Pełne sprawozdanie z obrad

Czwartek, 27 października 2005 r. - Strasburg

1. Otwarcie posiedzenia

VORSITZ: INGO FRIEDRICH
Vizepräsident

(Die Sitzung wird um 10.05 Uhr wieder aufgenommen.)

  Hans-Gert Poettering, im Namen der PPE-DE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, liebe Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Sie haben gestern wahrscheinlich von der Erklärung des Präsidenten des Iran, Herrn Ahmadinedschad, Kenntnis genommen, der unter Berufung auf Ayatollah Khomeini den Staat Israel auslöschen möchte. Das ist ein ungeheuerlicher Vorgang, weil der iranische Präsident sich damit an die Seite von Terroristen stellt! Für uns hat die Integrität, die Sicherheit Israels einen hohen Wert, den wir verteidigen.

Ich möchte für meine Fraktion ankündigen, dass wir das zu einem Thema machen wollen. Wir werden das in der nächsten Tagungswoche des Europäischen Parlaments vorschlagen, und ich wäre dankbar, wenn die anderen Fraktionen sich dem anschließen könnten. Wir haben ja Frau Koch-Mehrin und Herrn Swoboda hier und andere, die dies vielleicht mit unterstützen.

  Hannes Swoboda, im Namen der PSE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Wenn diese Äußerung wirklich so gefallen ist, dann ist sie natürlich für uns alle in diesem Haus völlig unakzeptabel und kann nicht undiskutiert übergangen werden – es müssen entsprechende Konsequenzen folgen. Ich schließe mich daher namens meiner Fraktion dem Wunsch des Kollegen Poettering, dass wir das auf die Tagesordnung der nächsten Plenarsitzung setzen, voll an.

  Silvana Koch-Mehrin, im Namen der ALDE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Auch für uns sind diese Äußerungen – wenn sie so stimmen – inakzeptabel, skandalös und gefährlich. Es ist schon bestürzend, dass ein Präsident auf einer Konferenz, die sich „Welt ohne Zionismus“ nennt, überhaupt spricht und sich dann möglicherweise auch noch so äußert. Das ist absolut inakzeptabel, und wir schließen uns dem Antrag an, dies im Parlament zu thematisieren.

  Der Präsident. Wir haben die Vorschläge zur Kenntnis genommen, und Sie haben ja angekündigt, dass Sie dies zu gegebener Zeit auch in den Gremien, etwa die Konferenz der Präsidenten, einbringen werden.

2. Składanie dokumentów: patrz protokół

3. Działalność Europejskiego Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich (2004 r.)

  Der Präsident. Als nächster Punkt folgt die Aussprache über den Bericht von Manolis Mavrommatis im Namen des Petitionsausschusses über den Jahresbericht 2004 über die Tätigkeit des Europäischen Bürgerbeauftragten (2005/2136(INI)) (A6-0276/2005).

  Nikiforos Diamandouros, Ombudsman. Mr President, I wish to thank you for this opportunity to address Parliament and to present the annual report for 2004, my first full year in office.

The year 2004 was hugely significant for the European Union: a year of historic enlargement, European elections, a new Commission and intense debate about the Constitution. These events and the popular attention they attracted had important consequences for the Ombudsman, as I will explain in a minute.

The annual report records our progress in handling complaints, in promoting good administration and in making the Ombudsman’s work better known to citizens. In total, 3 726 complaints were received, a 53 % increase compared with the previous year. The rise in complaints does not result from worsening administrative behaviour by the institutions; rather, it reflects citizens’ increased general awareness of matters European and growing knowledge about their rights and about how to exercise those rights.

As I have mentioned, 2004 was a year in which European subjects figured prominently in headlines throughout the Union. I also made intensive efforts to inform citizens about their right to complain to the European Ombudsman and to spread the word about the positive results that have been achieved. All in all, I gave over 30 public lectures and presentations and held over 150 meetings with ombudsmen, public officials and other interlocutors in the Member States and candidate countries.

During 2004, I was able to help almost 70 % of the people who complained to me. The help took one of three forms: opening an inquiry, transferring the case to a competent body or advising on where to turn for a prompt and effective solution to the problem. I closed 251 inquires during the year. In 45 % of the cases, the inquiry revealed no maladministration. Such a finding is not always negative for the complainant, who at least has the benefit of a full explanation from the institutional body concerned of its actions. Furthermore, even when there is no maladministration, I may identify an opportunity for the institutional body to improve the quality of its administration in the future. If so, I point this out in a further remark in the closing decision.

Whenever there is maladministration, I try, if possible, to achieve a positive-sum outcome that satisfies both the complainant and the institution. In 28 % of cases, my inquiries resulted either in the institution concerned settling the case to the satisfaction of the complainant or in a friendly solution. When a friendly solution is not possible, I close the case with a critical remark or make a draft recommendation.

An example of a draft recommendation accepted in 2004 was a case in which the Commission granted ex gratia compensation to a small company that had been given insufficient time to prepare a proposal for a research and development contract.

If a Community institutional body fails to respond satisfactorily to a draft recommendation, the Ombudsman’s ultimate weapon is a special report to the European Parliament. Only one special report was made in 2004, following the Commission’s refusal to reconsider its rules on the grading of press officers in its delegations. I made the draft recommendation in this case because the Commission failed to provide a coherent and convincing explanation of the variations in its current practice, despite having every opportunity to do so during my inquiry.

In my view, it is important that the European institutions should be willing to think again, rather than give the appearance of acting in an arbitrary way. I am grateful for Parliament’s support in this important issue of principle, as expressed in paragraph 11 of Mr Mavrommatis’s report.

Two own-initiative inquiries addressing systemic issues were closed during the year with positive results. The Commission accepted the need to improve the administration of the European schools and gave a commitment to cooperate with parents. I encouraged the Commission to seek to ensure that the schools themselves acknowledge the need to empower parents and to win their trust. The Commission also accepted and implemented a draft recommendation to introduce an internal complaints procedure for seconded national experts.

I would now like to say a few words about my priorities for the future. The first priority is to promote a citizen-centred approach by the EU institutions and bodies in all their activities. To this end, I will seek every opportunity systematically to reach out to the institutions to encourage best practice and promote friendly solutions. The active cooperation of the institutions and bodies is essential to the success of the Ombudsman’s work for citizens. The annual report contains many examples of the institutions taking prompt action to settle cases brought to their attention and responding positively to my proposals and recommendations.

During visits to the institutions and bodies, I underlined the value of reacting promptly and constructively to complaints. The ultimate goal for us all must be to ensure the best possible service for the citizen. I will continue to push for an end to the present confusing situation in which different institutions and bodies apply different codes of good administration.

Parliament has already approved, on 6 September 2001, the European Code of Good Administrative Behaviour. That text contains the rules and principles that should apply to all the Union institutions and bodies. The Code has received wide recognition internationally, in the Member States and candidate states, in the Council of Europe and elsewhere in the world. It is, by all accounts, a European success story of which both Parliament and the Ombudsman can be justly proud.

I was encouraged by the positive reaction of the President of the Commission on this point when I met the College of Commissioners in May this year. With the cooperation of the Commission, I believe that it would be possible for a common code to be adopted in 2006.

I also intend to revisit the question of the Ombudsman’s statute. My principal objective here is to ensure that citizens can have full confidence in the Ombudsman’s power to find the truth when hearing witnesses or inspecting documents. I would also like to cooperate with Parliament to ensure that citizens’ complaints about violations of the fundamental rights mentioned in the Charter can be brought before the Court of Justice if an important issue of principle cannot be resolved in any other way. Parliament already has full rights as an institution to initiate cases before the Court. In that context, it could be useful for the Ombudsman to have the power to intervene in such cases; a power, I note, that has already been given to the European Data Protection Supervisor, with whom I had a very friendly and productive meeting last week.

A third priority is to deepen my close cooperation with ombudsmen in the Member States through the European Network of Ombudsmen. The network makes it possible to transfer cases rapidly, share best practice and promote a free flow of information about European law and its implementation at the national, regional and local levels. The aim is to promote good administration throughout the Union so that citizens can enjoy their rights under European law. I am delighted that, following a valuable proposal from the De Rossa report last year, the Committee on Petitions participates in the network as a full member and was represented at the meeting of national ombudsmen, which took place in The Hague in September.

I would like to thank the Members of the Committee on Petitions and, in particular, this year’s rapporteur, Mr Mavrommatis, for their support and constructive proposals as set out in Parliament’s report.

I have already mentioned today many of the matters on which the report contains wise advice, at least to the Ombudsman. As regards other points, I have already undertaken to ask to appear before the Committee on Petitions whenever I deem it advisable and necessary to submit a special report to this House following the rejection of a friendly solution or draft recommendation.

Earlier this month, I presented the Committee with two special reports. The first was on the financial treatment of Commission staff whose children cannot attend the European Schools because of their degree of disability. The second report found that the Council has given no valid reason for continuing to legislate behind closed doors. The Council could easily amend its Rules of Procedure to provide for open legislative meetings.

I am also committed to improving information to citizens about the services provided by members of the European Network of Ombudsmen. I intend to introduce an interactive guide on our website to help complainants find the appropriate ombudsman to deal with, be it at the European, national or regional level.

A few weeks ago, we celebrated the first ten years of the European Ombudsman. To mark the occasion we published a volume tracing the history of the institution. We have also held a number of successful commemorative events, including one for the European Parliament on 27 September this year. Further events will take place in the next few weeks in both Strasbourg and Brussels.

I believe that the relationships of goodwill, trust and understanding that have been built up over the last decade are a precious resource for improving the quality of public administration in Europe to the benefit of citizens. The European Parliament and its Committee on Petitions constitute vital partners for the European Ombudsman in this regard.

  Μανώλης Μαυρομμάτης (PPE-DE), Εισηγητής. – Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ευχαριστώ τον κ. Διαμαντούρο για τη συνεργασία που είχαμε σε όλο αυτό το διάστημα της προετοιμασίας και εκπόνησης αυτής της έκθεσης. Ευχαριστώ πολύ επίσης την Επιτροπή Αναφορών, τον κ. Libicki, όλους τους συναδέλφους μου που βρίσκονται σήμερα εδώ καθώς και τον Sir Robert Atkins και όσους άλλους βοηθήσαν σε αυτή την έκθεση.

Κυρία Επίτροπε, κύριε Διαμαντούρο, αγαπητοί συνάδελφοι, ο διαμεσολαβητής είναι ένας θεσμός ανεξάρτητος και ένας μηχανισμός ελέγχου της διοίκησης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης. Η έκθεση που μας παρουσίασε ο κ. Διαμαντούρος στη συνεδρίαση της Επιτροπής Αναφορών στο Στρασβούργο, αποτελεί βασική πηγή για τη σύνταξη της ετήσιας έκθεσης του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου για τις δραστηριότητες του Ευρωπαίου Διαμεσολαβητή.

Είναι γεγονός ότι οι καταγγελίες αυξήθηκαν το 2004 κατά 53% σε σχέση με την προηγούμενη χρονιά. Παρ' όλο που είχε υπολογισθεί ότι η διεύρυνση θα είναι η κυριότερη αιτία της αύξησης των καταγγελιών στον Ευρωπαίο Διαμεσολαβητή, μόλις το 51% του ποσοστού αύξησης προήλθε από τα 10 νέα κράτη. Ωστόσο, η αύξηση των καταγγελιών δεν σημαίνει υποχρεωτικά ότι είναι περισσότερες οι περιπτώσεις κακοδιαχείρισης από τα όργανα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, αλλά ότι οι πολίτες είναι περισσότερο ενημερωμένοι για τα δικαιώματά τους. Αυτό οφείλεται, κατά κύριο λόγο, στην έντονη δραστηριότητα του Διαμεσολαβητή. Μέσα στο 2004 πολυάριθμες επισκέψεις του σε κράτη μέλη και τρίτες χώρες, δημόσιες διαλέξεις, συνεντεύξεις Τύπου και άλλες συναντήσεις, συνέβαλαν στην ενημέρωση των πολιτών για το ρόλο του, αλλά και για το δικαίωμα των πολιτών για τις καταγγελίες τους. Παρ' όλη όμως τη δραστηριότητα του κ. Διαμαντούρου για την ενημέρωση του κοινού, εξακολουθεί να επικρατεί σύγχυση σε ό,τι αφορά τους τομείς δικαιοδοσίας του Ευρωπαίου Διαμεσολαβητή. Συγκεκριμένα, το 2004, το 74.8% των καταγγελιών που δέχθηκε ο Ευρωπαίος Διαμεσολαβητής ήταν εκτός αρμοδιότητάς του. Οφείλουμε, κατά συνέπειαν, και εμείς ως Κοινοβούλιο, να συμβάλουμε στο σαφή διαχωρισμό της αρμοδιότητας των κοινοτικών οργάνων στα οποία οι Ευρωπαίοι μπορούν να προσφύγουν διεκδικώντας το δίκιο τους.

Άλλο ένα σημείο που θα ήθελα να σταθώ, είναι ορισμένα στοιχεία που προκύπτουν από την ετήσια έκθεση του Διαμεσολαβητή. Στο 2004 περατώθηκαν 251 έρευνες, από τις οποίες οι 4 ήταν αυτεπάγγελτες. Προτάθηκαν 12 φιλικοί διακανονισμοί, διατυπώθηκαν 36 επικρίσεις, μία εκ των οποίων ήταν προς το Κοινοβούλιο εξ αιτίας της μη λήψης επαρκών μέτρων για την προώθηση της ουσιαστικής συμμόρφωσης με τους κανόνεςσχετικά με το κάπνισμα στις εγκαταστάσεις του. Επίσης συντάχθηκαν 17 σχέδια σύστασης και υποβλήθηκε 1 ειδική έκθεση.

Σημαντικός παράγων για την αποτελεσματικότητα του θεσμού του διαμεσολαβητή, είναι η συνεργασία του με τους θεσμούς της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης και του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου γενικότερα. Ενδεικτικά αναφέρω τις τακτικές ενημερώσεις και συναντήσεις του κ. Διαμαντούρου με την Επιτροπή Αναφορών και το Προεδρείο της, καθώς και τη συνάντησή του, στις 25 Μαΐου του 2005, με το Κολλέγιο των Επιτρόπων. Στα συμπεράσματα της συνάντησης αυτής τονίζεται η γνήσια κοινότητα συμφερόντων, μεταξύ της Επιτροπής και του Ευρωπαίου Διαμεσολαβητή, στην εξασφάλιση ότι τόσο η διορθωτική όσο και η παρεμβατική πτυχή του έργου του διαμεσολαβητή επιτελούνται με επιτυχία.

Είναι γεγονός ότι οι περισσότερες καταγγελίες αφορούν περιπτώσεις κακής διαχείρισης. Περίπτωση κακής διοίκησης σύμφωνα με την ετήσια έκθεση του Διαμεσολαβητή το 1997, σημειώνεται όταν ένα δημόσιο όργανο παραλείπει να ενεργήσει σύμφωνα με τον κανόνα ή την αρχή που το δεσμεύει. Το 22% των περιπτώσεων κακοδιαχείρισης αφορούν την έλλειψη διαφάνειας και την άρνηση παροχής πληροφοριών. Το 19% αφορά διακρίσεις, το 12% καθυστερήσεις, που θα μπορούσαν να έχουν αποφευχθεί. Επί πλέον, το 9% αφορά δικαστικά σφάλματα, το 7%, κατάχρηση εξουσίας ή αδικία, το 6% αφορά περιπτώσεις αμέλειας, ενώ το 5% νομικό σφάλμα.

Έχοντας, λοιπόν, υπόψη αυτά τα στοιχεία, ο διαμεσολαβητής θα πρέπει να προσδιορίσει την έννοια της κακής διοίκησης από την άποψη, τόσο των θεσμικών οργάνων και οργανισμών των οποίων επιμελείται, όσο και των υποθέσεων που αποτελούν αντικείμενο καταγγελλιών.

Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κυρία Wallstöm, θα ήθελα επί πλέον να επισημάνω, όπως αναφέρω και στην έκθεσή μου, ότι θα ήταν ουσιαστική η παρουσία του Διαμεσολαβητή στην Επιτροπή Αναφορών του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου προκειμένου να συζητείται κάθε μορφή άρνησης από την πλευρά του θεσμικού οργάνου ή οργανισμού για φιλικό διακανονισμό. Η ετήσια έκθεση του Διαμεσολαβητή καταδεικνύει, μεταξύ άλλων, και τις προσπάθειες που καταβάλλονται από τον διαμεσολαβητή για τη διεύρυνση και την περαιτέρω ενδυνάμωση του δικτύου εθνικών και περιφερειακών διαμεσολαβητών αναπτύσσοντας την ανταλλαγή πληροφοριών και βέλτιστων πρακτικών.

Η συμμετοχή της Επιτροπής Αναφορών του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου στο δίκτυο αυτό θα διευκόλυνε την πρακτική συνεργασία μεταξύ των ευρωπαϊκών θεσμικών οργάνων και των εθνικών και περιφερειακών διαμεσολαβητών και θα επέτρεπε την αύξηση των τακτικών επαφών της με τις επιτροπές αναφορών των εθνικών κοινοβουλίων και με τους διαμεσολαβητές των κρατών μελών.

Ιδιαίτερο ενδιαφέρον προκαλεί η διαπίστωση ότι το 69% των καταγγελιών είναι εναντίον της Επιτροπής. Από την πλευρά της, η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή θα πρέπει να εξετάζει τις καταγγελίες, που αφορούν παραβάσεις εντός εύλογης προθεσμίας, έτσι ώστε να επιτυγχάνεται άμεση και αποτελεσματική εξέταση των καταγγελιών των πολιτών.

Τέλος, σημείο αναφοράς για τη σύνταξη της έκθεσής μου ήταν και η περυσινή έκθεση De Rossa, για τις δραστηριότητες του Ευρωπαίου Διαμεσολαβητή το 2003. Μελετώντας συγκριτικά τις εκθέσεις του Διαμεσολαβητή για το 2003 και το 2004 το αποτέλεσμα ήταν θετικό και μας κατευθύνει να επικεντρωθούμε στα σημεία που η Επιτροπή Αναφορών δείχνει ιδιαίτερο ενδιαφέρον. Εξάλλου, με τον τρόπο αυτό μπορούμε να δούμε και την ουσιαστική πρόοδο που έχει μέσα σε ένα χρόνο.

Κλείνοντας, θα ήθελα να ευχαριστήσω όλους εσάς και τη γραμματεία της Επιτροπής Αναφορών, βεβαίως, καθώς και όλους τους συναδέλφους που βοήθησαν με τις τροπολογίες τους να συνταχθεί αυτή η έκθεση.

  Margot Wallström, Vice-President of the Commission. Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking the rapporteur, Mr Mavrommatis, for his report, which is a very useful document. It allows the Commission to take into account the views of the European Parliament on a number of important issues raised by the Ombudsman in his annual report for 2004.

Let me say that, for me, the Commission’s relationship with the Ombudsman is about firmly engaging ourselves to guarantee good administration and openness and, ultimately, democracy. The same applies to our relations with Parliament’s Committee on Petitions. To me, the European Ombudsman has an essential role in building bridges between citizens and the European Union. His actions contribute to enhancing the Commission’s interaction and communication with citizens. The Commission, therefore, will continue to look at different ways of further promoting its cooperation with and commitment to the European Ombudsman.

As is rightly pointed out in Mr Mavrommatis’ report, the number of complaints to the European institutions and bodies addressed by the Ombudsman rose by 53% in 2004. I agree with the Ombudsman’s annual report that this reflects Europeans’ increasing awareness of the European Ombudsman, which is a development that we should welcome.

In light of the Commission’s dedication further to improving and promoting its cooperation with the Ombudsman, I would like to take the opportunity to highlight the very recent reform of the Commission’s internal procedures. The reform aims at strengthening the guarantees of strong political ownership by each commissioner as regards Ombudsman enquiries within his or her domain.

The Commission has decided to replace the existing empowerment – at present granted to the President alone – with an empowerment granted to the Commissioner in charge of the subject-matter of the enquiry addressed to the Ombudsman. In parallel, the Commission Secretariat-General reinforces its role as guardian of the political and administrative coherence and consistency of the Commission’s final replies to the Ombudsman. This reform will enter into force on 1 November 2005.

Furthermore, the Commission needs to strengthen its efforts to agree to friendly solutions proposed by the European Ombudsman. Recommendations for the Commission to follow up certain aspects in order to remedy problems highlighted by different cases need to be taken into account promptly. Proposing solutions that give satisfaction to the citizen and to the administration is one of the main tools of the Ombudsman.

It should be underlined again that the Ombudsman’s inquiries often not only produce positive results for the complainants but also help to improve the quality of our administrative services.

Mr Mavrommatis’ report touches upon the issue of transparency, regarding in particular the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 on access to documents, a fundamental right of citizens. The report also points out that Regulation 1049/2001 now applies to Community agencies.

We can also confirm that we examine applications for access to documents with the utmost care and that derogations from the right of access are applied on a case-by-case basis.

The role of the Ombudsman in this field is really important. We have made significant progress in the direction of better and more transparency. This is the case in particular for access to documents in infringement procedures. It is essential that the Commission should have the necessary room for manoeuvre to conduct its procedure totally independently. In these cases, a balance needs to be found between the transparency principle and confidentiality. For closed infringement procedures, the Commission has reviewed its practices and, in principle, documents have now been made available.

The Commission is set on applying procedures that will allow the European Ombudsman to do his job. For example, it is now possible for the Ombudsman to inspect files. It allows him to verify the completeness and accuracy of the information supplied by the Community institution or body concerned. It is, therefore, an important guarantee to the complainant and to the public that the Ombudsman can conduct a thorough and complete investigation.

The Commission attaches great importance to the issue of a code of good administrative behaviour, with binding effect upon all the EU institutions and bodies. We consider this matter with an open mind.

The Commission’s own code entered into force in November 2000. We will report to the bodies concerned the results of our reflections on this issue. The recent creation of a European School of Administration increases the importance of this matter.

The proposal for a new Constitutional Treaty would give the Union a specific legal base to act on this. However, considering the situation, we need to look at the issue differently. Nevertheless, a positive conclusion on this dossier is possible and I hope that we can arrive at the result proposed by the Ombudsman and the rapporteur.

Let me say a few words on the Ombudsman’s Statute. During his visit to the College of Commissioners on 25 May 2005, Mr Diamandouros informed the Commission that he had asked the European Parliament to review certain aspects of the Ombudsman’s Statute. He would like in particular to be entitled to intervene in proceedings before the Court of Justice in cases relating to alleged violations of the rights set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

It should be noted that, on this subject, it is the European Parliament that has the right of initiative and acts by majority vote, subject to Council approval, with the Commission merely issuing an opinion. The Commission will examine any new initiative in this respect with the utmost care and an open mind.

Our willingness to cooperate with the Ombudsman is not only our obligation but is also very important for better administration. This is the reason why we welcome your report. Let me assure you that we continue to engage the Commission to work even closer with the Ombudsman and with Parliament’s Committee on Petitions.

  Richard Seeber, im Namen der PPE-DE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, sehr geehrte Frau Kommissarin, sehr geehrter Herr Ombudsmann! Ich begrüße den Bericht des Bürgerbeauftragten und darf gleichzeitig meinen Kollegen Manolis Mavrommatis recht herzlich zu seinem Berichtsentwurf beglückwünschen.

Der Bürgerbeauftragte stellt wohl eines der wichtigsten Hilfsmittel dar, um der Rolle der Bürger gegenüber den Institutionen Geltung zu verschaffen. Immer, wenn man mit großen Verwaltungseinheiten zu tun hat, ist eine unabhängige, unkomplizierte und vor allem auch kostenlose Kontrolle von außen unabdingbar. Es kommt wohl nicht von ungefähr, dass sich die skandinavischen Staaten schon sehr früh ein solches Instrument zugelegt haben und dass bereits in den 70-er Jahren in der Gemeinschaft ein solches Organ angedacht und schließlich nach dem Vertrag von Maastricht gegründet wurde.

Die Rolle des Europäischen Bürgerbeauftragten, der ja ursprünglich als parlamentarischer Kommissar gedacht war, der im Wesentlichen mit Beratungs- und Kontrollfunktionen betraut ist, hat sich in der Praxis rasch weiterentwickelt, so dass der Bürgerbeauftragte heute als externer Kontrollmechanismus der europäischen öffentlichen Verwaltung auftritt und immer wieder auftretende Missstände ans Licht bringt.

Betrachtet man die Anzahl der Beschwerden, die ja stetig ansteigt, so heißt das für mich primär nicht, dass die europäische Verwaltung schlechter geworden ist, sondern dass sich die Bürger vermehrt um die Durchsetzung ihrer Rechte bemühen. Deshalb ist es auch weniger bedeutend, dass die unzulässigen Beschwerden konstant sehr zahlreich sind und im Schnitt ca. 70-75 % ausmachen. Sie deuten wohl darauf hin, dass sich jemand einer ungerechten Behandlung ausgesetzt sieht und etwas dagegen tun will.

Wenn man im täglichen Leben jedoch nicht permanent mit diesen Dingen zu tun hat, so ist die korrekte Form nicht immer leicht zu finden im Sinne von: Habe ich eine vollständige Sachverhaltsdarstellung geliefert? Durch welchen Umstand fühle ich mich konkret beschwert? Welches Recht wurde verletzt? Welches Organ sollte handeln? Deshalb sollten die unzulässigen Beschwerden uns vielmehr dazu Anlass geben, darüber nachzudenken, wie wir Systeme schaffen können, die den Bürgern schnell und unbürokratisch eine stichhaltige Antwort oder einen Lösungsansatz bieten.

Die Bestrebungen des Bürgerbeauftragten, das Netz zwischen den nationalen Beschwerdestellen und auch zwischen ihm und diesen nationalen Stellen enger zu knüpfen, sind deshalb voll zu unterstützen. Das gilt auch für seine verstärkten Kommunikationsbestrebungen. Nur so holen wir den Bürger dort ab, wo er derzeit steht, und können ihm vielleicht etwas Angst vor der leider meist immer noch gesichtslosen Gemeinschaft nehmen. Die Union hat hier eindeutig einen Handlungsauftrag, d.h. Verbesserung der Verwaltung, mehr Transparenz, schnellere Verfahren und erleichterter Zugang zum Recht auch über außergerichtliche Instrumente wie eben den Bürgerbeauftragten und natürlich auch den Petitionsausschuss dieses Hauses.

Deshalb bin ich auch nicht besonders glücklich über die Formulierung im Berichtsentwurf unter der Überschrift "Überlegungen über die Entwicklung der Rolle des Europäischen Bürgerbeauftragten", wo es heißt: "Vor dem aktuellen Hintergrund der Überlegungen über den Mangel an pädagogischem Geschick auf Seiten der europäischen Institutionen und der nationalen Regierungen gegenüber den Völkern der Union nach dem doppelten Scheitern der Referenden in Frankreich und in den Niederlanden" usw.

Was kommt hier zum Ausdruck? Es geht hier wohl nicht um pädagogisches Geschick, sondern darum, wie wir die Kommunikation und die Politik der Gemeinschaft verbessern können. Es geht nicht darum, lehrerhaft von oben etwas zu erklären, das in breiten Bevölkerungskreisen keine Unterstützung findet.

In diesem Sinne ist dieser Bericht für uns Statusanalyse und Auftrag zugleich, zum einen, um bessere Regeln zu schaffen, die Rückhalt bei den Bürgern haben, und gleichzeitig für deren korrekte Umsetzung zu sorgen, und zum anderen Instrumente wie eben den Bürgerbeauftragten mit den notwendigen Kompetenzen auszustatten, damit er diese unabhängige, außergerichtliche, kostenlose und bürgernahe Kontrollfunktion gegenüber den Handlungsträgern ausüben kann.

  Proinsias De Rossa, on behalf of the PSE Group. – Mr President, I welcome Mr Mavrommatis's report and, indeed, I welcome the European Ombudsman here today to the European Parliament. The Ombudsman's office is a direct link between the citizen and Europe; it enables citizens to make known their concerns about maladministration at European level.

The committee of which I am a member and which prepared this report, the Committee on Petitions, equally, is a direct link with the citizen, but has a different role in that it enables citizens to ensure that authorities in the Member State comply with European rules, regulations, funding etc. So the Ombudsman and the European Parliament's Petitions Committee are, in a sense, complementary to each other.

The very existence of the Ombudsman's office, I believe, is a deterrent to maladministration, and the 10th anniversary of that office deserves a review of the statute. I do hope that this Parliament, which has that responsibility, will undertake that in the course of the next 12 months.

The Ombudsman's office clearly has resolved many problems, but it has not been in a position to resolve them all. Indeed, the fact that 75 % of the complaints the Ombudsman's office receives do not relate directly to European Union institutions and problems therein is, in my view, not necessarily a bad thing. It demonstrates that people are aware that there is a body there that can help them, and the fact that the Ombudsman's office refers them to the appropriate area where they may receive a resolution of their problem is an important service.

I would like to mention a number of issues here; one relates to the European schools. A report is in preparation on the issue of funding for the European schools to enable children with special needs to be catered for, in the same way that all children attending European schools are catered for, free of charge with compulsory education. That is a matter the Commission, and specifically the Commissioner responsible for the budget of the European schools, has to address. Unless the Commission brings forward a detailed analysis of the money required in order to enable the schools to do their job properly, either in providing the special needs education within the schools or providing that education outside of those schools, then we are failing as a Union, and, indeed, as an employer of the parents of these children.

The other issue I want to refer to is the code of good administrative behaviour. As has already been mentioned, this has been adopted by this Parliament; this Parliament itself operates by it and the Council operates by it. There is absolutely no reason why the Commission should not buy into that code of good administrative behaviour, so that we would have a common code for all three institutions. I would appeal to Commissioner Wallström to address that issue and to raise the matter with the college of Commissioners.

The final point I want to make relates to the most recent special report, which is a rarity – special reports from the Ombudsman are a rarity – relating to the need for the Council to meet in public when making law. Your job in promoting the Plan D – debate, democracy and dialogue – is being undermined by the fact that the Council continues to refuse to make law in public. We would not accept that from this Parliament or from any national parliament; the Council should not be allowed to get away with it.

  Luciana Sbarbati, a nome del gruppo ALDE. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, ringrazio l'onorevole Mavrommatis per l'eccellente relazione e il Mediatore.

L'istituzione del primo Mediatore europeo risale al 1809 ed è avvenuta in Svezia. Come cittadina italiana, desidero tuttavia ricordare che fu Giuseppe Mazzini – di cui quest'anno ricorre il bicentenario della nascita – a creare l'istituto della petizione, prevedendo, all'articolo 10 della Costituzione della Repubblica romana del 1849, la possibilità di farvi ricorso sia singolarmente che collettivamente. Fu lui a ipotizzare un'associazione politica dei popoli europei in un'Europa fatta di Stati nazionali liberi, federati tra loro e precursori di quell'idea d'Europa che un secolo dopo ha trovato forma e sostanza nel primo nucleo attuale dell'Unione.

La relazione annuale del nostro Mediatore, oggi in esame, ci fornisce un'idea del desiderio che ha il cittadino di interagire con le istituzione comunitarie. Il dato sul quale dovremmo riflettere, però, è che, su oltre 3.726 denunce ricevute, il 72 percento non è di sua competenza. E' significativo anche il fatto che il 51 percento dei casi viene segnalato da cittadini dei paesi dell'allargamento. Questo vuol dire che la percezione che hanno i cittadini dell'Unione e dei suoi rappresentanti è ancora confusa, che è innegabile che il cittadino comunitario sia ben consapevole dei suoi diritti e che vuole, attraverso le denunce, esercitare la sua cittadinanza, ma è anche vero che non riesce evidentemente a ben individuare il destinatario delle sue istanze.

La figura del Mediatore e l'istituto della petizione hanno avuto successo. Questo è un dato dal quale non si può prescindere; oggi vanno invece approfondite le ragioni dell'errore e del perché si fa ricorso in modo errato ad essi. Uno sforzo, a mio avviso, andrebbe fatto anche sul fronte dei tempi – come citato anche nella relazione Mavrommatis – necessari all'esame delle denunce, ottimizzando, ove possibile, lo scambio di informazioni e la collaborazione tra le istituzioni.

Onorevoli colleghi, la funzione del Mediatore europeo è stata istituita dal Trattato di Maastricht, quale parte della cittadinanza europea, una questione oggi aperta, che ci sollecita nuovi diritti emergenti a seguito dell'allargamento e della complessità del fenomeno migratorio e della globalizzazione. Ritengo che il nostro Mediatore abbia risposto pienamente alle tre direttrici su cui si era impegnato: promuovere lo Stato di diritto; buona amministrazione e rispetto dei diritti umani; allargamento – e quindi avvicinamento – di tutti i cittadini, compreso un rapporto costante con i difensori civici a livello europeo. L'analisi politica dei dati dimostra, però, che gli europei riconoscono, e quindi ricorrono, alle istituzioni comunitarie bypassando di fatto le istituzioni nazionali. Quindi, anche se la percezione dell'Europa da parte dei cittadini corrisponde a un'entità diversa – che immaginano dotata di poteri e competenze – ciò spesso non si traduce in realtà. Sta a noi pertanto indirizzare meglio gli europei verso le nostre istituzioni, raccogliendo l'indicazione popolare al fine di sollecitare un'apertura dei governi a cedere ambiti di sovranità a beneficio di una maggiore incisività dell'azione europea.

Com'è stato ricordato, il Mediatore è un organo indipendente e imparziale. Egli deve cooperare con tutte le altre istituzioni e ritengo lo farà al meglio delle sue possibilità, con la nostra collaborazione e con collaborazione di tutte le istituzioni.

  David Hammerstein Mintz, en nombre del Grupo Verts/ALE. – Señor Presidente, en primer lugar, quisiera agradecer al ponente su excelente informe, y al Defensor del Pueblo Europeo, el trabajo que está realizando día a día y su Informe anual.

Señora Comisaria Wallström, aunque su llamado Plan D para acercarse a la ciudadanía europea, para abrir las puertas de esta Institución y para fomentar el diálogo, merece nuestro apoyo, ello no excluye el derecho de queja ante el Defensor del Pueblo, ya que es él quien ofrece a los ciudadanos un análisis independiente en caso de que éstos quieran presentar una queja por mal gobierno o mala conducta de las instituciones europeas.

Sin duda alguna, una de las conclusiones que pueden extraerse de los referendos de Francia y Holanda es que la ciudadanía no quiere ser considerada como mero espectador pasivo, sino como actor dinámico en el proceso de construcción europea, que quiere más transparencia y más vías para participar.

Yo creo que el Defensor del Pueblo realiza un trabajo muy bueno. Pero quisiera mencionar algunos de los problemas que hemos tenido, uno en particular: me gustaría expresar mi preocupación y desaprobación por el modo en que la Conferencia de Presidentes ha tratado el reciente y muy importante Informe especial del señor Diamandouros.

Este informe contiene un asunto de gran relevancia para la ciudadanía: la Oficina Europea de Lucha contra el Fraude (OLAF), supuestamente, no cooperó plenamente con el Defensor del Pueblo, cuando éste estaba investigando una queja contra dicha Oficina.

Por ello, la Comisión de Peticiones, —la Comisión adecuada— decidió redactar un informe y escuchar tanto al Defensor del Pueblo como al Director de la OLAF.

Debo mostrar mi sorpresa y mi asombro por el modo en que los máximos líderes de los dos grandes grupos políticos bloquearon el informe y no dejaron que esta audiencia tuviera lugar. Y lo que es aún peor, la Conferencia de Presidentes, ante la insistencia de los dos grupos principales, prohibió a la Comisión de Peticiones escuchar al Defensor del Pueblo y al Director de la OLAF, para lo que, desde mi punto de vista, el Reglamento del Parlamento no la autoriza.

Yo creo que las razones que se dieron —que estábamos inmersos en el proceso de elección de un nuevo Director de la OLAF— no eran aceptables y que esta Cámara debería examinar este asunto, porque esto no beneficia la vía de la transparencia ni que los ciudadanos encuentren una respuesta a sus quejas.

En mi opinión, estas acciones conllevan un daño colateral: el debilitamiento del papel del Defensor del Pueblo, lo que es totalmente irresponsable.

Para reaccionar ante ello, he presentado, de acuerdo con el ponente, señor Mavrommatis, varias enmiendas en su informe, para que el Parlamento responda al Defensor del Pueblo siempre que éste se dirija a nosotros con un Informe especial.

Como las enmiendas presentadas fueron apoyadas por mis colegas de la Comisión de Peticiones, forman ahora parte del informe que se someterá al Pleno. Obviamente, corresponde al Parlamento decidir si está de acuerdo o no con las recomendaciones del Defensor del Pueblo.

Ahora bien, lo que es inaceptable es que no se adopte posición alguna, dañando y debilitando el papel tan crucial, tan importante, del Defensor del Pueblo Europeo.

  Mario Borghezio, a nome del gruppo IND/DEM. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, la relazione del Mediatore europeo per il 2004 non contiene, a nostro avviso, una visione d'insieme dei principi, di cui invece si sentiva sicuramente l'esigenza, giacché, come hanno sottolineato molti dei colleghi intervenuti, il risultato dei referendum, che ha cassato, in paesi di grande importanza e di grande tradizione democratica, la bozza di Costituzione europea, dimostra che vi è un forte senso di insofferenza e di insoddisfazione diffusa fra i cittadini europei nei confronti della democraticità delle istituzioni europee.

Agli occhi della stragrande maggioranza dei cittadini europei l'Unione europea appare un Moloch e il Mediatore europeo avrebbe dovuto sentire il dovere di dare voce a questa sensibilità che si è espressa in maniera così chiara, laddove la relazione che ci viene sottoposta sembra un documento di un istituto di statistica: è sterile e da essa non traspare una battaglia sui principi e sulle motivazioni delle tematiche svolte.

Basti pensare, per esempio, al delicato settore delle sovvenzioni e dei finanziamenti pubblici, che costituiscono forse la parte più rilevante dell'impressione che hanno i cittadini europei di scarsa trasparenza delle Istituzioni europee. A chi può rivolgersi il cittadino europeo che, vedendo un cartello di un'opera gigantesca, magari inutile, recante la dicitura "finanziata dall'Unione europea", pensa ai soldi delle tasse che ha pagato? Come mai non avete pensato di chiedere che ovunque vengano esposti simili cartelli o venga realizzata un'opera finanziata dall'Unione europea, sia indicato il modo in cui il cittadino – il quidam de populo – può rivolgersi all'istituzione che dovrebbe tutelare il suo desiderio di trasparenza.

Se penso a quello che emerge tutte le volte che nel nostro paese la commissione antimafia mette il dito sull'utilizzazione dei fondi europei in certe regioni, mi domando che cosa pensi un onesto cittadino siciliano, pugliese, calabrese o campano quando vede simili opere pubbliche realizzate magari attraverso appalti poco trasparenti.

Ritengo che sia necessaria una svolta da parte dell'istituto del Mediatore europeo e che vada affrontata la tematica essenziale e sensibile del ruolo di una moderna democrazia in Europa. Nella relazione si parla genericamente di contatti con i colleghi difensori civici nazionali, senza specificare quale sia la tematica di tali incontri, né spiegare qual è stato lo spirito di questa collaborazione o la modalità di raccordo del lavoro che questa rete – che senz'altro ha un carattere positivo e della quale noi ci compiacciamo – può svolgere attraverso la presenza nei singoli Stati dei difensori civici nazionali.

Dalla relazione emerge un po' una concezione – tanto per cambiare – "superburocratica" del ruolo del Mediatore europeo. Risulta inoltre molto generica, signor Diamandouros, la sua dichiarazione di intenti per i primi cinque anni di attività: lei si limita a dire che i cittadini devono conoscere i loro diritti, senza accennare al fatto che è in corso di attuazione un provvedimento pericoloso per la libertà dei cittadini, come il mandato d'arresto europeo. Allora difendiamo la libertà dei cittadini europei!

  Marcin Libicki, w imieniu grupy UEN. – Panie Przewodniczący! Zabierając tu dzisiaj głos, odczuwam wielką satysfakcję, bo spotykam się z osobami, które darzę osobiście wielkim uznaniem: z panem Rzecznikiem Diamandourosem, z którym bardzo blisko współpracujemy w Komisji Petycji, której jestem przewodniczącym; z panem sprawozdawcą Mavrommatisem, który jest jednym z najaktywniejszych członków naszej komisji; i z panią komisarz Wallström, z którą nasza komisja utrzymuje bliskie i dobre kontakty.

Jakie cechy powinien mieć Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich, żeby mógł dobrze sprawować swój urząd? Wymieniłbym trzy cechy. Po pierwsze, profesjonalizm i kompetencję. Te cechy profesor Diamandouros posiada w najwyższym stopniu. Po drugie, obiektywizm i bezstronność. Co do tych cech nie ma żadnej wątpliwości – nigdy nie zetknęliśmy się z jakimikolwiek zarzutami, że profesor Diamandouros pełni swoją funkcję nieobiektywnie. Gdyby tak było, dochodziłyby do nas takie sygnały. Nigdy tak się nie zdarzyło. Trzecią cechą, którą dzisiaj się rzadziej wymienia, jest godność pełnienia swojego urzędu. Profesor Diamandouros pełni swój urząd niezwykle godnie. Pełnienie tego urzędu wymaga również pewnego elementu spersonalizowania. I ten element bardzo wyraźnie w aktywności profesora Diamandourosa widzimy. To nas bardzo cieszy.

Każdy urzędnik powinien cieszyć się uznaniem. Profesor Diamandouros cieszy się tym uznaniem. Wiem o tym dobrze, ponieważ jestem w kontakcie z rzecznikami krajowymi, a to jest najlepszy sprawdzian. Profesor Zoll, Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich w Polsce, o działalności profesora Diamandourosa wyraża się zawsze z uznaniem. To kryterium jest dla nas bardzo przekonywujące. Nasza Komisja Petycji przecież doskonale wie, jak dobrze pracuje profesor Diamandouros. I trzecia rzecz – reelekcja, którą profesor Diamandouros wygrał miażdżąco. Za to wszystko, Panie Profesorze, dziękujemy. Dziękuję również panu sprawozdawcy.

  Jean-Claude Martinez (NI). – Monsieur le Président, Monsieur le Médiateur, c'est le dixième anniversaire de l'ombudsman européen, comme le rappelle, d'ailleurs, dans un rapport très complet, très agréable, notre rapporteur Manolis Mavrommatis.

Vous n'êtes compétent, Monsieur le Médiateur, pardonnez-moi de le dire, que pour les questions de mauvaise administration. Ainsi, dans la question du fromage feta de mes amis grecs, vous ne vous êtes pas reconnu compétent pour le fromage feta, qui est fabriqué avec du lait de brebis du sud de la France, en Lozère.

En revanche, vous êtes compétent en matière de violation des droits fondamentaux, ici même au Parlement européen, c'est-à-dire 10% de votre activité. Par exemple, le droit fondamental de parler sa langue: les trente-cinq députés non inscrits ne bénéficient pas des services d'interprétation lors des réunions de groupe. Pourquoi? Parce qu'entre le singe et l'homo sapiens politique, le non-inscrit est le chaînon manquant de l'humanité. Donc, chez les non–inscrits, pour communiquer, nous nous grattons sous les aisselles, nous sortons la langue et non poussons des grognements. C'est pour cela, évidemment que nous n'avons pas besoin d'interprètes!

Deuxième exemple: chacun a droit à un logement, à l'eau, à des toilettes, ici au Parlement. Eh bien nous, les non–inscrits, nous avons des bureaux sans toilettes, sans eau! C'est pourquoi nous demandons l'application des conventions de Genève sur les droits des prisonniers politiques, notamment le droit d'aller aux toilettes. C'est la raison pour laquelle je propose, Monsieur le Médiateur, votre candidature pour le prix Sakharov de l'année prochaine, si vous dénoncez la violation des droits de l'homme des trente-cinq députés privés de leurs droits biologiques.

Il est vrai que l'arrivée des Turcs va arranger les choses pour les non–inscrits, puisque nous aurons peut-être droit à des cabinets turcs. Comme quoi, les voies du Seigneur sont impénétrables! C'est l'arrivée de la Turquie qui va permettre, enfin, d'assurer le respect des minorités politiques, des non-inscrits, au Parlement européen...

  Andreas Schwab (PPE-DE). – Herr Präsident, Frau Vizepräsidentin, Herr Diamandouros, Herr Berichterstatter Mavrommatis! Zunächst einmal möchte ich mich sehr herzlich dafür bedanken, dass der Bericht, den der Petitionsausschuss und der Berichterstatter Mavrommatis erstellt haben, sehr gelungen ist, weil er die wichtigsten Probleme, die auch der Ombudsmann in seinem Bericht anspricht, wieder aufgreift und einer Lösung zuführen möchte.

Die Zusammenarbeit zwischen dem Petitionsausschuss und dem Bürgerbeauftragten ist im vergangenen Jahr sehr gut gewesen. Sie sollte nach meinem Dafürhalten auch Vorbild sein für die Zusammenarbeit zwischen dem Bürgerbeauftragten und der Kommission und – darauf werde ich später nochmals eingehen – für die Zusammenarbeit zwischen dem Bürgerbeauftragten und dem Europäischen Rat. Diese Zusammenarbeit war zwar in der überwiegenden Mehrzahl der Fälle des Jahres 2004 durch große Kooperationsbereitschaft gekennzeichnet: In einer Reihe von Fällen hätte sie allerdings durchaus positiver ausfallen können.

Die Aufgaben des Bürgerbeauftragten, den es in meinem Heimatstaat nicht gibt, sind für die Europäische Union von grundlegender Bedeutung, da er mit den Bürgern der Europäischen Union direkt kommuniziert und sie damit näher an die Organe der Europäischen Union heranbringt. Trotz aller Schwierigkeiten, die der Kollege Seeber angesprochen hat, ist auf diesem Weg schon vieles gelungen. Wir sollten aber nichtsdestotrotz weiter versuchen, die Bürgerinnen und Bürger von den Möglichkeiten zu überzeugen, die Sie, Herr Bürgerbeauftragter, zur Verfügung haben, um Missstände in der europäischen Verwaltung aufzudecken, die etwas gravierender sind als der, den der Kollege gerade beschrieben hat, und diesen Problemen nachzugehen.

Der Bürgerbeauftragte stellt durch seine Arbeit die Einhaltung höchster Verwaltungsstandards innerhalb der Europäischen Union und ihrer Organe sowie Institutionen sicher. Selbst in den 113 von insgesamt 251 Fällen, in denen keine Missstände der Verwaltungstätigkeit festgestellt werden konnten, ist die Arbeit des Bürgerbeauftragten hilfreich, da das betroffene Organ – die Kommission beispielsweise – oder die betroffene Institution auf Möglichkeiten einer künftigen Qualitätsverbesserung hinweisen kann. Im Einzelfall kann der Bürgerbeauftragte die Institution vor einer ungerechtfertigten Kritik in Schutz nehmen, weil er, sozusagen als Außenstehender, absolute Objektivität für sich in Anspruch nehmen kann.

Die Zahlen – Kollege Mavrommatis hat darauf hingewiesen – haben in den vergangenen Jahren beständig zugenommen. Das ist sicherlich Ausdruck für das Vertrauen, das Sie genießen. Wir sollten allerdings eine stärkere Verknüpfung zwischen der Wahrnehmung der Interessen jener Bürgerinnen und Bürger, die sich an die Abgeordneten wenden, und der Arbeit Ihrer Institution anstreben, damit wir diese Anliegen noch effizienter und besser bearbeiten können.

Ich möchte Ihnen noch in einem Punkt sehr herzlich danken. Sie haben die Anfrage der Jungen Union aus Deutschland – der ich selbst auch noch angehöre –, die zusammen mit dem Kollegen Brok eingebracht wurde, positiv beschieden. Ich weise an dieser Stelle darauf hin, dass der Rat, an den sich meine Kritik in diesem Zusammenhang wendet, heute leider erneut durch Abwesenheit glänzt. Durch die Nichtöffentlichkeit seiner Sitzungen kommt der Rat nicht dem Ziel der europäischen Verfassung nach, das er selbst mitbeschlossen hat und das darin besteht, möglichst offen für die Interessen der Bürgerinnen und Bürger und für die Menschen in Europa einzutreten. Es ist in der Tat ein positives Signal, dass eine europäische Institution durchaus auch einmal kritisch auf das Handeln einer anderen europäischen Institution blickt und sich dabei einzig und allein von den Zielen der Europäischen Verfassung leiten lässt. Dafür, Herr Diamandouros, möchte ich Ihnen sehr herzlich danken!

  Alexandra Dobolyi (PSE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Először is szeretnék köszönetet mondani mind az Ombudsman úrnak, mind Mavrommatisz úrnak a kitűnő beszámolójáért, és szeretném egy személyes megjegyzéssel kezdeni. Én egy új tagállamból érkező képviselő vagyok, és mikor a tavalyi évben tárgyaltuk az ombudsmani éves jelentést, akkor még semmilyen személyes tapasztalattal nem rendelkeztem sem a Petíciós Bizottságról, sem az Ombudsman intézményéről.

Azonban, mint ahogy azt Mavrommatisz úr a beszámolójában is említette, az Ombudsman úr tavalyi éves tevékenysége és az új tagállamokban folytatott kampánya során rengeteg magyar állampolgár megismerte azt a jogát, hogy petícióval élhet az Unió felé. Örömmel veszem, hogy ezzel a jogukkal élnek is, és – ha esetleg a beadványok nem is felelnek meg mindig az Unió elvárásainak, és nem is mindig tudunk velük mit kezdeni –, mindenképpen segítséget jelent az új tagállamok állampolgárainak, hogy van még egy olyan fórum, amihez fordulhatnak.

Ahogyan Wallström asszony a beszédében említette, a Bizottságnak van egy olyan reformterve, amellyel szeretné a törekvésünket segíteni. Az európai állampolgárok jogosan várják el a hatékony és a nyitott szolgáltatáson alapuló közintézményi munkát. Remélem, hogy a beszédben megfogalmazott reformtörekvéseket a Bizottság meg fogja valósítani a jövőben.

Ahogy itt a vitában megfogalmazódott nagyon sokakban, azzal a kéréssel fordulok én is a Tanácshoz, hogy – ahogy az Ombudsman úr speciális jelentésében megfogalmazta – kívánatos lenne, hogy a Tanács minden ülése nyitott legyen az Unió többi intézményi dolgozója előtt. De ha már a politikai döntéseiket mindenképpen zárt ajtók mögött szeretik meghozni, legalább a törvényhozási gyakorlat legyen átlátható a számunkra is, és mi is lehessünk jelen ezeknél a döntéseknél. Tavaly Diamandurosz úr elkészített egy anyagot, amely még szorosabbra fűzi az Ombudsman és a Petíciós Bizottság közötti együttműködést, és életre hívta az úgynevezett Ombudsmani Hálózatot, amelyet bevezetőjében említett. Ez szintén üdvözlendő, és nagyon örülök, hogy idén már a Petíciós Bizottság képviselői is részt tudtak venni ennek a hálózatnak az ülésén.

Hozzászólásomat szeretném azzal összefoglalni, hogy újra felhívom mindannyiunk figyelmét, hogy az Európai Ombudsman elmúlt tíz éves tevékenysége igazán sikeres volt, de rengeteg feladat vár még megoldásra. Ezeket pedig mindannyiunknak az EU valamennyi intézménye és szerve figyelmének középpontjában kell tartanunk, hogy az európai polgár érezhesse, hogy értük dolgozunk, jogaik érvényesítésén, az ő érdeküket szolgáló közügyek megoldásán.

  Mieczysław Edmund Janowski (UEN). – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Rzeczniku! Dziękuję profesorowi Diamandourosowi za jego precyzyjne omówienie roku 2004. Był on szczególnie istotny ze względu na rozszerzenie Unii o 10 nowych państw. Pragnę także wyrazić uznanie i podziękowanie panu posłowi Mavrommatisowi za jego solidne sprawozdanie.

Europejski Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich określił trzy wyzwania: przestrzeganie praw obywatelskich wynikających z prawa unijnego, zachowanie najwyższych standardów administrowania oraz zagwarantowanie najlepszego i skutecznego działania na rzecz obywateli. Profesor Diamandouros odpowiedział pozytywnie na te ważne wyzwania. Proszę więc, Panie Profesorze, przyjąć wyrazy uznania także za to, że próbował Pan służyć ludziom w sytuacjach, gdy sprawy nie leżały w zakresie Pana obowiązków.

10 lat funkcjonowania tej instytucji to dobry przykład szerzenia świadomości praw obywateli naszej Wspólnoty. Mówię o tym jako przedstawiciel Polski – kraju nowego. Mamy doświadczenia z funkcjonowaniem instytucji polskiego Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich oraz Rzecznika Praw Dziecka. To wszystko służy budowaniu europejskiej wspólnoty obywateli świadomych swych praw i obowiązków, co chcę podkreślić.

Oczywiście jest jeszcze sporo do zrobienia. W moim rozeznaniu, znajomość Karty Praw Podstawowych oraz Kodeksu Dobrej Praktyki Administracyjnej, zwłaszcza wśród ludzi młodych, budzi nadzieję. Istotne jest zachowanie zasady przejrzystości wszędzie tam, gdzie to jest możliwe.

Drobna uwaga, Panie Profesorze: uważam, że niepotrzebnie odwoływał się Pan do Traktatu Konstytucyjnego, który wszak nie obowiązuje - wiadomo, co się stało po dwóch referendach. Myślę, że dotychczasowe rozwiązania wynikające z Traktatu z Maastricht są ważne. Na koniec zaznaczę, że byłoby doskonale, gdyby Pański urząd nie musiał istnieć i gdyby prawo było w sposób doskonały przestrzegane. Proszę również pozwolić, że złożę życzenia jubilatowi: ad multos annos!

  Ryszard Czarnecki (NI). – Panie Przewodniczący, Panie Rzeczniku! Ojczyzna Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich – Grecja zdobyła parę tygodni temu, ponownie po kilkunastu latach, tytuł mistrza Europy w koszykówce. Mówię o tym, ponieważ przeczytałem w projekcie rezolucji Parlamentu informację, że Rzecznik udzielił skutecznej pomocy w sprawie 70% przedłużonych spraw. Pańscy rodacy, Panie Rzeczniku – najlepsi koszykarze Europy powiedzieliby Panu, że mieć skuteczność rzutów z gry za 2 i 3 punkty na poziomie 70% to niebywała skuteczność i tej skuteczności Panu gratuluję. Gratuluję również wzrostu ilości skarg, bo to świadczy o tym, że ludzie poważnie traktują Pana instytucję, wierzą w potrzebę jej istnienia.

Nie zgadzam się ze stwierdzeniem projektu rezolucji, że tylko połowa tego wzrostu skarg przypada na nową Unię. Nie tylko, lecz aż połowa, ponieważ dla mieszkańców nowych Państw Członkowskich instytucjia Europejskiego Ombudsmana jest czymś bardzo świeżym. Niech się Pan nie martwi, zasypiemy Pana skargami.

  Péter Olajos (PPE-DE). – Tisztelt Elnök Úr! Először is engedjék meg, hogy gratuláljak előadó kollégámnak Manolisz Mavrommatisz úrnak, aki nagy gondossággal tekintette át az Európai Ombudsmannak az Európai Parlamenthez benyújtott 2004. éves tevékenységéről szóló jubileumi jelentését. Magam is támogatom az Ombudsman szoros együttműködését az Európai Parlament Petíciós Bizottságával, mivel így az állampolgárok panaszai közvetlenül eljutnak az Európai Parlament döntéshozóihoz is, egyenes visszacsatolást adva az uniós jogalkotás hatékonyságára.

Az Európai Ombudsman által kiadott 2004. évi jelentésből kiderül, hogy 2004-ben a panaszbeadványok száma 53 százalékkal növekedett 2003-hoz képest. Ami ennél is meglepőbb, hogy a növekedésnek csupán a fele származik az újonnan csatlakozott tíz országból. Másképp fogalmazva úgy tűnhet, minthogyha az új országok állampolgárait és vállalkozásait kevesebb sérelem érné az EU-ban, vagy kevésbé lennének panaszosak.

Mint az egyik ilyen újonnan csatlakozott tagország képviselője, tapasztalatból mondhatom, hogy egyik sem igaz. Bár igaz, hogy a tíz új tagország többsége a lakosság arányához képest kevesebb panasszal élt, azonban ennek sokkal inkább oka az Európai Ombudsman intézményének relatív ismeretlensége, mintsem a sérelmeik kisebb száma.

A nyolc új posztszocialista államban sajnos még mindig jellemző egyrészt az alultájékoztatottság, valamint a történelmi tapasztalatokban gyökerező rossz beidegződés, a panasztételtől való félelem. Sajnos a mai napig gyakran fordulnak hozzánk EP-képviselőkhöz informális úton állampolgárok az európai intézményekben velük szemben megnyilvánuló diszkrimináció miatt. Így tapasztalatból tudom, hogy mi is nehezen tudjuk rábírni őket, hogy panaszukkal forduljanak az Ombudsmanhoz.

EP-képviselőként, bár nem európai munkavállalóként is, számos alkalommal találkozom másfél évvel a csatlakozás után diszkriminációval. Példaként említhetném azt a parlamenti gyakorlatot, miszerint az írásban feltett kérdéseinket az anyanyelvünkön kívül csupán a régi tizenöt tagország nyelvére fordítják le, míg az arra adott válaszokat az anyanyelvünkön kívül csupán angolul vagy franciául adják meg.

Külön felhívnám Diamandurosz úr figyelmét arra a diszkriminatív jelenségre, amely az európai intézményekbe való felvétel során tapasztalható. A 25 tagország számára kiírt versenyvizsga során ugyanis a vizsga feltétele az EU 15 nyelve közül kettőn való vizsgázás. Így tehát amíg a régi tagállam pályázója saját anyanyelvén, valamint egy idegen nyelven versenyezhet a vizsgán, addig az új tagországból érkezett pályázó nem használhatja anyanyelvét.

Számtalan ehhez hasonló panasz érkezik nap mint nap. Kedden tárgyalta a Parlament a svédországi Vaxholm-ügyet, de hasonló, az új tagországokból érkező vállalkozásokkal szembeni diszkriminációval találkozunk számos alkalommal. Hadd említsem meg a Soko Bunda és a Soko Pannónia fedőnevet viselő ügyet, melynek keretében több tucat magyarországi vállalkozást szorítottak ki a német piacról, most már bíróságok által is helytelennek mondott módszerekkel. Ez ügyben egyébként képviselőtársaimmal az illetékes biztoshoz is fordultunk.

Mindezek kapcsán feltétlenül fontosnak tartom az állampolgárok folyamatos tájékoztatását. Örömmel olvastam, hogy az uniós országokban növekszik a tudatosság arra vonatkozóan, hogy a hivatali visszásságokkal kapcsolatban az állampolgároknak joguk van az Ombudsmanhoz fordulni. Kiemelten fontosnak tartom annak hangsúlyozását, hogy az Ombudsman intézménye nem egy sokadik felettes szerv vagy egy végrehajtó hivatal, hanem egy speciális intézmény, ami azért jött létre, hogy az állampolgárok gondjain, panaszain segítsen. A 2004-es ombudsmani jelentésnek külön erénye, hogy az ügyek és a vizsgálatok bemutatásán kívül tematikus elemzést is ad a munkáról. Külön örömömet szeretném kifejezni, hogy az Ombudsman aktív közéleti szerepet vállal az állampolgárok tájékoztatása érdekében.

  Genowefa Grabowska (PSE). – Panie Rzeczniku, jest Pan Rzecznikiem 450 mln obywateli Unii Europejskiej zarówno, gdy piszą do Pana indywidualnie, jak i wówczas gdy działają w sposób zorganizowany. Zwrócić się do Pana może każdy obywatel Unii i każda osoba fizyczna, która mieszka na obszarze Państw Członkowskich – tak mówi prawo. Każda osoba, a więc nie tylko człowiek dorosły, który potrafi dbać o swoje interesy, ale też ta część obywateli Unii Europejskiej, która nie jest dorosła, czyli dzieci. W Pana sprawozdaniu pojawiają się pewne elementy wskazujące na zainteresowanie Pana urzędu tą kwestią, ale ja chcę zadać generalne pytanie: w jakim stopniu Pan osobiście czuje się odpowiedzialny za reprezentowanie tej części obywateli Unii Europejskiej, za reprezentowanie interesów i potrzeb najmłodszych obywateli Unii wobec unijnych instytucji?

Druga kwestia Panie Rzeczniku: gratuluję Panu konsekwencji we wprowadzaniu Kodeksu Dobrej Praktyki Administracyjnej. Kodeks ten jest przejmowany przez administracje Państw Członkowskich, jest coraz popularniejszy w Europie, także w moim kraju – w Polsce, ale dobra administracja zaczyna się od prawidłowego doboru kadr, od rekrutowania i zatrudniania urzędników bez jakiejkolwiek dyskryminacji, przy pełnym respektowaniu zasady równości. Dlatego chcę zapytać, jak w tym kontekście ocenia Pan procedury zatrudniania obywateli z nowych Państw Członkowskich w unijnych instytucjach? Czy nie jest przypadkiem dyskryminacją brak lub śladowa liczba obywateli nowych Państw Członkowskich wśród urzędników, a zwłaszcza wśród urzędników wyższego szczebla unijnego?

Panie Rzeczniku dążymy do Unii, która będzie bliższa obywatelowi i to właśnie Pan zrobił pierwszy krok w tym kierunku. Pan jest tym obywatelom najbliższy, oni Pana potrzebują i lubią – tego Panu gratuluję.

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (PSE). – Panie Przewodniczący! Europejski Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich pełni niezwykle ważną funkcję w demokratycznym społeczeństwie europejskim. Jest bezpośrednim słuchaczem głosu obywateli, którzy zwracając się do niego wskazują na przypadki złego funkcjonowania instytucji europejskich. Choć w znakomitej większości – konkretnie aż w 75% – skargi dotyczą spraw spoza zakresu jego kompetencji, okazuje się, że Ombudsman traktowany jest często jako ostatnia deska ratunku w walce z niekompetencją organów krajowych. W tej sytuacji rzetelne, merytoryczne informowanie obywateli o ich prawach i o roli Europejskiego Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich powinno być traktowane priorytetowo.

Dotychczasowe działania Rzecznika, w osobie pana prof. Diamandourosa, takie jak przygotowanie i rozpowszechnianie corocznych sprawozdań oraz wyraźna publiczna aktywność w zakresie informowania obywateli, zasługują na wielkie uznanie. Niemniej jednak kontynuacja wysiłku w celu zwiększenia skuteczności jego działań jest absolutnie niezbędna. Rzecznik powinien być strażnikiem dobrej administracji instytucji europejskich, jeszcze ściślej współpracującym ze swoimi odpowiednikami na szczeblu lokalnym i regionalnym. Skargi obywateli muszą być rozpatrywane szybko i skutecznie, dlatego też należy poprzeć starania Rzecznika skłaniające instytucje europejskie do skrócenia okresu rozpatrywania skarg związanych np. z odmową dostępu do dokumentów. Publiczny dostęp do tego typu informacji, dotyczących instytucji europejskich, jest dowodem jawności i przejrzystości ich działań, dlatego też powinno się dążyć do zapewnienia tego prawa wszystkim obywatelom Unii Europejskiej, dla których te instytucje przecież pracują.

Szczególnie zaś Komisja Europejska powinna, po pierwsze, zaprzestać odmowy rozpowszechniania swoich dokumentów, a po drugie, jak najszybciej przyjąć Europejski Kodeks Dobrej Praktyki Administracyjnej, w celu położenia kresu obecnej sytuacji, w której instytucje europejskie stosują różne kodeksy postępowania.

(Oklaski)

  Nikiforos Diamandouros, Ombudsman. Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking Members of Parliament for their kind remarks on the work of the Ombudsman during the past year. I am deeply appreciative of the attention and the very careful and constructive comments. I note that a great many of the comments came from the new Member States, which I welcome very much as an indication of their commitment to this institution. I welcome the tenor, the nature, the thrust and the intent of the remarks by the Vice-President of the Commission, Mrs Wallström. I am delighted to hear her formally announce the reform that the Commission is about to adopt as of 1 November, which will make it possible for the complaints to be handled at a higher level, with a greater degree of responsibility and uniformity.

I appreciate the Commissioner’s commitment to greater cooperation, particularly the encouraging words concerning the proposed revision of the Statute. I note, finally, that we can look forward to a binding code. I see that from your positive remarks and I am very grateful for the political will you have demonstrated on issues to do with the Ombudsman. That is exactly the kind of cooperation I look forward to from the Commission. I want to thank the Commissioner for that publicly.

Concerning the various comments from Members, allow me to mention briefly those of Mr Seeber. Clearly we have a high percentage of inadmissibles, but we have managed to help 70% of those who come to us and whose complaints are not admissible. I find that to be a satisfactory percentage of citizens we can help, even though they are outside the mandate.

I wish to thank Mr De Rossa for his remarks. At the last meeting of the national ombudsmen held in September in The Hague, we took specific decisions on how to address, through the network, mechanisms to expedite the handling of issues outside the mandate. I hope to be able to take further steps to reduce the number of inadmissibles.

Concerning Mr Hammerstein Mintz’s remarks, for which I thank him, the report that he referred to relates to 2005. It is therefore not part of my report to this body for 2004; it is a report concerning OLAF that will be examined next year. As far as I am concerned, I have completed my duty to Parliament and have submitted a special report. It is now up to this august body as to how it wishes to move forward.

I appreciate the remarks from Mr Borghezio and Mr Martinez, but I need to point out that the Ombudsman, unlike Parliament, is not a political body. Therefore, it is not within my mandate to get involved in the kind of political activities that you are asking of me. I fear that, were I to do so, this body – to which I am ultimately accountable – would object to my taking political initiatives which are beyond my mandate.

Je suis conscient, M. Martinez, du problème qui découle de votre qualité de membre non inscrit. Mais, encore une fois, je m'en tiens au contenu de vos remarques. Or, vos remarques sortent du champ de mes compétences dès lors qu'elles portent plutôt sur des questions politiques.

I want to thank Mr Libicki for his cooperation in his capacity as chairman of the Committee on Petitions. I am also grateful to all the staff of the committee for their help and I hope that this cooperation will continue.

The remarks by Mrs Dobolyi and Mr Olajos were very constructive. Let me just say to Mr Olajos that I am currently dealing with a case concerning discrimination in language candidacies. I have asked for further information. That particular case is still being examined and I hope to be able to report to this body next year on the outcome.

Finally, let me say to Mrs Grabowska that I am, as you know, very sensitive to issues concerning children. One of my special reports to this body this year had to do with the special education needs of severely disabled children. Therefore this is very much a concern of mine and I will be happy to consider any other complaints. I have not in fact received any other complaints relating to children. Nor I am aware of having received any complaint about recruitment and the filling of senior posts. However, because I receive many complaints concerning recruitment, I shall be very sensitive to that issue.

Lastly, I know there is a case concerning recruitment pending before the Court of First Instance. That is therefore automatically outside my mandate and I will have to await the decision of the judicial authorities.

I should like to thank Members of Parliament and the Commissioner again for their remarks and support.

  Der Präsident. Die Aussprache ist geschlossen.

Die Abstimmung findet heute um 11.30 Uhr statt.

(Die Sitzung wird von 11.25 Uhr bis 11.30 Uhr unterbrochen.)

PRESIDENCIA DEL SR. VIDAL-QUADRAS ROCA
Vicepresidente

  Hannes Swoboda (PSE). – Herr Präsident! Ich möchte mich gemäß Artikel 142 und 143 der Geschäftsordnung melden. Zur Überraschung vieler Kolleginnen und Kollegen war die Haushaltsdebatte am gestrigen Tag wenige Minuten nach 11.00 Uhr zu Ende, obwohl wir bis 12.00 Uhr Zeit hatten. Nun war die Zeit wohl nicht ganz richtig berechnet, auch sind einige Kolleginnen und Kollegen nicht gekommen oder haben kürzer gesprochen – so z.B. die Kommission und der Rat.

Ich bitte aber im Präsidium des Parlaments zu überlegen, ob man in diesen Fällen nicht etwas flexibler reagieren kann und insbesondere jenen Kolleginnen und Kollegen, die bis zum Ende der Debatte im Saal anwesend sind, dann noch das Wort erteilt, wenn sie dies wünschen, bzw. sie länger reden lässt. Stattdessen werden nur noch einminütige Redezeiten vergeben, und wir haben fast eine Stunde Zeit verschwendet, in der wir keine Sitzung hatten!

Ich möchte das Präsidium bitten, hier eine Regel einzuführen, damit diese Debatte flexibel geführt und die Zeit ausgenutzt werden kann.

(Beifall)

  El Presidente. Muchas gracias, señor Swoboda. Tomamos buena nota de su petición.

4. Prawa człowieka w Saharze Zachodniej

  El Presidente. Señorías, antes de comenzar el turno de votaciones debo someter a la consideración de la Cámara un asunto concreto: en su reunión de ayer, la Conferencia de Presidentes decidió proponer que, excepcionalmente, el debate sobre los Derechos humanos en el Sáhara Occidental no se cerrara con la votación de una propuesta de resolución, con el fin de no perjudicar la visita que la Delegación ad hoc realizará a esta región del 11 al 15 de enero del año próximo.

De conformidad con nuestro Reglamento, debo someter al Pleno esta decisión excepcional de la Conferencia de Presidentes y doy la palabra para una intervención a favor y una en contra de esta propuesta.

  Hans-Gert Poettering (PPE-DE). – Herr Präsident! Ich möchte dafür plädieren, dass über die Entschließung gleichwohl abgestimmt wird. Ich habe es in der Konferenz der Präsidenten für richtig befunden, mich dafür einzusetzen, dass es keine Entschließung gibt, und zwar aus der Überlegung heraus, dass wir zunächst das Ergebnis der Delegation abwarten und dann die Entschließung verfassen sollten.

Da ich als Fraktionsvorsitzender natürlich auf die Unterstützung der Fraktion angewiesen bin, habe ich dies meiner Fraktion heute Morgen so berichtet. Die Fraktion war einstimmig der Ansicht, dass wir heute gleichwohl eine Entschließung verfassen sollten. Das heißt – und ich schäme mich deswegen nicht –, die Fraktion war anderer Meinung als der Fraktionsvorsitzende.

(Beifall)

Da ich das Votum der Fraktion zu vertreten habe und ein guter Demokrat bin, setze ich mich dafür ein, ...

(Zurufe)

... ja, ich wünschte, andere würden das auch so sagen: Ich akzeptiere das, was unsere Fraktion dem Fraktionsvorsitzenden mit auf den Weg gibt. Unsere Fraktion ist der Meinung, dass wir nicht das Ergebnis der Delegation abwarten sollten, sondern uns in der Sache jetzt schon äußern. Deswegen tritt die EVP-ED-Fraktion dafür ein, dass wir heute über eine Entschließung entscheiden.

(Beifall)

  Francis Wurtz (GUE/NGL). – Monsieur le Président, la situation a changé, puisque le démocrate M. Poettering s'est finalement rallié à la position de son groupe, qui était la position que j'avais moi-même défendue à la Conférence des présidents, et qui était de dire qu'aucune considération tactique ne devait empêcher le Parlement de s'exprimer sur l'urgence de la situation des droits de l'homme au Sahara occidental

(Applaudissements)

et qu'il était plus logique que le Parlement exprime sa position avant l'envoi d'une délégation sur, notamment, les révélations très graves qui viennent d'être faites, avec la découverte de fosses communes, pour faire la lumière sur cette question et pour inviter les autorités marocaines, pour inviter tout le monde à travailler avec le nouveau représentant de l'ONU. Je me félicite donc de la position qui vient d'être exprimée et qui sera certainement celle de l'ensemble de notre Assemblée, à savoir avoir un vote à l'issue de notre débat cet après-midi.

(El Parlamento rechaza la propuesta de modificación del orden del día)

5. Głosowanie

  El Presidente. De conformidad con el orden del día, se procede a la votación.

6. Projekt ogólnego budżetu Unii Europejskiej - Rok budżetowy 2006

- Antes de la votación:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), relatore. – Signor Presidente, mi consenta, prima di proporre alcuni aggiustamenti tecnici, di ringraziare tutti i colleghi per l'ottimo dibattito, anche sintetico, che si è tenuto ieri e per la leale collaborazione che hanno assicurato fino a questo momento e che, mi auguro, assicureranno anche nel corso della votazione e delle fasi successive.

Come ogni anno, prima di passare al voto chiedo che vengano accolti alcuni adeguamenti tecnici. Per quanto riguarda la linea 15 06 06, relativa alle manifestazioni annuali speciali, dal secondo trattino di testo occorre sopprimere le parole "al nuovo museo dell'Europa". In relazione alla 19 03 06, relativa ai rappresentanti speciali dell'Unione europea, per coerenza con il titolo della linea, nel commento la parola "inviato" deve essere sostituita dalla parola "rappresentante". La parte rimanente del commento alla stessa linea si presenta depennata a causa di un errore tecnico e di conseguenza detta parte di testo non deve essere soppressa.

All'emendamento 771 del blocco 4 l'importo totale degli stanziamenti di pagamento della linea di bilancio 22 02 01 01 deve essere iscritto sulla linea e infine sulle linee riguardanti il Fondo europeo di sviluppo occorre introdurre una menzione "per memoria" per ripristinare il progetto preliminare di bilancio. Si tratta specificamente delle linee comprese dalla 21 03 01 alla 21 03 015.

(El Parlamento aprueba las modificaciones técnicas propuestas por el ponente)

- Antes de la votación de las enmiendas 779 y 231:

  Catherine Guy-Quint (PSE). – Monsieur le Président, ce que je vais faire n'est pas classique. À la ligne suivante, nous avons deux amendements. Un amendement qui a été voté par la commission des budgets et un autre concernant les médicaments orphelins, qui nous est envoyé par la commission de l'environnement, de la santé publique et de la sécurité alimentaire. Il nous faut voter l'amendement proposé par la commission des budgets. Quant à l'amendement suivant, il demande un million supplémentaire pour les médicaments orphelins, dont l'Agence des médicaments a besoin. Je voudrais savoir s'il nous serait possible de voter sur l'amendement 231, pour que l'Agence puisse travailler cette année avec tous les moyens nécessaires.

Vous comprenez que techniquement, ce n'est pas correct. Je suis entièrement d'accord. Mais il se fait que depuis le vote à la commission des budgets, nous avons reçu des éléments supplémentaires. S'il était possible de voter cet amendement 231, qui rajouterait un million d'euros encore disponible dans la marge, cela nous permettrait d'améliorer considérablement les conditions de travail dans ce domaine qui nous tient à cœur.

(Applaudissements)

  El Presidente. Si hemos comprendido bien, usted desea que se someta a votación primero la enmienda 231 y después la 779.

  Catherine Guy-Quint (PSE). – Monsieur le Président, on peut aussi voter le 779, mais je voudrais que l'on puisse, en ajout au 779, voter un million d'euros supplémentaire pour l'Agence pour les médicaments orphelins. Je tiens à vous dire que, si quelqu'un n'est pas d'accord, nous sommes obligés de l'accepter.

  El Presidente. ¿Hay alguna oposición por parte de los Grupos políticos?

  Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE). – Señor Presidente, preferimos atenernos a los principios del procedimiento. Por tanto, es preferible la distribución orginal de la lista de voto.

  El Presidente. Entonces procedemos como estaba previsto.

- Antes de la votación de la enmienda 446:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), relatore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, qualora questo emendamento dovesse essere adottato, chiedo che venga adottata anche la frase standard che abbiamo utilizzato per tutti gli emendamenti simili e cioè "una parte dello stanziamento è destinata a", perché non possiamo fare una prenotazione di fondi specifici.

- Antes de la votación de las enmiendas 74 y 223:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), relatore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, onde evitare confusioni durante la votazione, propongo di procedere alla votazione dell'emendamento 74 per quanto riguarda i commenti e dell'emendamento 223 per gli importi.

  El Presidente. ¿Hay alguna oposición?

  Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE). – Señor Presidente, volvemos a lo mismo, preferimos el orden de votación establecido en el procedimiento. No entendemos estos cambios en el último momento.

(Aplausos)

  Kathalijne Maria Buitenweg (Verts/ALE). – Mr President, in the amendments before us there is no change in the amounts. We are not voting on the amounts. There is only a remark on it. That is the only change. We will vote only on the remark. We will vote on the figures later.

  El Presidente. Tiene usted toda la razón. Vamos a proceder como estaba previsto.

- Antes de la votación de la enmienda 292:

  Giovanni Pittella (PSE), relatore. – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, anche per questo emendamento vale ciò che ho detto prima e cioè, se dovesse essere approvato, occorre adottare la frase standard, perché non possiamo fare una prenotazione di fondi specifica; quindi "una parte dello stanziamento è destinata a".

  El Presidente. Habiendo tomado nota de esto, procedemos a la votación de la enmienda 292.

- Antes de la votación de las enmiendas 473 y 475:

  Valdis Dombrovskis (PPE-DE). – Priekšsēdētāja kungs! Godātie kolēģi! Runājot par 2006. gada budžeta citu institūciju sadaļu, ir nepieciešama sekojoša tehniska korekcija. Priekšlikumos Nr. 473 un 475 minētais datums — 2005. gada 31. oktobris — ir jāpārvieto no piezīmēm uz pamatojumu.

(El Parlamento aprueba las modificaciones técnicas propuestas por el señor Dombrovskis)

7. Projekt budżetu ogólnego na rok 2006 (sekcja III)

- Después de la votación final:

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE). – Señor Presidente, hay un problema: en esta línea no tenemos traducción, y tampoco servicio de micro. Es toda la línea.

  El Presidente. Pido a los servicios técnicos que acudan para resolver ese problema técnico.

8. Projekt budżetu ogólnego na rok 2006 (sekcje I, II, IV, V, VI, VII i VIII)

- Antes de la votación:

  Valdis Dombrovskis (PPE-DE), rapporteur. – Mr President, due to technical problems I shall speak English in order that those colleagues who also have technical problems can better understand.

As a result of the vote on the draft general budget, the following technical adjustments should be made. First, in paragraph 5, the amount should be EUR 7.5 million. Paragraph 27(b) should begin ‘to create 46 posts (21 A*, 1 temporary A*, 19 B* and 5 C*)’. In paragraph 41, the amount should be EUR 3 398 000. In addition, the date mentioned in paragraphs 17, 23 and 25 should be replaced by 13 November 2005.

  Francesco Enrico Speroni (IND/DEM). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, il collega Dombrovskis si è espresso in inglese anziché in polacco. Sono consapevole che molti colleghi conoscono meglio l'inglese che non il polacco, ma tutte le lingue hanno la stessa dignità e, di conseguenza, l'interpretazione deve essere disponibile per tutte o per nessuna.

  El Presidente. Ha sido un problema técnico, ajeno a la voluntad de la cámara y el señor Dombrovskis ha tenido la gentileza de colaborar con sus compañeros.

9. Sytuacja w Azerbejdżanie w przeddzień wyborów

10. Rewizja procesu barcelońskiego

11. Działalność Europejskiego Rzecznika Praw Obywatelskich (2004 r.)

  El Presidente. Con esto concluimos el turno de votaciones.

12. Wyjaśnienia dotyczące sposobu głosowania

- Proyecto de presupuesto general de la Unión Europea - Ejercicio 2006

  Agnes Schierhuber (PPE-DE). – Herr Präsident! Ich habe heute bei der ersten Lesung zum Gesamthaushaltsplan gegen die Änderungsanträge 543, 301, 344 und 345 gestimmt, weil keine Differenzierung zwischen Zucht-, Nutz- und Schlachttieren vorgenommen wird. Ich bin persönlich und auch für Österreich gegen den Lebendexport von Schlachtrindern, aber da in der Bewertung kein Unterschied zwischen Zucht- und Schlachttieren gemacht wird, bedeutet die Streichung der Exporterstattungen die Zerstörung der europäischen Produktion sowie der Existenz der Rinderbauern.

Zweitens: Ich habe für Änderungsantrag 99 gestimmt, weil es die Gemeinsame Marktorganisation für Tabak gibt und sie Gültigkeit hat.

  Jan Andersson, Ewa Hedkvist Petersen, Inger Segelström och Åsa Westlund (PSE), skriftlig. Vi vill att budgeten skall bidra till en hållbar social, ekonomisk och miljömässig utveckling för EU i enlighet med Lissabonstrategin. Vi har därför valt att stödja de ändringsförslag i omröstningen som prioriterar forskning, utveckling och utbildning. Vi vill dock inte stödja de ändringsförslag som ger mer pengar till direkt jordbruksstöd då detta stöd redan är överdimensionerat. Detta stöd resulterar i ett ineffektivt jordbruk som skadar miljön och som genom dumpning av överskott bidrar till att öka klyftorna mellan fattiga och rika i världen.

Vi vill inte heller ge pengar till stöd för tobaksodling då detta direkt bidrar till folkhälsoproblem. Vi anser att detta stöd skall snabbt trappas ned för att inom kort helt tas bort. De pengar som därigenom sparas kan därmed användas bland annat till åtgärder för att minska bruket och beroendet av tobak. Vi vill att direktstödet till sockerodlare skall reformeras då vi inte i längden kan stödja en produktion som till stor del är överflödig. Vi vill dock inte att odlare i utvecklingsländer skall bli utan levebröd och har därför röstat för ett övergångsstöd för att kompensera dem tills de hunnit ställa om sin produktion.

  Hélène Goudin, Nils Lundgren och Lars Wohlin (IND/DEM), skriftlig. Junilistan anser att EU:s budget skall begränsas till 1,00% av medlemsländernas genomsnittliga BNI och stödjer därför i princip Rådets position. 2006 års budget är den sista budgeten inom det nuvarande finansiella perspektivet varför det är extra olyckligt att Europaparlamentet försöker flytta fram sina positioner inför de kommande förhandlingarna genom att föreslå kraftiga höjningar. Vi har därför valt att rösta nej till samtliga höjningar som Europaparlamentet föreslagit samtidigt som vi välkomat de få besparingar som endera budgetutskottet eller enskilda ledamöter lagt fram som ändringsförslag.

Det finns fler olyckliga budgetposter, men Junilistan beklagar i synnerhet det höga stödet till EU:s jordbrukspolitik, sammanhållningsfonden, fiskerinäringen samt de budgetposter som innehåller stöd till olika former av informationskampanjer.

  Alyn Smith (Verts/ALE), in writing.

Amendment 263:

This budget line would have given an authorisation to use funds to communicate the benefits of the euro. As Scotland, as a current part of the UK, is not a member of the euro I have accordingly abstained as this is not a matter for me.

Amendment 440:

This budget line would have extended the translation facilities of the ACP assembly to include all languages, as opposed to the current working languages of that assembly. While I would in principle support the extension of translation on the basis that all languages are of equal dignity, the costs of this move to such a vast number of languages would be prohibitive. It would also, I suspect, be unnecessary as the current system has worked well enough up till now.

  Catherine Stihler (PSE), in writing. It is a real pity that Parliament today has voted to maintain tobacco subsidies. Half a million EU citizens die needlessly each year from tobacco related illnesses. It is only through concerted action that we can fight against the tobacco industry and protect public health.

  Corien Wortmann-Kool (PPE-DE), schriftelijk. Hierbij verklaar ik voor amendement over CESI 446 te hebben gestemd betreffende budgetlijn 04030302

- Informe: Pittella (A6-0309/2005)

  Richard James Ashworth (PPE-DE), in writing. British Conservative policy is firmly committed to ensuring that budgetary commitments should not exceed 1.0% of GNI contributions. We would like to see an EU that spends taxpayers' money wisely on initiatives that support the Lisbon objectives while eliminating fraud, mismanagement and wasteful spending such as tobacco subsidies.

For these reasons, we have voted against amendments or proposals that would breach the 1.0% ceiling without, in our view, contributing to the promotion of sustainable growth and jobs in Europe. However, we do support projects that will encourage the development and supply of new-generation energy solutions.

  Niels Busk og Anne E. Jensen (ALDE), skriftlig. Venstres medlemmer af Europa-Parlamentet stemte imod ændringsforslag 7, fremsat af Jens Peter Bonde for IND/DEM-Gruppen. Venstre er imod eksport af levende dyr og har stemt imod budgetlinje 05 02 13 04. Hr. Bondes forslag kan imidlertid ikke gennemføres i praksis og må anses for at være urealistisk og ugennemtænkt.

  Proinsias De Rossa (PSE), in writing. I support the Pittella Report including Amendments 3004 & 3005, which restore €12 million of the 2006 funding for PEACE 11 to the technical assistance/innovative actions budget-heading. The Member States must ensure the budgetary flexibility required in no way endangers continued full funding of PEACE 11, as envisaged last year when funding for that programme was guaranteed into 2006.

The Socialist Group played a key role in securing €108 million for Ireland's Peace 11 programme for 2006, and continues to pledge its full support for the programme. John Hume, a former member of the Socialist Group was the architect of the PEACE programme and its contribution to reconciliation has been enormous. If we are to succeed in bringing communities together from both sides of the sectarian divide continued funding for the PEACE programme is crucial

We must also support the SDLP campaign for a PEACE 111 programme by earmarking €200 million in the 2007-2013 budget. I hope Minister Noel Tracy takes this up urgently and all Member States ensure smooth administration of arrangements for finalising the PEACE 11 funding, and guarantee continuing funding for a PEACE 111 programme for 2007-2013.

  Ana Maria Gomes (PSE), por escrito. Votei a favor da eliminação dos subsídios à produção de tabaco. Creio que a produção de tabaco, na medida em que constitui um elo fundamental da indústria tabaqueira, não deve continuar a ser subsidiada. As consequências nefastas para a saúde pública (mais de 500.000 mortos por ano na Europa por doenças ligadas ao consumo de tabaco) e, portanto, também para as economias dos Estados-Membros e da UE do consumo de tabaco levam-me a considerar que o encargo de mais de mil milhares de Euros gastos em subsídios a estes produtores no âmbito da PAC é moral, política e economicamente indefensável. Do meu ponto de vista, a produção e indústria do tabaco não só não devem ser apoiadas como deveriam ser progressiva mas rapidamente eliminadas. Compete ao Parlamento Europeu pressionar os Estados-Membros e a Comissão neste sentido, designadamente através do orçamento da UE que aprova.

Sou evidentemente sensível ao problema dos 3.500 empregos que em Portugal dependerão desta produção. E defendo, assim, que se devem acelerar os esforços de reconversão da indústria, para garantir postos de trabalho e a sobrevivência económica dos produtores em Portugal e todos os países europeus que produzem tabaco. E nesse sentido apoio toda a assistência financeira que lhes possa ser dada, quer por instâncias comunitárias, quer nacionais. Mas continuar a política de subsídios europeus representa...

(Declaração de voto encurtada nos termos do artigo 163º do Regimento)

  Pedro Guerreiro (GUE/NGL), por escrito. Serve a presente declaração de voto para denunciar a hipocrisia da maioria do Parlamento Europeu que, após ter aprovado em anteriores resoluções a criação de um "programa comunitário", com os "recursos adequados", para o sector do têxtil e vestuário, "particularmente" dirigido às "regiões menos favorecidas", apoiando a "investigação, a inovação, a formação profissional e as PME's", face a uma proposta clara que visa a sua concretização futura no Orçamento comunitário para 2006, a rejeite. Ou seja, a maioria do PE não se envergonha da sua incoerência.

Pela nossa parte, lamentamos a rejeição de propostas - apresentadas por nossa iniciativa e que recolheram o apoio de diversos deputados - no sentido:

- da criação de um projecto-piloto para acções no domínio do sector do têxtil e vestuário, com vista à criação futura de um programa comunitário;

- da criação de planos de recuperação dos recursos haliêuticos tendo em conta as consequências socio-económicas dos períodos de defeso;

- e da defesa do multilinguísmo, nomeadamente nas assembleias parlamentares UE-ACP.

Como valorizamos a aprovação de outras, que apresentámos, visando a promoção da reflorestação e a prevenção dos incêndios florestais, a conservação do património cultural, ou o apoio à cooperação entre PME's.

  David Martin, (PSE), in writing. In the budget vote I voted for CAP reform, for cuts in Tobacco subsidies, for the end of the transport of lives animals over 8 hours, against cuts in the Northern Ireland peace programme and for assistance to ACP banana and sugar producers.

  Claude Moraes (PSE), in writing. I voted for Heading 3 of the Budget Vote today because I want to add no less than 200 million euros in payment appropriations to a range of budget headings for the Lisbon strategy which the Council reduced at first reading.

The main areas which would boost EU competitiveness include increases for programmes to support small and medium-sized companies, but above all for the 6th framework research programme. The payments for education programmes are also increased, by 35 million euros for Socrates, 20 million euros for Leonardo da Vinci and 3 million euros for e-learning, whcih I fully support.

  Alyn Smith (Verts/ALE), in writing. I voted to delete this budget line because I do not believe that we should in this day and age be refunding the export of live animals, often in dreadful conditions. I accordingly voted to end this practice.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Το ΚΚΕ είναι κατηγορηματικά αντίθετο στο αντιλαϊκό προσχέδιο προϋπολογισμού της Ε.Ε. για το 2006.

Η έγκρισή του από τους βουλευτές του ΕΛΚ, σοσιαλδημοκράτες κ.ά., σηματοδοτεί την ένταση της αντιλαϊκής επίθεσης Ε.Ε. και αστικών κυβερνήσεων στα κ.μ., σε βάρος της εργατικής τάξης και των λαϊκών στρωμάτων, για την αύξηση των κερδών του ευρωενωσιακού κεφαλαίου.

Αποτελεί "προπομπό" του αντιλαϊκού αντιδραστικού σχέδιου δράσης που συζητείται στην άτυπη Σύνοδο Κορυφής στην Αγγλία, για το βάθεμα των καπιταλιστικών αναδιαρθρώσεων στο πλαίσιο της στρατηγικής της Λισαβόνας, δραστικές περικοπές στις κοινωνικές παροχές, στην αγροτική παραγωγή, στις μικρομεσαίες επιχειρήσεις, και μεταφορά πόρων για την ενίσχυση των στρατιωτικών κατασταλτικών μηχανισμών.

Στο στόχαστρο είναι οι καπνοκαλλιεργητές με την περικοπή 1 δισ. Ευρώ. Με πρόσχημα την ταύτιση της καπνοκαλλιέργειας με την αντικαπνιστική εκστρατεία, αναγορεύονται επικίνδυνα τα κοινοτικά καπνά, και "αθώα" τα εισαγόμενα. Καταπατούνται και αυτές οι αποφάσεις της Ε.Ε. για την αντιλαϊκή αναθεώρηση της ΚΑΠ και την περιορισμένη ενίσχυση της γεωργίας μέχρι το 2013.

Ενώ η ανεργία, η φτώχεια αυξάνονται με μαθηματική πρόοδο, τεράστιες είναι οι ανάγκες για τη δημόσια υγεία, παιδεία κλπ., μεταφέρονται κεφάλαια στην επικοινωνιακή πολιτική, προκειμένου να μακιγιαριστεί ο ιμπεριαλιστικός και αντιλαϊκός χαρακτήρας της Ε.Ε.

Η πάλη του εργατικού κινήματος ενάντια στον Προϋπολογισμό χρειάζεται να περιλάβει το σύνολο της αντιλαϊκής πολιτικής της Ε.Ε.

- Informe: Dombrovskis (A6-0307/2005)

  Niels Busk og Anne E. Jensen (ALDE), skriftlig. Venstres medlemmer af Europa-Parlamentet stemte imod ændringsforslag 4, fremsat af Jens Peter Bonde for IND/DEM-Gruppen. Venstre er tilhænger af en reform af rejsegodtgørelserne, så alle rimelige og nødvendige rejseomkostninger refunderes. Hr. Bondes forslag er imidlertid tåbeligt og lader sig ikke gennemføre i praksis.

  David Martin (PSE), in writing. I wish to record that I abstained on amendments dealing with travel allowances at cost because I believe this is covered in the Member's Statute.

  Mechtild Rothe (PSE), schriftlich. Die SPD-Abgeordneten im Europäischen Parlament sind für eine Reisekostenabrechnung gemäß den entstandenen Kosten. Wir stimmen allerdings keinem Änderungsantrag zu, der den Präsidenten zu regelwidrigem Verhalten auffordert.

- Informe: Jäätteenmäki (A6-0280/2005)

  Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE), par écrit. – Dans un mois à Barcelone, le partenariat euroméditerranéen doit être refondé autour de quelques idées forces.

D'abord, la lutte contre la pauvreté, en élaborant et finançant une version méditerranéenne des objectifs du Millénaire et en avançant sur des mécanismes de solidarité comparables à ceux de la politique régionale européenne.

La promotion de la démocratie et des droits de l'homme doit être placée au coeur du partenariat, avec la mise en oeuvre concrète de l'article 2 des accords d'association et la généralisation des sous-commissions sur les droits de l'homme.

La lutte contre la discrimination à l'égard des femmes et pour l'égalité des sexes doit faire l'objet d'une politique spécifique et prioritaire de l'UE. Ce sont les femmes qui seront les vectrices d'un rapprochement véritable, celui des peuples et des cultures autour du bassin méditerranéen.

Des réponses communes sur la question des migrations. Halte à l'hypocrisie et au cynisme! Ne pensons pas garder les mains propres en laissant nos partenaires de la rive sud faire le sale boulot. Nous devons jeter les bases d'une gestion commune des flux migratoires, par une approche généreuse et solidaire de la question de la circulation des personnes en Méditerranée

Une "zone de développement durable" en Méditerranée, avec un programme de dépollution de la mer Méditerranée d'ici 2020, assorti d'un calendrier précis de réalisation.

(Explication de vote écourtée en vertu de l'article 163 du Règlement)

  David Martin (PSE), in writing. I welcome this report. I would like the Barcelona Process and structures to be used to a greater extent to encourage dialogue and interaction (economic, social cultural, educational, technical etc) between Israel and its neighbours. I am convinced this is the only way that the peoples of this region will be able to live in peace. There can be no security behind barriers.

  Andreas Mölzer (NI), schriftlich. Innerhalb einer Nacht haben kürzlich über 1.000 Schwarzafrikaner in Melilla versucht, die Grenzen gestürmt um ins „gelobte Land“ zu kommen. Dabei sind Unzählige ums Leben gekommen und haben sich scharenweise in die gnadenlosen Fänge von Menschenhändlern begeben, welche nach wie vor den Traum eines Schlaraffenlandes Europa aufrechterhalten.

So werden verzweifelte Menschen, in eine auswegslose Situation getrieben, da obendrein der Weg nach Hause oft verbaut ist. Aber auch Entscheidungsträger vor Ort leisten dieser Entwicklung Vorschub und sind Mitschuld an der Tragödie, wenn sie in Nacht und Nebelaktionen en groß illegale Einwanderer einbürgern.

Eine allzu liberale weltfremde Haltung gegenüber illegaler Immigration, die ja leider unlängst auch in der Kiew-Affäre zu Tage kam, hilft den Menschen keinesfalls, sondern schafft nur neue Probleme und begünstigt v.a. den Menschenhandel und organisierter Kriminalität.

Das rasante Bevölkerungswachstum wird die Flut an Wirtschaftsflüchtlingen vor Marokko und den Küsten Italiens und Maltas noch verschärfen. Ein EU-weit einheitliches Vorgehen in der Flüchtlingsfrage ist daher ebenso essentiell, wie das Zerstören dieser unrealistischen Traumbilder in den Flüchtlingsländern, damit wir so Mittel frei bekommen, um die Lebensbedingungen vor Ort zu verbessern. Gerade deshalb ist die Beibehaltung des Barcelona-Prozesses als Maßnahme der Armutsbekämpfung so wichtig und der Ausbau der länderspezifischen Aktionspläne muss vorangetrieben werden.

  Luís Queiró (PPE-DE), por escrito. O processo de Barcelona pretendia uma viragem nas relações entre a União Europeia e os seus vizinhos do Sul e ainda constituir o enquadramento para um desenvolvimento concertado e de entreajuda dos países mediterrânicos.

É pois necessário nos dez anos deste processo ajustar e reforçar a sua aplicação, de modo a proporcionar condições para enfrentar os desafios actuais e se adaptar a um novo contexto regional e internacional.

Ao combinar níveis de diálogo político, económico e social, bilateral e regional, com oportunidades de interacção este processo reforça as possibilidades de aproximação e de estabelecimento de relações de confiança entre povos.

Considero que o ponto mais relevante é a prevista criação de uma zona de comércio livre euromediterrânica, a partir de 2010 e que deverá abranger cerca de 40 Estados e, aproximadamente, 700 milhões de consumidores.

Parece-me que um modelo de relacionamento assente num espaço de comércio livre alargado será com certeza mais eficaz e pode, promovendo as economias do sul, contribuir para o desenvolvimento desta região de forma a evitar, por exemplo, tensões migratórias como aquelas a que temos assistido nos últimos tempos.

Votei favoravelmente o relatório Jäätteenmäki.

- Situación en Azerbaiyán (B6-0558/2005) e Informe: Jäätteenmäki (A6-0280/2005)

  Hélène Goudin, Nils Lundgren och Lars Wohlin (IND/DEM), skriftlig. Vi anser att EU har en viktig roll inom sitt närområde för att främja demokrati och mänskliga rättigheter. Båda resolutionerna berör dock länder och områden som inte kan betraktas som EU:s närområde. Det är tydligt att syftet är att framhäva EU:s utrikes- och säkerhetspolitiska roll. För dessa ändamål är andra organisationer lämpade, exempelvis FN, OSSE samt Europarådet. De två sistnämnda organisationerna bör prioriteras när det gäller valövervakning och värnande av mänskliga rättigheter inom Europa.

Med anledning av ovanstående väljer vi att lägga ner våra röster i slutomröstningen om de två resolutionerna. Vi har dock valt att stödja några förslag som, enligt vår mening, ligger utanför EU:s utrikes- och säkerhetspolitik. Det gäller exempelvis förslagen om att inrätta ett frihandelsområde mellan EU och Medelhavsområdet till 2010, att utveckla ett samarbete för civil- och miljöskydd.

- Informe: Mavrommatis (A6-0276/2005)

  Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL), por escrito. Embora este relatório se refira à actividade desenvolvida pelo anterior Provedor de Justiça no mandato que já cessou, registamos positivamente a forma como desenvolveu o trabalho, procurando chamar a atenção das instituições europeias para as queixas dos cidadãos, tendo mesmo, num caso ou outro, conseguido a sua resolução.

De igual modo, apresentou propostas que, se forem aceites, podem melhorar a capacidade de intervenção e resolução dos problemas dos cidadãos, designadamente através de uma maior celeridade nas respostas das instituições europeias interpeladas.

De igual modo, acompanhamos a posição do relator que defende uma maior cooperação entre o Provedor de Justiça Europeu e a Comissão de Petições do Parlamento Europeu, bem como os esforços para dar uma maior visibilidade aos direitos das pessoas.

Daí o nosso voto favorável.

  David Martin (PSE), in writing. I welcome this report which rightly praises the ombudsman during 2004. The Ombudsman has show diligence and forcefulness in dealing with complaints from the EU citizens regarding the activities of the EU instutions. He is proving to be a true champion of citizens rights to fair and open treatment by the Institutions.

  Luís Queiró (PPE-DE), por escrito. A Europa enfrenta uma crise de diálogo com os seus cidadãos

O Provedor de Justiça Europeu continua a receber queixas que não se enquadram no âmbito do seu mandato.

Parece-me pois fundamental que se restabeleça um diálogo com os cidadãos no qual, de forma clara e simples, se explicam os poderes das instituições.

O Provedor de Justiça Europeu tem tomado iniciativas neste sentido e deve continuar a fazê-lo. Por outro lado, o actual Provedor de Justiça mostrou-nos que está bem consciente do seu papel, tendo ainda proposto uma intensificação da cooperação com os seus homólogos nacionais ou regionais e medidas para a promoção dos mais elevados níveis de qualidade na administração pública europeia.

Sublinho finalmente, que é vital manter a imparcialidade deste influente organismo, que actua como conciliador entre a administração pública e os cidadãos europeus e oferece soluções extrajudiciais.

Votei assim, favoravelmente o relatório do colega Mavrommattis.

  Γεώργιος Τούσσας (GUE/NGL), γραπτώς. – Ο θεσμός του Ευρωπαίου Διαμεσολαβητή αποφασίστηκε στη Σύνοδο του Μάαστριχτ και μετράει 10 χρόνια εφαρμογής. Έχει ως αντικείμενο τη διερεύνηση καταγγελιών που αφορούν περιπτώσεις κακοδιοίκησης από τα θεσμικά όργανα της Ε.Ε. και από τις κυβερνήσεις στα κράτη-μέλη.

Είναι φανερό ότι ο θεσμός αυτός υπηρετεί τις ανάγκες εξωραϊσμού της Ε.Ε. στα μάτια των πολιτών, να μετατοπιστούν οι αντιδράσεις από την αντιλαϊκή πολιτική που εφαρμόζει σε ανώδυνα κανάλια, δηλαδή στο αν εφαρμόζεται με χρηστή ή κακή διοίκηση η ιδιωτικοποίηση των πάντων, η αφαίρεση μισθολογικών και κοινωνικών δικαιωμάτων των εργαζομένων, η αστυνόμευση και καταστολή της συνδικαλιστικής και πολιτικής δράσης κλπ.

Χρηστή διοίκηση και αντιλαϊκή - αντιδημοκρατική πολιτική δε συμβιβάζονται

Δεν υποτιμάμε την ταλαιπωρία των εργαζομένων από περιπτώσεις κακοδιοίκησης ούτε την αξία της διευκόλυνσής τους στις σχέσεις τους με τη "γραφειοκρατία των Βρυξελλών" ή κυβερνήσεων στα κράτη-μέλη. Όμως, ο θεσμός πολύ λίγο αφορά τα πλατειά λαϊκά στρώματα, δεν δημιουργήθηκε για να επιλύσει τα προβλήματά τους, αλλά αξιοποιείται ως ανάχωμα για να απορροφήσει τη δυσαρέσκεια από την ίδια την αντιλαϊκή πολιτική και από τα διοικητικά μέσα επιβολής της.

Για να ανοίξει ο δρόμος για την επίλυση των οξυμένων προβλημάτων των εργαζομένων, χρειάζεται ένταση της πάλης του εργατικού λαϊκού κινήματος συνολικά ενάντια στην αντιλαϊκή πολιτική της ΕΕ.

13. Korekty do głosowania (patrz: protokół)

(La sesión, interrumpida a las 12.55 horas, se reanuda a las 15.00 horas)

PRESIDÊNCIA: MANUEL ANTÓNIO DOS SANTOS
Vice-Presidente

14. Zatwierdzenie protokołu z poprzedniego posiedzenia: patrz protokół

15. Debaty nad przypadkami łamania praw człowieka, zasad demokracji i praworządności (art. 115 Regulaminu)

16. Prawa człowieka w Saharze Zachodniej

  Presidente. Segue-se na ordem do dia o debate sobre seis propostas de resolução sobre os direitos do Homem no Sara Ocidental⁽¹⁾.

  Karin Scheele (PSE), Verfasserin. – Herr Präsident! Ich glaube, alle Beteiligten sind etwas erschöpft, denn die Entschließung über die Menschenrechte in Westsahara war tatsächlich eine sehr schwierige Geburt. Ich bin trotzdem froh, dass das Europäische Parlament sich gegen den Druck von marokkanischer Seite gewandt hat und dass wir heute im Plenum fast einstimmig beschlossen haben, dass dieser Tagesordnungspunkt bestehen bleibt und nicht, wie gestern in der Konferenz der Präsidenten beschlossen, von der Tagesordnung genommen wird. Das war sehr wichtig für unser Selbstbewusstsein und auch für das Bild, das wir als selbstbewusstes Parlament nach außen abgeben.

Ein wichtiger Punkt in dieser Entschließung ist die Forderung nach Freilassung der saharauischen politischen Gefangenen, allen voran von Aminatou Haidar, die am 17. Juni schwer verletzt in El Ayun gefangen genommen und in das so genannte schwarze Gefängnis von El Ayun gesteckt wurde. Es hat auch schon eine Initiative von diesem Parlament gegeben. Im Juli haben 178 Europa-Abgeordnete die Forderung nach einer Freilassung dieser politischen Gefangenen unterschrieben. Dieser Text ist aber auch deswegen sehr gut, weil er das wirkliche Problem aufzeigt, nämlich dass das internationale Recht in Westsahara noch immer nicht zur Geltung gekommen ist und dass es noch keine politische Lösung dieses Konflikts gibt.

Ich bin sehr froh, dass wir zumindest versuchen, die Problematik der Rohstoffe in dieser Entschließung zu berücksichtigen, denn wir wissen, dass ein Grund für den Westsahara-Konflikt der Reichtum an Rohstoffen und an Fisch ist. Es ist auch Aufgabe dieses Parlaments, dass wir ganz klar die Gründe für diesen Konflikt benennen, wenn wir zu einer Verbesserung der Situation beitragen wollen.

  Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Autor. – Quisiera empezar lamentando el incomprensible intento que hemos vivido estas últimas horas de impedir que esta Cámara se pronunciase en relación con un tema tan importante como éste de los derechos humanos en el Sáhara Occidental.

De haber tenido éxito esta iniciativa para impedir el presente pronunciamiento, se habría sentado un precedente claramente preocupante de cara a futuros debates y resoluciones de urgencia sobre otros temas relacionados con los derechos humanos.

Por lo tanto, celebro que, finalmente, haya vuelto la cordura y me felicito por que hoy estemos, no solamente debatiendo, sino también aprobando —espero— una resolución importante.

Una resolución que, además, es urgente, precisamente por algunas de las razones que ya ha mencionado mi colega Karin Scheele y en las que quiero insistir, porque creo que debemos aprovechar esta oportunidad para reclamar, también, a la parte marroquí que desempeñe un rol importante en el proceso de resolución de este conflicto.

En estos momentos, varias personas se encuentran en las prisiones marroquíes en condiciones completamente inaceptables, aspecto que ha sido señalado, criticado y denunciado por informes de Amnistía Internacional y de la Organización Mundial contra la Tortura.

Además, en agosto se produjo la liberación de muchos presos políticos, de centenares de presos de guerra marroquíes, por parte del Frente Polisario. Ése era el momento oportuno para que Marruecos demostrara su buena voluntad en relación con la gestión de este conflicto, haciendo un gesto positivo, liberando a presos e informando acerca del trato que éstos reciben en las cárceles de Marruecos.

Y no se ha hecho así. Por ello, esta Cámara —el Parlamento Europeo— tenía que pronunciarse, por ello, esta resolución es importante y, por ello, es urgente hablar alto y claro, precisamente, en aras de la mejora de las relaciones Unión Europea-Marruecos, para poder solucionar —insisto— no solamente el problema específico de las personas que se encuentran detenidas, sino, de una vez por todas, el conflicto en el Sáhara Occidental.

  Simon Coveney (PPE-DE), author. – Mr President, I am pleased and relieved to have an opportunity to speak in favour of the joint resolution. I want to make quite clear my absolute rejection of attempts by the President of Parliament and the Conference of Presidents to set aside this motion on the human rights situation in Western Sahara until after the visit and conclusion of some future EU delegation. The decision was made to move ahead with this urgency on the Western Sahara through the normal and proper channels. Different Group motions were debated and a compromise common text was agreed and a decision taken by plenary. Last-minute efforts to shelve the motion, without consultation, threatened to set a dangerous precedent that, in my view, would have significantly damaged the credibility both of the urgency procedure and perhaps, more importantly, Parliament’s work on human rights issues generally.

On human rights questions, the politics of the issue should be secondary to the need to outline concerns and criticisms – if they are warranted – based on credible facts. The politics of the Western Sahara issue is complex and I want to focus my remarks primarily on human rights, although, obviously, there is a crossover between the two.

This motion welcomes and recognises the freeing of Moroccan prisoners of war but demands that the Moroccan authorities release human rights defenders. It also calls for the release of Sahrawi political prisoners and assistance from the authorities in solving the question of the disappeared. We are calling on both sides to cooperate fully with the International Red Cross on the question of the disappeared and missing since the conflict began.

The motion insists on the protection of the population of Western Sahara generally and in a manner consistent with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, specifically in the area of freedom of expression and freedom of movement and calls for any final political resolution to be consistent with international law and the relevant UN Security Council resolution.

Finally, the motion demands open access to all territories in Western Sahara for independent observers, NGOs and the free media. I am glad to support the motion and commend it to the House.

  Marios Matsakis (ALDE), Author. – Mr President, firstly I should like to add my voice to that of the previous speakers and say how wonderful it has been to see that the attempts made by some to stop Parliament from passing a joint resolution today on Western Sahara have been unsuccessful. Let this be a precedent and a warning for the future: hypocrisy and false, pretentious tactics should never stand in the way of our will and determination to express condemnation for human rights abuses anywhere in the world.

Refugees are protected by various UN resolutions, UN protocols and UN conventions. In some cases this protection is effective, and in many cases it is lifesaving. In others, unfortunately, the situation is not as it should be and innocent civilians suffer hunger, ill treatment, disease and even death.

Such is the case currently for a large number of refugees in Western Sahara. It is reported reliably that hundreds of people have been subjected to inhumane treatment by the Moroccan authorities in the regions of the so-called Spanish enclaves of Ceuta and Melilla, where many migrants have been shot dead while attempting to enter Spanish territory. Now, why there is Spanish territory in Morocco is another story. There is a similar reason, I suppose, as to why there is British soil in Cyprus, or why there is – or has been until recently – French soil in faraway oceanic lands.

Perhaps modern colonisation is not entirely finished, but then, who wants to talk about such sensitive matters? After all, some of the old colonising powers – of which we are all constantly reminded in this House – are splendid examples of fighters for the principles of democracy, freedom and respect for human rights. That is fair enough.

Coming back to the subject-matter of this resolution and in conclusion, this joint resolution makes it absolutely clear to the Moroccan Government, and to all other interested parties, that we expect nothing less than their doing their utmost fully to safeguard the rights of refugees in Western Sahara.

  Pedro Guerreiro (GUE/NGL), Autor. – Antes de mais gostaria de valorizar o fracasso da tentativa de inviabilizar a conclusão deste debate parlamentar com uma resolução sobre o Sara Ocidental. Um debate que, na nossa opinião, deverá ter como conclusão a manifestação da solidariedade para com a justa luta do povo saraui pelo direito à sua autodeterminação, como determinam as resoluções das Nações Unidas. Aliás, uma solução justa e durável, como refere a proposta de resolução, terá sempre de colocar fim à opção colonial de que é vítima o Sara Ocidental e a criação de um Estado saraui, soberano, independente e viável.

Apesar dos grandes esforços, concessões unilaterais e gestos de boa-vontade da Frente Polisário, legítima representante dos interesses do povo saraui, como a recente libertação de todos os prisioneiros de guerra, o processo continua bloqueado pela atitude intransigente do Governo marroquino - mas não só! - que se recusa a reconhecer os direitos fundamentais do povo saraui, pelo que se impõem iniciativas imediatas e efectivas, que tenham como objectivo claro a conclusão do processo de descolonização do Sara Ocidental, assim como iniciativas que denunciem a repressão de que é vítima o povo saraui nos territórios ocupados e que exijam a libertação dos patriotas sarauis detidos pelas autoridades marroquinas.

No mesmo sentido é necessário assegurar as condições de vida do povo saraui, nomeadamente através da garantia de uma plena ajuda alimentar, assim como nas áreas da saúde e da educação, a todos os que se encontram nos campos de refugiados.

  Bernd Posselt, im Namen der PPE-DE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Auch ich bin glücklich, dass wir heute diese Debatte führen. Das soll ein deutlicher Schuss vor den Bug des Präsidenten und der Konferenz der Präsidenten sein, denn wir hätten sonst einen sehr gefährlichen Präzedenzfall geschaffen. Noch am Donnerstag war die Konferenz der Präsidenten der Meinung, dass Westsahara eines der drei dringendsten Menschenrechtsprobleme ist, die wir zu behandeln haben. Dieselbe Ansicht herrschte auch am Montag noch ohne jeden Widerspruch vor.

Dann lief hier ein Botschafter herum, und wenig später fand man heraus, dass eine Delegation unterwegs ist. Das hätte einen Präzedenzfall geschaffen. Dann hätte demnächst wegen eines Abendessens mit Herrn Putin und beim nächsten Mal wegen eines Mittagessens mit dem chinesischen Generalkonsul oder aus sonst irgendeinem Grund immer wieder willkürlich eine Menschenrechtsfrage von der Tagesordnung abgesetzt werden können. Das kann keine Fraktion hier im Haus akzeptieren.

Zum Thema selbst: Ich bin durchaus ein Freund Marokkos, und ich glaube in der Tat, dass in diesem Konflikt die Verantwortung auf verschiedenen Seiten liegt. Marokko war ebenso wie Westsahara ein Opfer des Kolonialismus, und die Grenzen in der Wüste sind seinerzeit von Kolonialmächten einfach mit dem Lineal gezogen worden. Deshalb ist es eine komplizierte Frage, die nur durch Verhandlungen und einvernehmlich gelöst werden kann. Es ist im Interesse beider Seiten, dass unsere Delegation dort unbehindert arbeiten kann, was ein Minimum, eine Selbstverständlichkeit ist. Es ist ungeheuer, wenn damit gedroht wird, dass dies vielleicht nicht der Fall sein könnte. Wir respektieren beide Seiten, und wir wollen unseren Beitrag zum Frieden leisten. Aber eines muss ganz klar sein: Friede ist nur auf der Basis von Recht möglich, und Recht heißt hier Völkerrecht, und vor allem Menschenrechte. Ohne unbedingten Respekt vor den Menschenrechten und ohne Freilassung aller politischen Gefangenen sind auch keine Friedensverhandlungen möglich. Deshalb stehen wir als Partner für Vermittlungsdienste und für gute Dienste zur Verfügung. Wir nehmen keine einseitige Position ein, schon gar nicht als Europäische Volkspartei. Aber wir sind ganz klar der Meinung, dass Menschenrechte Menschenrechte sind und politische Gefangene politische Gefangene und dass Letztere ohne Wenn und Aber freizulassen sind, wenn man in dieser heiklen Frage wirklich eine Lösung anstrebt.

  Luis Yáñez-Barnuevo García, en nombre del Grupo PSE. – Señor Presidente, voy a relativizar un poco las opiniones precedentes, entre las que se encuentran las de buenos amigos míos, con los que comparto muchas cosas de todo tipo: valores, ideas y objetivos.

Mi larga experiencia política, sobre todo en política exterior, me indica que, a veces, no es el que más grita, o el que hace resoluciones más contundentes, el que obtiene mejores resultados. Cuando se toma una determinación, hay que tener en cuenta muchos factores. Estamos discutiendo un tema procedimental, pero nadie ha dicho que lo que se va a ver desde fuera es la hipocresía de la votación en un Parlamento: 600 diputados dicen que tienen que haber debate ―y yo así lo he votado, y aquí estoy―, pero luego resulta que sólo estamos 20 en el debate, y en la votación habrá 70. ¿Eso tiene realmente valor, o sólo nosotros mismos nos creemos la importancia de estos debates los jueves por la tarde? Hay que ser un poco más realista y tener en cuenta todos esos factores.

Estoy de acuerdo con la Resolución conjunta y con el objetivo de apoyar al pueblo saharaui en sus reivindicaciones y, sobre todo, en su reivindicación de la autodeterminación ―aún no lograda después de treinta años―, pero también en que este tema siempre hay que balancearlo con el problema de seguridad y de estabilidad que tenemos en la frontera sur de la Unión Europea, y en que hemos de tener en cuenta el factor Marruecos, un país de 30 millones de habitantes, donde está latente el peligro de una involución islámica.

Tenemos que contribuir, con nuestra acción, o con nuestra inacción, a que haya una reforma política y un proceso democrático en ese país.

  Alyn Smith, on behalf of the Verts/ALE Group. – Mr President, I would wholeheartedly endorse the previous comments of my group colleague, Mr Romeva i Rueda, and add my own disbelief that the situation in the Western Sahara remains as bad as it so clearly does after all these years of European hand-wringing and alleged involvement. The situation today remains as grave as it has been for many years. The unseemly, shabby debate in the Conference of Presidents yesterday demonstrated Europe at its very worst.

When we Europeans concern ourselves with tactics, internal politics, the considerations of our own domestic situations, we are weak and divided. If we remember our core principles of the promotion of democracy, human rights, freedom from torture and above all of dialogue, then we will speak with a loud and clear voice. This motion goes some way towards that.

We must take a view on the motion before us today, otherwise, what is this Parliament for? The motion is worthy and valid and I hope the delegation of our Parliament will speak with a suitably clear voice on this matter when it visits the region.

  Jaromír Kohlíček, za skupinu GUE/NGL. – V dnešní Africe nejsou žádné kolonie ani jejich pozůstatky, to je teze, se kterou se v Evropském parlamentu často setkáváme u některých konzervativních poslanců. Realita je ovšem zcela jiná. V případě dvou enkláv (Ceuta a Melilla) dosud kolonizace nebyla zahájena a západní Sahara, bývalá kolonie Španělska Rio de Oro, je dnes obsazená přes dvacet let Marokem. V předkládané rezoluci chce Evropský parlament podpořit již dávno dojednané referendum o budoucnosti tohoto území. Uvědomme si, vážení kolegové, že bude nutno nejen odsouhlasit uskutečnění referenda, ale i stanovit, kdo je oprávněným voličem a další technické detaily.

Vítám dnes vyhlášené rozhodnutí zorganizovat cestu poslanců Evropského parlamentu do této země v lednu příštího roku. Domnívám se, že zúčastnění poslanci by měli poznat nejen realitu pouštního území s velkými ložisky fosfátů, je zároveň třeba vedle zástupců Fronty Polisario a Marockého státu konzultovat celou záležitost i s dalšími dvěma sousedními státy, zejména s Alžírskem. Jedině tak se můžeme vyhnout jednostrannému pohledu na celou situaci. Zajímavý bude i názor zástupce Africké unie.

Je nutné stanovit pravidla účasti na referendu. Dnes na tomto území žije velká skupina přistěhovalců z Maroka, řada lidí z bývalé španělské kolonie se nachází mimo toto teritorium. Je zde i řada dalších, dosud nezodpovězených otázek, a já se domnívám, že splnění požadavků předkládané rezoluce může otevřít cestu k jejich položení a řešení problému dekolonizace západní Sahary.

  Charles Tannock (PPE-DE). – Mr President, 1975 to 1991 was a period of bloody conflict in Western Sahara between Morocco and Polisario, ending with a UN-brokered ceasefire, which called for a referendum for independence, yet to happen I have to say, monitored by MINURSO. Seventy-six countries now recognise the Sahrawi Democratic Republic.

In 2001 James Baker proposed a five-year period of autonomy within Morocco before holding the referendum, but Polisario rejected it, particularly on the issue of who would be allowed to vote. So, legally, the 1991 UN Settlement Plan remains in place. In the meantime Morocco has continued its repression, including the recent alarming allegations of arbitrary arrests, ill treatment of prisoners in custody and even allegations of torture.

Algeria has now come into a large windfall profit from the high oil revenues it is enjoying and is therefore in a position to rearm Polisario. That is extremely dangerous, because there could be a resurgence of hostilities. We must avoid hostilities and stop war breaking out again at all costs.

  Iratxe García Pérez (PSE). – Señor Presidente, hace unos meses, en este mismo lugar, debatíamos sobre la necesidad de atender, mediante ayuda humanitaria, a la población saharaui. Ya en aquella ocasión aprovechamos para recordar que esta situación es consecuencia de un conflicto político que, hasta el momento, hemos sido incapaces de resolver.

Hoy hablamos de una situación grave y preocupante, relativa a la violación de los derechos humanos de la población saharaui: sus derechos a la libre expresión, a la manifestación y a la libertad de movimiento, que, en estos últimos meses, hemos podido constatar tanto a través de organizaciones de derechos humanos como de los propios medios de comunicación.

Por ello, hoy, desde el Parlamento, hacemos un llamamiento firme a las autoridades marroquíes, para que procedan a la liberación de los detenidos políticos saharauis. Asimismo, consideramos de vital importancia la visita de esta delegación del Parlamento Europeo, para obtener de primera mano la información real sobre la situación que se está viviendo en estos momentos en los territorios del Sáhara.

Sin duda alguna, este conflicto necesita la intervención decidida, tanto de los organismos internacionales como de la Unión Europea, para poner fin a tres décadas de injusticia y sufrimientos. La designación por parte de las Naciones Unidas del nuevo representante para la MINURSO es una buena señal. Ahora es el momento de posibilitar que se den las condiciones para la resolución de este conflicto y que se reconozca la aspiración legítima de los saharauis a determinar su propio futuro.

Señorías, el de hoy no puede ser un debate más, ni la resolución de hoy sólo una más de todas las que hemos tenido sobre este tema. Por los derechos humanos y por la justicia social, tenemos la obligación de trabajar en esta dirección.

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. Mr President, the Commission continues fully to support the role of the United Nations and its efforts to bring a political solution to the conflict in Western Sahara.

We share the hope that the new personal envoy to the Secretary General of the United Nations, Mr Peter Van Walsum, as well as the new Special Representative, Mr Francesco Bastagli, will bring new impetus to the search for a political solution. The Commission encourages all the parties involved and the international community fully to cooperate with them towards this objective.

The Commission also welcomes the release of 404 Moroccan prisoners of war by the Polisario Front. This is a very positive measure that will no doubt contribute to finding a solution.

Regarding recent tensions in Western Sahara, the Commission followed last month’s demonstrations, arrests, trials and hunger strikes very closely, and continues to monitor the situation.

The Commission, through its delegation in Rabat, and in cooperation with the Member States, has undertaken high-level demarches to the Moroccan authorities and other parties involved, expressing concern and requiring direct information about the situation and the measures to be taken. Moreover, the Commission continues to work resolutely on human rights, since respect for human rights is an essential principle of the European Union’s external relations.

In the context of our bilateral relationship with Morocco, a sub-committee on human rights, democratisation and good governance is being set up. The date of its first meeting will probably be fixed at the Association Council with Morocco in November. This sub-committee will allow the Commission to approach the human rights issue as a whole, including freedom of expression and assembly.

These issues – human rights, democratisation, political and institutional reform – are also considered in the action plan agreed between the Commission and Morocco within the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy.

  Presidente. O debate está encerrado.

A votação terá lugar hoje, às 16 horas.

(1) Ver Acta.

17. Uzbekistan

  Presidente. Segue-se na ordem do dia o debate sobre seis propostas de resolução sobre os direitos do Homem no Usbequistão⁽¹⁾.

  Józef Pinior (PSE), autor. – Panie Przewodniczący! Ponad dwudziestomilionowy Uzbekistan, ojczyzna legendarnego Tamerlana, kraj położony na Jedwabnym Szlaku, świadomy swojego dziedzictwa historycznego odgrywa zasadniczą rolę geostrategiczną na styku Europy, Bliskiego Wschodu i Azji. Społeczeństwo Uzbekistanu oraz bogata kultura tego kraju predysponują go do odgrywania ważnej roli w tworzeniu międzynarodowego ładu politycznego opartego na pokoju, demokracji i przestrzeganiu praw człowieka.

Autorytarny reżym Islama Karimowa dławi dążenia demokratyczne społeczeństwa Uzbekistanu, dopuszcza się łamania podstawowych praw człowieka, jest odpowiedzialny za masakrę w Andiżanie. W ostatnią sobotę, 22 października bieżącego roku, został aresztowany przywódca opozycyjny, biznesmen Sanjar Umarov. Jego adwokat Vitaly Krasilovsky przekazał niepokojące wiadomości o upokarzającym traktowaniu Umarova w areszcie. Adwokat jest zaniepokojony stanem Sanjara Umarova. Widzenie w areszcie trwało jedynie kilka minut i Umarov nie był w stanie udzielić spokojnych odpowiedzi na pytania jego adwokata. To jeden z wielu przypadków łamania praw człowieka przez reżym Karimowa.

Unia Europejska nie może pozostawać obojętna wobec sytuacji w Uzbekistanie. Nasze działania muszą być skierowane do społeczeństwa obywatelskiego tego kraju, muszą służyć budowaniu dobrych relacji z narodem uzbeckim, pomagać ofiarom represji politycznych ze strony autorytarnego reżymu. Sprawą podstawową pozostaje wizyta przedstawicieli Parlamentu Europejskiego w Uzbekistanie. Władze Uzbekistanu muszą wyrazić zgodę na naszą wizytę w Andiżanie oraz na spotkania z przedstawicielami mediów, opozycji oraz organizacji pozarządowych. Niech będzie mi wolno wyrazić nadzieję na dalszy rozwój dobrych stosunków pomiędzy Unią Europejską a Uzbekistanem, stosunków, które posłużą do rozwoju i dobrobytu społeczeństwa tego kraju. Przyczynią się do rozwoju demokracji i praw człowieka w Uzbekistanie i w całym regionie Azji Środkowej.

  Carl Schlyter (Verts/ALE), författare. – Herr talman! Rådet fattade ett bra beslut om vapenembargo den 3 oktober. Uzbekistan behöver inga vapen, de kan användas till att förtrycka den egna befolkningen. Det är bra att vi idag kräver att en oberoende undersökning genomförs av vad som hände i Abizjan.

Media är hårt kontrollerat och opposition och folkrörelser hindras från att mötas. De krav vi ställer på president Karimov borde inte vara så svåra att uppfylla. Han behöver bara uppfylla sitt eget lands konstitution, för där står det att det skall råda fri rörlighet, föreningsfrihet och mötesfrihet och att domstolarna skall vara oberoende. Det är inget orimligt krav att en president skall följa sitt eget lands konstitution, och det är det vi kräver här idag.

  Simon Coveney (PPE-DE), Author. – Mr President, I apologise. I should, of course, have acknowledged the presence of the Commissioner the last time I spoke, but I will this time.

I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak briefly on the motion on Uzbekistan. Uzbekistan is a large and very influential country in Central Asia. Its stability directly impinges on the whole region and the EU has rightly attempted to build contacts and a relationship with this geographically close and significant neighbour. For me, however, this motion has one main focus: to ask again what happened in Andijan last May and to make a further call for an open and independent inquiry. There seems to be a view that, by asking for the truth to be established, we are in some way taking sides against the Uzbek authorities. The EU has human rights and international law at the centre of its value system and it is our responsibility to call for the truth behind this tragedy.

To date, there are three versions of the ‘truth’. Firstly, the official Uzbek and the President Karimov version, according to which the killings were ‘a measured response to an Islamist uprising where 187 criminals were killed’. Next, there is the media and NGO version, which reports a bloodbath where women and children were mowed down by armed police, bodies were dragged to a school nearby and left lying there until the following day, some of them not dead, and then taken to hospital. We do not even know the numbers that were killed. Reports vary between 500 and 1500 people. Thirdly, there are the locals in Andijan, most of them silenced or suffering from amnesia, basically afraid to speak out because some who have done so have disappeared.

The EU must insist on an independent inquiry and we must take action that will ensure that, if we are refused that, it will have implications for the relationship between Uzbekistan and the European Union.

  Ona Juknevičienė (ALDE), autorė. – Uzbekijos Prezidentas Islamas Karimovas įžūliai ir atvirai ignoruoja tarptautinės visuomenės norą atskleisti visą tiesą, kas įvyko Andižane šių metų gegužės mėnesį. Jis kuria savo tiesą. Prezidentas Karimovas kuria tiesą atvirai pažeisdamas žmogaus teises, ištrindamas žudynių pėdsakus, neutralizuodamas liudininkus ir jų gimines. Panašu, kad tiesa Uzbekijoje gali būti tik viena – kruopščiai valdžios cenzūruota tiesa. Terorizmas ir ekonominiai nusikaltimai – tai du migloti motyvai, po kuriais bandoma paslėpti atvirą susidorojimą su vadinamaisiais valstybės priešais. Vis dėl to manau, kad privalo būti skiriamoji riba tarp saugumo užtikrinimo ir represijų. Uždraudus opoziciją ji susitelkia į radikalias formas. Religinį ekstremizmą skatina socialinė neteisybė, nuomonių įvairovės blokavimas. Galima pripažinti, kad Uzbekija yra patrauklus taikinys islamo ekstremistams, tačiau tokie valdžios veiksmai nestabdo islamo radikalizmo, nes tik demokratija ir nepriklausomi teismai, o ne priespauda, padeda kovoti su radikalizmu. Gerb. Pirmininke, Parlamento nariai, kviečiu jus šiandien balsuoti už rezoliuciją, nes tikiu, kad ji bus dar vienas mūsų indėlis siekiant paskatinti Uzbekijos piliečių nuomonės įvairovę, laisvą žodį, jų žmogiškąsias teises. Tai yra tikrasis kelias į demokratiją.

  Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL), Auteur. – Voorzitter, niet alleen in Oekraïne, Georgië of Kirgizië is na het instorten van de Sovjet-Unie een autoritair regime aan de macht gekomen, maar vooral ook in Belarus, Turkmenistan en Oezbekistan. Niet de democratie heeft daar gewonnen maar een groepje mensen dat ervaring opdeed in het oude staatsapparaat en de veiligheidsdiensten. Die mensen hebben geen enkele andere doelstelling dan zelf aan de macht te blijven. Zij maken de staatsbedrijven tot hun privé-eigendom, misvormen de verkiezingsresultaten, geven opposities zo min mogelijk ruimte, hinderen vrije organisaties, beperken de pers en gebruiken zo nodig geweld tegen hun volk.

Oezbekistan is toe aan een radicale verandering, maar de aanzet daartoe is op 13 mei met grof geweld tegen demonstranten verhinderd, waarbij honderden doden zijn gevallen. Sindsdien is de buitenwereld opvallend stil gebleven. Heeft dat te maken met economische en militaire belangen? Mag de dictatuur in Oezbekistan aanblijven, omdat die zich nuttig heeft gemaakt voor de militaire interventie in Afghanistan? Laten we de inwoners van het land in de steek? Europa mag hun rechten en vrijheden niet ondergeschikt maken aan andere overwegingen, de ontwerpresolutie draagt bij tot de noodzakelijke stellingname.

  Marcin Libicki (UEN), autor. – Panie Przewodniczący! Przełom, który w Polsce zaowocował powołaniem demokratycznego rządu w roku 1989 i który w konsekwencji doprowadził do upadku Muru Berlińskiego oraz rozpadu całego bloku komunistycznego zarządzanego z Moskwy, niestety nie we wszystkich państwach byłego bloku komunistycznego zaowocował wprowadzeniem demokratycznego ustroju szanującego prawa człowieka. Przemiany, których świadkami byliśmy w Polsce, na Słowacji, w Czechach oraz na Węgrzech, czyli wprowadzenie systemów szanujących prawa człowieka, niestety nie nastąpiły początkowo na Ukrainie. Przemian tych nie widzimy po dziś dzień na Białorusi i niestety nie możemy ich zaobserwować także w Uzbekistanie.

Zdarzenia z 13 maja 2005 roku były pewnego rodzaju papierkiem lakmusowym stosunków panujących w Uzbekistanie. Postawa rządu, który najpierw nie chce dopuścić obserwatorów zagranicznych do wyjaśnienia przyczyn śmierci wielu ludzi, który zastrasza dziennikarzy, który nie dopuszcza kontroli z zewnątrz, wymaga zajęcia przez Parlament Europejski stanowczego stanowiska. Dlatego też wzywamy do wyjaśnienia wszystkich tych spraw i do doprowadzenia do tego, by w Uzbekistanie zapanowały stosunki demokratyczne.

  Bernd Posselt, im Namen der PPE-DE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Es handelt sich bei Usbekistan um eine alte Kulturlandschaft, die unter anderem Staaten wie die Khanate von Buchara und Kokand hervorgebracht hat, dann aber Opfer eines aggressiven Kolonialismus wurde. Wir haben heute vom europäischen Kolonialismus in Afrika gesprochen, aber dort waren es der sowjetkommunistische Kolonialismus und vorher der zaristische Kolonialismus in Zentralasien. Dieser Kolonialismus hat erst 1989 mit dem Sturz der kommunistischen Regime in Mitteleuropa geendet. Das möchte ich dem Kollegen Kohlíček hier sagen.

Wir haben die Verpflichtung, die Situation dort realistisch zu sehen. Diese Länder wurden mit Monokulturen gestraft, sie wurden ausgeplündert, sie wurden ausgesaugt, und jetzt sind sie mühsam auf dem Weg, sich ihre Staatlichkeit zu erarbeiten. Dafür muss man ein gewisses Verständnis haben, und deswegen bedürfen sie auch unserer ganzen und intensiven Hilfe. Dies heißt aber nicht, dass wir Menschenrechtsverletzungen dulden.

Unsere Aufforderung ist klar und eindeutig: Wir verlangen von der usbekischen Regierung, dass sie die Untersuchungen, die überfällig sind, nicht weiter behindert und dass sie alle Gefangenen freilässt sowie Grund- und Menschenrechte gewährt. Aber wir werden hier nur auf dem Weg des Dialogs vorankommen, und nicht mit einseitiger Bevormundung!

Wir müssen wissen, dass es auch terroristische und destabilisierende Elemente in der ganzen Region gibt und außerdem nach wie vor den Einfluss Moskaus, das erst in jüngster Zeit in großem Ausmaß Tellerminen – hiermit haben wir uns oft im Haus beschäftigt – an Usbekistan geliefert hat, um zum Beispiel Grenzanlagen auszubauen. Nach wie vor agieren hier russische Truppen in einer Art und Weise, als wären dies immer noch koloniale Gebilde! Auch dies können wir so einfach nicht akzeptieren, zumal in diesem Raum auch wichtige geostrategische Interessen der Mächte – auch auf dem Energiesektor –aufeinander treffen.

Deshalb ganz klar: Menschenrechtspolitik und offene und faire Partnerschaft gegen jeden Kolonialismus in diesem Raum!

  Karin Scheele, im Namen der PSE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Die heutige Entschließung verurteilt das Verweigern jeglicher Transparenz durch die usbekische Regierung bei der Aufklärung der Vorkommnisse im Mai 2005, und sie unterstreicht die Wichtigkeit einer unabhängigen internationalen Untersuchungskommission, die die Möglichkeit haben soll, die Einzelheiten umgehend aufzuklären und die laufenden Prozesse ungehindert beobachten zu können.

Wie viele Menschen tatsächlich in jenen Maitagen in Andidschan ihr Leben lassen mussten, hat die Weltöffentlichkeit bis jetzt nicht erfahren können. Die Angaben der Menschenrechtsorganisationen liegen zwischen 500 und 1 000, laut Angaben der usbekischen Regierung waren es 176 Opfer. Immer wieder nutzt Präsident Karimow die Islamismuskeule, um politische Gegner – ganz egal, welcher politischen Couleur – auszuschalten. Deshalb ist es wichtig, dass wir mit Nachdruck fordern, dass die noch inhaftierten Menschenrechtsaktivisten, Journalisten und Mitglieder der politischen Opposition freigelassen werden.

  Tobias Pflüger, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Wer die brutalen Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Usbekistan betrachtet, würde erwarten, dass harte Kritik an diesem Regime in Usbekistan geübt wird, und nicht Relativierung, wie wir sie gerade von Herrn Posselt gehört haben. Stattdessen arbeitet ein EU-Mitglied – Deutschland – engstens mit Usbekistan zusammen. Deutschland betreibt in Termes einen geopolitisch – insbesondere für den Afghanistan-Militäreinsatz – zentralen Militärstützpunkt. Er sei kein NATO-Stützpunkt, werde aber von NATO-Staaten genutzt, wurde mir von der NATO gesagt. Auch die EU-Staaten Niederlande, Belgien, Schweden, Norwegen, Dänemark, Großbritannien, Frankreich, Griechenland und Spanien nutzen diesen Bundeswehrstützpunkt.

Deutschland gewährt Usbekistan umfangreiche Wirtschafts- und Militärhilfe. Es ist von zwei Milliarden Euro die Rede, von Munitionsfabriken, die zur Verfügung gestellt werden, alten Waffen usw. Die Menschenrechtspolitik der EU ist heuchlerisch, wenn einerseits die brutalen Menschenrechtsverletzungen richtigerweise kritisiert werden, andererseits das Regime in Usbekistan aus geopolitischen Gründen militärisch und wirtschaftlich unterstützt wird.

  Urszula Krupa, w imieniu grupy IND/DEM. – Panie Przewodniczący! Tuż przed zwoływanymi na grudzień wyborami parlamentarnymi w Uzbekistanie problem łamania praw człowieka jest ponownie tematem debaty w Parlamencie Europejskim.

Uzbekistan jest republiką byłego ZSRR, w której mimo częściowego uniezależnienia od reżimu komunistycznego nie zmieniły się metody sprawowania władzy. Islam Karimow, były komunistyczny sekretarz sprawujący urząd prezydenta, okazał się dyktatorem lawirującym między rywalizującymi mocarstwami: Rosją i Stanami Zjednoczonymi – które do niedawna wynajmowały tam bazy wojskowe – a także Europą. Region Uzbekistanu ma więc strategiczne znaczenie polityczne oraz ekonomiczne zarówno dla Rosji jak i Stanów Zjednoczonych, co jeszcze bardziej komplikuje sytuację w tej republice, która od 2001 r. jest jednym z najważniejszych w Azji sojuszników USA w walce z terroryzmem.

Ponadto Uzbekistan wchodzi w skład Piątki Szanghajskiej z udziałem Rosji, której celem jest także walka z terroryzmem w rejonie Azji. Moskwa używa zagrożenia fundamentalizmem islamskim jako "straszaka" na ewentualną chęć wydobycia się Uzbekistanu spod jej wpływów.

W bogatym w ropę i gaz oraz inne bogactwa naturalne Uzbekistanie osiągnięto, zwłaszcza przy pomocy USA, sukces gospodarczy. Mieszkańcy zróżnicowani etnicznie wyznający islam, prawosławie i katolicyzm nie wykazywali wrogości. Jednak w ostatnich czasach, w wyniku ścierania się także zewnętrznych wpływów oraz autorytarnej mentalności Karimowa, dochodzi tam do łamania praw człowieka i prześladowania opozycji, zwłaszcza islamskiej.

13 maja doszło do krwawego stłumienia demonstracji w Andiżanie, gdzie mogło zginąć kilkuset cywilów. Mimo protestów, sprawcy masakry nie zostali pociągnięci do odpowiedzialności, a prasa właściwie przemilczała tę tragedię. Zwłaszcza zagraniczni obserwatorzy i raporty organizacji Amnesty International oraz Human Rights Watch donoszą o niespotykanych, świadczących o barbarzyństwie torturach stosowanych w uzbeckich więzieniach wobec przeciwników reżimu. Opisują prześladowania praw człowieka, niezależnych dziennikarzy i politycznych aktywistów, którzy ujawnili prawdę o wydarzeniach 13 maja. Po nieudanych zamachach na jego życie, Karimow krytyków muzułmańskich nazywa fanatykami i terrorystami, usprawiedliwiając prześladowania niezależnej i opozycyjnej myśli politycznej.

Ojciec Święty Jan Paweł II przypominał, że wolność jest zawsze wyzwaniem, a władza jest wyzwaniem wolności, nie można jej sprawować inaczej jak tylko służąc. Społeczność międzynarodowa oraz ludzie sprawujący władzę powinni zawsze przedkładać godność i prawa człowieka nad interesami gospodarczymi. Dlatego apelujemy o zaprzestanie stosowania represji, respektowanie godności ludzkiej oraz przestrzeganie podstawowych zobowiązań wynikających z kart praw człowieka i zasad demokracji.

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. Mr President, following the Andijan massacre and Uzbekistan's persistent rejection of an independent international inquiry into these events, the European Union has taken a very firm stance vis-à-vis Uzbekistan through the adoption of the Council conclusions of 3 October, following the earlier conclusions adopted since May.

The package of restrictive measures includes the partial suspension of the partnership and cooperation agreement, an arms embargo, a selective visa ban as well as consideration of actions in the framework of the United Nations and the OSCE. That is a very clear and strong political signal by the Union to Uzbekistan.

The Commission fully supports the Member States on the imposition of the visa ban, the arrangements for the implementation of which are currently being finalised. The Commission equally fully supports the implementation of the arms embargo and has prepared the legislation for the Council to be effective immediately.

In terms of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA), the Commission has immediately suspended all further technical meetings with Uzbekistan. That means that we have suspended the Subcommittees on Trade and Investment and on Justice, Liberty and Security, along with the Cooperation Committee.

Although the initiative for the Cooperation Council meeting rests with the Member States, the Commission takes the view that the meeting could be maintained in order not to sever our political dialogue with Uzbekistan altogether.

The Commission takes note of the decision to postpone the Sixth EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committee meeting and regrets that the delegation would not be allowed to travel to the Andijan region nor to have unrestricted access to members of the opposition, non-governmental organisations and the independent media.

With reference to Community assistance, the Commission has agreed to a reduction and reorientation of EU assistance from EUR 11 million to EUR 9.25 million in this year, and from EUR 9 million to EUR 7.25 million next year. In spite of those cuts, we strongly believe that targeted EU assistance should continue. It should focus on poverty reduction in the Ferghana valley and the development of a civil society, as well as on legal and judicial reforms and on the development of higher education.

I should like to take this opportunity to stress that the human rights situation which existed before the events in May was already very bleak and a source of deep concern to the Commission. To name but one of our concerns, the Commission would very much welcome a public commitment in support of President Karimov's condemnation of torture.

In addition, the Commission will continue to press the Uzbeks to establish an immediate moratorium on all death sentences before the abolition of the death penalty in 2008. The Commission is also concerned about reports of the detention and harassment of people including human rights defenders, journalists and local activists who have questioned the authorities' version of events.

The Commission will continue its efforts in the fight against drug trafficking, improving border management, energy networks and transport networks. The exclusion of Uzbekistan from such regional programmes would damage Uzbekistan's neighbours more than Uzbekistan itself.

  Presidente. O debate está encerrado.

A votação terá lugar hoje, às 16 horas.

(1) Ver Acta.

18. Sprawa Tenzina Delek Rinpocze

  Presidente. Segue-se na ordem do dia o debate sobre seis propostas de resolução sobre o caso de Tenzin Delek Rinpoche⁽¹⁾.

  Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (PSE), autorka. – Panie Przewodniczący! Jeden z ostatnich wielkich lamów Tybetu Tenzin Delek Rinpocze jest od 20 lat zaangażowany w ochronę kultury tybetańskiej. Będąc osobistością religijną pierwszego planu w Tybecie, angażował się aktywnie także w działalność gospodarczą, kulturalną i społeczną. Władzom chińskim od dawna osoba tybetańskiego lamy przeszkadzała, mimo iż nigdy nie uczestniczył on w manifestacjach politycznych.

Jako przywódca duchowy szczerze oddany ważnym akcjom społecznym, takim jak budowa szkół dla osieroconych dzieci, hospicja, lokalne drogi, a także wspierający pomoc osobom starszym, jest autorytetem pokojowym, bez cienia agresji w swoich działaniach. Jego popularność jednakże została uznana za czynnik zagrażający chińskim władzom lokalnym, które pod pretekstem rzekomego współuczestnictwa w organizacji serii zamachów aresztowały go. Oskarżony o terroryzm został skazany na śmierć, bez dowodów ani przyzwoitego procesu. Od wielu miesięcy przetrzymywany w nieludzkich warunkach czeka na egzekucję. Skutkiem długotrwałych tortur jest obecnie fatalny stan zdrowia lamy Tenzina Deleka.

Mając na uwadze powyższe fakty, domagamy się, by chińskie władze poprawiły warunki, w jakich jest on przetrzymywany. Domagamy się także, aby rząd chiński podjął starania w celu polepszenia warunków przetrzymywania więźniów, by zniósł tortury i przede wszystkim karę śmierci. Jako społeczność międzynarodowa musimy dać wyraźny sygnał, że nie godzimy się na osadzanie w więzieniach ludzi, którym nie udowodniono winy. Chiny muszą przestrzegać międzynarodowych norm odnoszących się do praw człowieka, a także szanować jego godność oraz wolności obywatelskie. Dlatego apeluję także do organizacji międzynarodowych o wywarcie nacisku na Chiny, by te wreszcie podjęły konstruktywny dialog w celu definitywnego uregulowania problemu Tybetu.

  Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Verfasserin. – Herr Präsident, werte Kolleginnen und Kollegen! Es ist nicht das erste Mal, dass wir hier über den erschütternden Fall von Tenzin Delek Rinpoché reden und feststellen müssen, dass China eben nicht bereit ist, den Weg der Versöhnung zu gehen. Ganz im Gegenteil: Nach wie vor ist kein transparentes, kein gerechtes Verfahren garantiert. Viel schlimmer noch: Folter und unmenschliche Haftbedingungen haben bei dem Verurteilten, der ohne gerechtes Verfahren eingesperrt wurde, nun einen lebensbedrohlichen Zustand ausgelöst, den wir unbedingt und neuerlich zur Sprache bringen müssen.

Das Europäische Parlament ist es sich schuldig, dass wir nun eingreifen, nachdem wir schon einmal verlangt haben, dass dieser Mensch, dessen einzige Schuld es war, ein beliebter Lehrer, ein lehrender spiritueller Führer zu sein, in seinem lebensbedrohlichen Zustand eine gerechte Behandlung erfährt. Jetzt müssen wir eingreifen! Jetzt müssen wir neuerlich unsere Forderungen an die chinesische Regierung stellen.

Das ist umso notwendiger, als gerade für die Mitgliedstaaten und ihre Regierungen gilt: Je größer ihr Appetit auf den chinesischen Markt wird, desto zurückhaltender werden sie im Ansprechen von Menschenrechtsfragen gegenüber ihren chinesischen Gesprächspartnern. Wir sind es uns schuldig, unsere Werte gerade jetzt und in diesem Kontext zu verteidigen. Wir als Parlamentarier müssen das tun, was unsere Regierungen in diesem Fall vernachlässigen.

Wenn eine Autonomie nur auf dem Papier besteht und nicht verwirklicht wird, wenn der Dialog mit dem Dalai Lama, der so erfolgversprechend begonnen hatte, nicht weitergeführt bzw. immer wieder hinausgeschoben wird und wenn die Menschenrechte in China nach wie vor nicht garantiert werden, müssen wir unsere Stimme erheben und verlangen, dass diese Situation ein Ende findet und in Ordnung gebracht wird.

  Thomas Mann (PPE-DE), Verfasser. – Herr Präsident! Mit unseren Entschließungen vom 18. November 2004 und 13. Januar 2005 und massiven diplomatischen Protesten sowie Aktionen von Menschenrechtsorganisationen haben wir einiges erreicht: Die Todesstrafe gegen den angesehenen Lama Tenzin Delek Rinpoché wurde in eine lebenslange Haft umgewandelt. Chinesische Behörden werfen ihm vor, er sei ein Krimineller. Er untergrabe die Sicherheit des Staates. Seine angebliche Beteiligung an Sprengstoffanschlägen wurde nicht nachgewiesen. Eine faire Gerichtsverhandlung unter internationaler Beobachtung wird nach wie vor verweigert.

Der wahre Grund für seine Inhaftierung – da stimme ich ausdrücklich meinen beiden Vorrednerinnen zu – ist sein großer Einfluss auf die Tibeter und seine Unterstützung für den Dalai Lama. Das aufgehobene Todesurteil scheint jetzt auf eine andere Art vollstreckt zu werden. Nach seinem Martyrium von Folterungen und Isolationshaft kann er weder reden noch sich bewegen. Sein Zustand ist lebensbedrohlich.

Alle Fraktionen unseres Hauses fordern die Chinesen auf, unverzüglich die Haftbedingungen zu verbessern und sich wortgetreu an die UN-Konvention über die Behandlung von Gefangenen zu halten. Wir bestehen auf der Zusicherung des freien Zugangs zu Tenzin Rinpoché für Manfred Nowak, den Sonderberichterstatter der Vereinten Nationen über Folter. Er wird in drei Wochen auf einer Inspektionsreise in China sein.

EU-Kommission, Rat und Mitgliedstaaten müssen das weitere Schicksal der politischen Gefangenen in diesem Land eng mit der Aufrechterhaltung des Waffenembargos gegen China verknüpfen. Solange Menschenrechte missachtet werden, muss das Embargo ohne jede Lockerung bestehen bleiben. Die chinesische Botschaft in Brüssel hat versucht, zu intervenieren. Sie behauptet, es gehe um interne Angelegenheiten. Keine Organisation und kein Einzelner habe das Recht, sich von außen einzumischen. Diese bedrückenden Äußerungen setzen etwas fort: die unbefriedigenden Ergebnisse des EU-China-Gipfels vom 5. September und die fehlenden konkreten Erfolge beim Menschenrechtsdialog. Die EVP-ED-Fraktion weist nachdrücklich darauf hin, dass die internationalen Wertestandards eingehalten werden müssen.

Es gibt ein wichtiges Signal für alle diejenigen, die aus politischen, religiösen oder kulturellen Gründen verfolgt werden, denn die Europäische Union macht die Zusammenarbeit mit allen Ländern davon abhängig, dass die Menschenrechte respektiert werden – ohne jede Ausnahme. Wer Kooperation statt Konfrontation will, der muss die Menschenrechte achten und darauf verzichten, sie zu verletzen. Menschenrechte gelten universell!

(Beifall)

  Elizabeth Lynne (ALDE), author. – Mr President, it is not our place to say whether Tenzin Delek Rinpoche is innocent or guilty. However, it is our place to point out human rights violations when we see them. There are real concerns about his detention, trial and sentencing, which were, I believe, miscarriages of justice.

In a news bulletin of 24 October, the Chinese Government said that it was an internal affair for China and that we had no right to interfere. If it is a matter of human rights, we have every right to interfere; that is our job. It is unclear whether he had full access to legal advice throughout the trial process. The Chinese said that he had two lawyers. My sources said that he had no defence counsel whatsoever. My sources also said that he did not confess and he has never confessed to this alleged crime, despite the torture he allegedly suffered for several months before his trial. When he was tried three years ago, there was international outcry, and at that time I understand that the Chinese Government promised a retrial in the Supreme Court. That has not happened. He must be given a fair trial in full accordance with international fair trial standards or released forthwith. There is no other option.

  Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL), Auteur. – Voorzitter, de onderdrukking in Tibet staat hier vaak op de agenda. China ziet dit als een vrijwel leeg gebied dat moet worden gekoloniseerd en toegankelijk gemaakt, waarna het op de huidige Chinese manier verder kan worden ontwikkeld. Alles gaat daar nu om discipline en economische groei zonder ruimte voor afwijkende opvattingen. Dat botst op de cultuur, de tradities en de belangen van de Tibetanen die hebben geleerd om te overleven in hun onherbergzame gebied en daar met rust willen worden gelaten.

Dat probleem doet zich binnen China ook voor bij andere volkeren met een afwijkende taal en cultuur zoals bij de Oeigoeren die verwant zijn aan de Turkse volkeren in de voormalige Sovjet-Republieken in Centraal-Azië, maar vooral Tibet trekt sinds de vlucht van de Dalai Lama naar India de aandacht.

We zien geen echte verbeteringen in de manier waarop China omgaat met de inwoners van Tibet. Ook al is het resultaat van onze uitspraken hier beslist niet wat we ermee willen bereiken, toch is het goed dat we hiermee onverminderd doorgaan. China mag niet de indruk krijgen dat Europa zich vanwege economische belangen neerlegt bij de bestaande realiteit.

Tot slot, de doodstraf in China moet weg, net zoals die in Amerika en overal ter wereld weg moet. Laten we daar overal tegen strijden en vóór de mensenrechten.

  Marcin Libicki (UEN), Autor. – Panie Przewodniczący! Panie Komisarzu! Dzisiaj, kiedy znowu debatujemy na temat Tybetu, musimy się zastanowić nad skutecznością działań Parlamentu Europejskiego i Komisji Europejskiej, ponieważ kolejna debata w tej samej sprawie wskazuje na to, że niestety tej skuteczności nie ma.

Słyszeliśmy tutaj, że to są wewnętrzne sprawy chińskie – takie jest stanowisko Ambasady Chińskiej w Brukseli. Otóż tak nie jest. Pojęcie wewnętrznych spraw, mające usprawiedliwiać każdą zbrodnię wobec własnego narodu, to jest pojęcie i doktryna wyznawana tylko przez tyranów, która nigdy nie była wyznawana w cywilizowanej Europie. W dawnych wiekach kościół katolicki i religie domagały się właściwego zachowania wobec swoich własnych obywateli i nie godziły się na to, żeby mówić, że władca może robić ze swoimi obywatelami, co mu się żywnie podoba. Dzisiaj organizacje międzynarodowe zawsze podkreślają, że sprawy wewnętrzne, jeżeli naruszają podstawowe zasady moralne, są sprawami ogólnoludzkimi.

Musimy sobie zdać sprawę, że tutaj nie chodzi tylko o tego mnicha, tutaj chodzi po prostu o zniszczenie Tybetu, zniszczenie kultury i narodu tybetańskiego tylko dlatego, że ten spokojny naród istnieje. Istnienie narodu o pewnej odrębności kulturalnej, historycznej, społecznej jest wystarczającym powodem dla władz chińskich, by starać się go zniszczyć. Dzisiaj zamiast cieszyć się z wybudowania kolei, która łączy Tybet z Chinami, musimy się martwić, bo ta kolej też ma służyć zniszczeniu Tybetu poprzez napływ chińskich przedsiębiorców i chińskiej ludności.

Nasz Parlament robi dużo w tym kierunku. Jest Intergrupa do spraw Tybetu, którą prowadzi bardzo aktywnie i energicznie nasz kolega, pan poseł Thomas Mann, ale to nie wystarczy. Panie Komisarzu, to jest najwyższa pora, żeby Komisja Europejska postąpiła tak stanowczo – a chyba może, bo jest potężnym organem Unii Europejskiej – żeby wreszcie uporządkować sprawy w Chinach, a jako pierwszy krok, uratować tego biednego mnicha tybetańskiego.

(Oklaski)

  Olli Rehn, Member of the Commission. Mr President, the human rights situation in Tibet is of constant concern to the European Union and it features very high on the agenda of the EU-China human rights dialogue. In that context, the European Union has always addressed the rights of minorities, especially in Tibet, and urges the Chinese authorities to preserve the cultural, religious and linguistic identity of the Tibetan people.

The case of the Tibetan monk Tenzin Delek Rinpoche has regularly been brought to the attention of the Chinese authorities in the course of this dialogue. In addition, the EU troika has made three approaches to the Chinese Government, twice last year and in the early part of this year, when the troika met Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan.

In all those instances, the European Union voiced its urgent demand for the abolition of the death penalty in China, expressed the hope that Tenzin Delek Rinpoche would not be executed, and asked for information about the conditions of his arrest and his state of health. Whilst welcoming the decision by the Chinese authorities on 26 January 2005 this year to commute Tenzin Delek Rinpoche’s death sentence to life imprisonment, the European Union remains deeply concerned about the persistent doubts surrounding his trial and the heavy sentence handed down to him. The European Union is fully committed to continuing to follow this issue very closely in the framework of the EU-China human rights dialogue.

On a more general level, as part of its overall policy on Tibet, for many years the European Union has called for and will continue to call for the establishment of a direct dialogue between the Dalai Lama and the Chinese authorities as the only realistic way to find a lasting solution to the question of Tibet. The third visit of the Dalai Lama’s special envoys at the end of last year was an encouraging move that should be pursued further.

  Presidente. O debate está encerrado.

A votação terá lugar hoje, às 16 horas.

DECLARAÇÃO ESCRITA (ARTIGO 142º)

  Filip Andrzej Kaczmarek (PPE-DE). – Jestem zwolennikiem wolnego handlu, ale czy powinniśmy handlować w sposób wolny z krajem, który nie uznaje wolności w innych sferach? Nie sądzę, aby można usprawiedliwiać postępowanie Chin, tłumacząc je różnorodnością kulturową. Kara śmierci nie jest do zaakceptowania w żadnej kulturze, bo uderza w naturę człowieczeństwa jako takiego. Chiny są dumne z nowej linii kolejowej w Tybecie, która stała się najwyżej położoną linią kolejową na świecie. Warto jednak podkreślić, że miarą wielkości cywilizacyjnej są nie tylko inwestycje infrastrukturalne.

Jeżeli Chiny mogą budować takie linie kolejowe, to znaczy, że mogłyby poprawić warunki, w których przebywają więźniowie. Musiałyby jedynie mieć taką wolę. Utrzymanie emargo na handel bronią z Chinami ma kluczowe znaczenie. Dlaczego? Otóż, dlatego, że losy Tenzina Delek Rinpocze są najlepszym dowodem na to, iż Chiny nie wyciągnęły wniosków z tego, co wydarzyło się 4 czerwca 1989 roku. Dla Polaków i Chińczyków jest to data symboliczna. Z tym, że w Polsce jest symbolem nadziei, bo odbyły się wówczas pierwsze częściowo wolne wybory do Parlamentu.

W Chinach zaś data ta stała się symbolem opresji, dramatu Tienanmen. W 1989 roku nosiłem znaczek z dwoma słowami w języku chińskim - wolność i demokracja. I tego właśnie życzę dzisiaj Tybetańczykom i Chińczykom - wolności i demokracji!

  Carl Schlyter (Verts/ALE). – Herr talman! Det har minst fem gånger denna sammanträdesperiod hänt att hörlurarna för hela raden bakom mej där jag normalt sitter - och därmed alltså tolkningen - inte har fungerat. Mikrofonen har heller inte fungerat, så att man hade kunnat påtala detta för ordföranden. Vi har visat stor flexibilitet under omröstningarna och fortsatt med dessa från den raden, men nästa gång behandlas många viktiga ärenden, bl.a. Reach, och då måste vi se till att tekniken fungerar annars kan det hända att sessionen avbryts på det mest olämpliga sätt, så jag hoppas att ni kan lösa det till nästa månad.

  Presidente. Infelizmente trata-se de um problema recorrente. Iremos examiná-lo de forma detalhada e cuidadosa e esperamos que para a próxima sessão esta dificuldade já não ocorra.

(1) Ver Acta.

19. Głosowanie

  Presidente. _Segue-se na ordem do dia a votação.

(Para os resultados da votação e outros pormenores: ver Acta)

20. Prawa człowieka w Saharze Zachodniej

21. Uzbekistan

22. Sprawa Tenzina Delek Rinpocze

  Presidente. A votação está encerrada.

23. Korekty do głosowania (patrz: protokół)

24. Skład Parlamentu: patrz protokół

25. Skład komisji i delegacji: patrz protokół

26. Oświadczenia pisemne wpisane do rejestru (art. 116 Regulaminu): patrz protokół

27. Decyzje dotyczące niektórych dokumentów: patrz protokół

28. Przekazanie tekstów przyjętych na niniejszym posiedzeniu: patrz protokół

29. Kalendarz kolejnych posiedzeń: patrz protokół

30. Odroczenie sesji

  Presidente. A sessão está encerrada.

(A sessão é interrompida às 16h20.)

The recent polio outbreak in Indonesia is still spreading, could spread further afield and could pose a global health threat, according to the United Nations children's agency UNICEF.

UNICEF also warns that the outbreak, which is a major setback to UN plans to eliminate this waterborne disease by the end of 2005, could spread more easily during the wet season, which usually starts in October.

Furthermore, just five diseases — pneumonia, diarrhoea, malaria, measles and AIDS — account for half of all deaths in children under five. According to the latest UN report ‘eleven million children a year — i.e. 30 000 a day — die before their fifth birthday from preventable or treatable causes. Most of these lives could be saved by expanding existing programmes that promote simple, low-cost solutions’.

Does the Council agree with the UN findings and will it give a commitment that it will take whatever concrete and positive steps that are necessary to ensure that the existing simple and low cost solutions are applied, in practice, without further unnecessary delay?

I am grateful to the Honourable Member for reminding us of the continuing horror of childhood poverty and disease in the developing world. The Council indeed shares this concern.

It is clear that children form an essential facet of the EU's development policy, and the Council intends that this should be adequately reflected in the follow-up to the Millennium Development Goals Summit of September 2005, in the formulation of future EC development policy and during examination of the future Commission Communication on this subject.

In the Conclusions of 24 May this year, the Council firmly supported the programme of action to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis through external actions presented by the Commission at the end of April 2005. This programme provides for specific attention to be focused on children's rights and on the needs of orphans and vulnerable children, as well as on school security, particularly with regard to girls. The Commission provides a significant level of support through the Global Fund for AIDS, TB and Malaria as a way of supporting and helping to finance country plans for services essential to child health. The Commission also support the Global Alliance for Vaccine Immunisation, which is focused on helping countries improve child immunisation against disease. We plan a joint action by the EC and the Member States, in collaboration with the main international organisations in the sector, and with teachers and parents' associations in the partner countries is planned.

The joint statement of November 2000 on EU development policy is under review. A new interinstitutional statement on future EU development policy should be adopted shortly by the three institutions. Child protection is among the many subjects identified as possible thematic priorities by the Council.

Lastly, at the request of the Council, the European Commission intends to submit in 2006 a Communication on children in the context of development policy, so that all questions relating to children in developing countries, including reduction of the mortality rate, are dealt with consistently.

Israel has recently issued instructions to seize more Palestinian land close to the largest Jewish settlement in the West Bank. According to the Israeli Justice Minister, the government plans to use the land to continue building the controversial West Bank barrier around the settlement of Maale Adumim.

In view of the fact that, in July 2004, the International Court of Justice issued an advisory ruling that Israel's West Bank barrier was illegal because it is being built on occupied territory and construction of it should be stopped, will the Council comment on these recent developments?

In a number of replies to recent questions raised by Members of the European Parliament, the Council set out the EU's unchanged position relating to the Wall and the Advisory Opinion from the International Court of Justice on the "Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory".

The Council and its Presidencies have repeatedly demanded in the past that Israel stops and reverses the construction of the Wall in the occupied Palestinian territory, including in and around East Jerusalem. In addition the Council and its Presidencies have done so with respect to the Israeli orders requisitioning the land to which the Honourable Member referred in his question.

Achieving universal primary education is one of the main Millennium Development Goals (MDG).

However the MDG 2005 annual report, which was recently published by the United Nations, states that 'in sub-Saharan Africa, less than two thirds of children are enrolled in primary school. Other regions, including Southern Asia and Oceania, also have a long way to go. In these regions and elsewhere, increased enrolment must be accompanied by efforts to ensure that all children remain in school and receive a high-quality education'.

Does the Council agree that without education there can be no real progress in the countries concerned? Furthermore does the Council have ideas as to how the situation can be seriously improved and the relevant action speeded up?

The second Millennium Development Goal is to "Achieve universal primary education" aims to "ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling".

The Council's view on this subject is clearly set out in the Resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States called: "Education and training in the context of poverty reduction in developing countries" which was adopted on 30 May 2002.

In that Resolution the Council recalled its strong commitment to the Millennium Development Goals, which include achieving universal primary education by 2015 and eliminating gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005 and to all levels of education no later than 2015. The Council also reaffirmed its commitment to the Framework for Action on Education for All agreed at the World Education Forum in Dakar, and to the goals it contains.

In addition, the ACP-EC Council of Ministers decided in Luxembourg on 24 June 2005 to allocate an indicative amount of EUR 63 million from the conditional billion of the 9th European Development Fund as a contribution to the "Education for All" Fast Track Initiative. The bulk of EU funding on education to ACP states is channelled through country programmes, increasingly in the form of budgetary support.

As the Council are aware, earlier this year Uzbek soldiers opened fire on a crowd of some ten thousand peaceful protestors. Human Rights Watch, the Institute of War and Peace Reporting and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe have all placed the number of slain civilians at no less than five hundred.

Given the fact that Uzbekistan has entered into a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) with the European Union, will the Council indicate if this matter has been discussed at Council level and, in the affirmative, what were the conclusions reached?

I can indeed confirm that the Council has discussed the issue, most recently on 3 October.

The Council has expressed its profound concern at the developments in Eastern Uzbekistan and strongly condemned the reported excessive and disproportionate use of force by the Uzbek security authorities. The Council has called upon the Uzbek authorities to respect their international commitments to democracy, the rule of law and human rights and to allow an independent international inquiry into the events in Andijan.

As the Honourable Member is probably aware, on 3 October the General Affairs and External Relations Council adopted conclusions on Uzbekistan, which spelt out detailed measures to be applied, including suspension of all scheduled technical meetings under the PCA, an arms embargo, a targeted visa ban, as well as use of the relevant mechanisms of the OSCE and the UN to secure an independent inquiry into the events in Andijan.

Can the Council outline its view and position on the issue of the detention of migrants in prison facilities in European Member States? In Ireland, illegal immigrants are detained in Cloverhill Prison. On a recent visit to the prison a delegation of MEPs found that the treatment of detainees was good and that the facilities provided were also of a good standard. However, MEPs are concerned about whether prison is an appropriate place to detain illegal immigrants.

What is the Council's view of the detention of illegal immigrants and of the very varied standard of facilities provided across the European Member States?

The attention of the Honourable Member of Parliament is drawn to the fact that the Council is not competent to reply to her question, insofar as the issue of the conditions under which irregular immigrants are detained is not covered by EU legislation at present, except as far as asylum seekers are concerned.

The Council has not yet taken a view on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning third-country nationals, which includes proposals on temporary custody, including where a Member State must resort to prison accommodation.

Jämställdhet har en stark ställning inom EU-samarbetet och är en av EU:s grundläggande värderingar och mål för all verksamhet inom unionen. Jämställdhet skall genomsyra alla EU:s politikområden. Jämställdhetsintegrering är en skyldighet såväl för EU:s medlemsstater som för gemenskapens institutioner. Hur arbetar ordförandeskapet för att se till att ”gender mainstreaming” blir verklighet inom unionens samtliga organ och främst inom rådsarbetet?

The UK is working with the Council, the European Commission and this Parliament, to progress gender mainstreaming throughout its Presidency. The UK Minister for Women and Equality, Meg Munn, addressed the European Parliament Women's Affairs Committee on 13 July 2005, to outline Presidency plans on gender equality, including the following initiatives;

on 30 September, the Presidency hosted a meeting of the European Commission High Level Group on Gender Mainstreaming, comprising representatives from every Member State. The main discussion item was the preparation of the Third Annual Report on Gender Equality, that is to be presented to the Spring European Council in March 2006;

and on 8-9 November, the Presidency will host an Informal meeting of Equality Ministers in Birmingham. Ministers will focus discussions on the EU Lisbon Strategy, in the context of "what works for women". They will exchange models of good practice on issues from education and skills for women, to worklife balance and childcare, to entrepreneurship and business creation for women.

The UK Presidency will also present a statement on gender equality to the Employment and Social Council on 8-9 December. It will outline EU progress towards implementation in acknowledgement of the tenth anniversary of the Beijing Platform for Action.

The Presidency is pleased with the EU's achievements in the field of gender equality and believes that progress has gone beyond purely creating a legislative framework. For example, the integration of gender equality into the employment policies of the Member States under the EU Employment Guidelines for 2005-2008 is a positive step forward in calling for "resolute action to increase female participation and reduce gender gaps in employment, unemployment and pay" as well as "better reconciliation of work and private life and the provision of accessible and affordable childcare facilities and care for other dependants".

However, the Presidency recognises that much work remains to be done and will continue to strive, in cooperation with the European Parliament and the Commission, towards achieving more progress in this area.

Leaders at the UN World Summit made commitments for the provision of universal access to life-saving anti-retroviral drugs for all those who need it by 2010. It has been reported, however, that the actual financial commitments made fall well short of what is needed to achieve this goal. The UK Government announced in August that it will double its aid to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

Has the Council raised this issue, and what steps has it taken to encourage more financial aid from other EU Member States in this area?

The fight against HIV/AIDS is a top priority for the EU in general and for the Council in particular, both in the context of poverty reduction (which is the overarching objective of the EU Development Policy) and in the framework of the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. The European Council, in the framework of the Multi-Annual Strategic Programme adopted in December 2003, agreed to give priority to ensuring improvements in aid effectiveness, coherence, co-ordination and complementarity in support of the primary objective of poverty reduction. This includes the fight against diseases like HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.

On the basis of the Commission communication on a new coherent European Policy Framework for External Action to Confront HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculosis, the Council adopted in May 2005 a comprehensive Plan of Action on different areas of intervention, including proposals for the future implementation, monitoring and co-ordination of the EU action to confront HIV/AIDS and the other major poverty-related diseases.

As regards the issue of funding, all EU Member States are contributing to the global EU effort in fighting poverty diseases. In May 2005⁽¹⁾, the Council decided on a new collective European Union target of an ODA⁽²⁾/GNI ratio of 0.56% by 2010. This implies an additional EUR 20 billion a year in Official Development Assistance, part of which will certainly be spent on HIV/AIDS prevention, care and research.

EU Member States and the European Commission were founding members of the Global Fund to fight Aids, Tuberculosis and Malaria in 2001 and the European Union is currently the Fund’s largest donor. The EU has so far provided more than US$2 billion to the Fund. At the Global Fund Replenishment Conference held in London on 6 September 2005 and chaired by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, EU Member States and the European Commission pledged an additional US$2.3 billion for 2006 and 2007, which will see Europe provide 60% of contributions to the Fund for that period.

Βάσει των τελευταίων στοιχείων, την περασμένη χρονιά, η επισκεψιμότητα αρχαιολογικών χώρων και ιδιαίτερα των μουσείων έχει μειωθεί σημαντικά. Στα 30.000 κρατικά και μη μουσεία της Ευρώπης, είχαμε συνολικά 500.000.000 επισκέπτες λιγότερους από τις προηγούμενες χρονιές. Με στοιχεία δε του ευρωβαρομέτρου αναφορικά με τις πολιτιστικές δραστηριότητες των Ευρωπαίων, η επίσκεψη σε μουσεία κατατάσσεται στις κατώτερες θέσεις, αφού στη σχετική κλίμακα, δείκτης πλησιάζει την απάντηση "σχεδόν ποτέ".

Η βρετανική προεδρία έχει συμπεριλάβει στις προτεραιότητες της για τον τομέα του πολιτισμού, την προώθηση πρωτοβουλιών για τη διευκόλυνση των μουσείων ως προς τη διοργάνωση εκθέσεων με ανταλλαγές πολιτιστικών αντικειμένων. Σκοπεύει στα πλαίσια αυτά να παρουσιάσει συγκεκριμένες προτάσεις στο Συμβούλιο της 14ης -15ης Νοεμβρίου; Σκέπτεται να ζητήσει από την Επιτροπή να προβεί σε μελέτη του φαινομένου της επισκεψιμότητας των ευρωπαϊκών μουσείων, με ποιοτικούς και ποσοτικούς δείκτες, για την αντιμετώπιση των παραγόντων εκείνων που αποτρέπουν τους Ευρωπαίους να τα επισκεφθούν (ρόλος τουριστικών γραφείων, επιπτώσεις απειλών τρομοκρατικών απειλών - εξονυχιστικοί έλεγχοι, μη εκσυγχρονισμός μουσειακών χώρων, με ενδιαφέρουσες παρουσιάσεις κ.α.); Σκοπεύει να προωθήσει με συγκεκριμένα μέτρα μία ευρεία διαβούλευση με τα κράτη-μέλη και αρμοδίους φορείς και μία κατευθυντήρια πολιτική στα 25 κράτη μέλη για την προσέλκυση του κοινού στα ευρωπαϊκά μουσεία;

The Council notes with interest the question posed by the Honourable Member, and would like to refer initially to the report Lending to Europe - Recommendations on Collection Mobility for European Museums, which was drawn up by an independent group of experts as part of the Work Plan for Culture, as set out in the November 2004 Education, Youth and Culture Council Conclusions.

This report refers to studies which show that active exhibition programmes and temporary exhibitions tend to increase visitor numbers. In view of this, and given that only 300 of the 30,000 museums in Europe hold major temporary exhibitions on a regular basis, it is clear that the mobility of works of art, art collections and exhibitions has become an important issue for the European Union.

At the 14 to15 November 2005 Council Meeting on Education, Youth and Culture, the Council will be called upon to achieve a partial political agreement - leaving budgetary aspects to be decided later - on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Culture 2007 Programme⁽¹⁾. One of the three objectives of this draft legislative instrument is "to encourage the transnational circulation of works and cultural and artistic products".

A Mobility of Collections Conference will also be held in Manchester on 28 November 2005 where museum experts and cultural administrators from across Europe will come together to draw up comprehensive plans to build contacts and trust, share best practice and work towards developing suitable common standards for loan agreements and insurance or state indemnity schemes. This should go a long way to combating the worrying trend that the Honourable Member has identified.

The European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation (EIUC) is the only educational institution active at European level which is explicitly mandated to reinforcing and disseminating the core Community values of respect for human rights and democracy. The European Parliament's Committee on Culture, Committee on Foreign Affairs and Committee on Civil Liberties have called for continued EU funding for the EIUC by incorporating references in the EP Report on Lifelong Learning to its reintegration in the Lifelong Learning Action Programme.

Will the Council ensure that, irrespective of whether the EIUC's budget is allocated under Education or RELEX, it will continue to be fully funded, and will the Council support its reintegration in Article 42 of the Integrated Action programme in the field of lifelong learning to that end?

Will the Council further undertake that it will ensure that the EU's continuing commitment to the important principles of human rights and democracy are not undermined by the dispute between Commissioners Figel and Ferrero-Waldner about the source of the EIUC budget?

The Council has taken note of the concern expressed by the Honourable Member regarding continued funding for the European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation (EUIC). This issue is part of ongoing discussions in the Council on the overall EU budget.

Η αμερικάνικη εισβολή και κατοχή του Ιράκ ονομάστηκε από τις ΗΠΑ απελευθέρωση του Ιράκ και του λαού του. Παρ’ όλα αυτά, και όπως ήταν αναμενόμενο, τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα στο Ιράκ έχουν περιοριστεί.

Το νέο Σύνταγμα, με ενσωματωμένη θρησκευτική διακήρυξη, επέβαλε φοβερούς περιορισμούς στα δικαιώματα των γυναικών και αντί να αντιπροσωπεύει τα δικαιώματα των γυναικών, τις θέτει σε καθεστώς ημι-δουλείας. Παράλληλα, οι γυναίκες, που κάποτε είχαν μια αρκετά ανεξάρτητη και παραγωγική ζωή, τώρα, με ένα μαινόμενο πόλεμο στο όνομα της επέκτασης των δικαιωμάτων τους, η φωνή τους έχει σιγήσει και οι ελευθερίες τους περιορίστηκαν αντί να επεκταθούν. Αυτό αποδεικνύεται και από την έκθεση του Human Rights Watch από τον Ιούλιο του 2003.

Πώς σχεδιάζει η Προεδρία του Συμβουλίου να συμβάλει στην βελτίωση της κατάστασης των δικαιωμάτων των γυναικών στο Ιράκ έχοντας υπόψη ότι αυτά συνεχίζουν να καταπατούνται από το καθεστώς που έχουν επιβάλει οι κατοχικές Αμερικανικές δυνάμεις;

It is not true to say that human rights in Iraq have been curtailed since the fall of Saddam Hussein. People now have freedom of speech and action and the draft constitution offers significant protection of women’s rights. It contains specific provisions that guarantee equal opportunities for all Iraqis, men and women, including mandatory 25% participation by women in the new Parliament.

In its bilateral relations with third states as well as in multilateral and regional fora, the EU regularly raises the ratification and application of the UN human rights instruments, including the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women, to which Iraq has been a party since 1986.

The Presidency will, of course, ensure that the important issue of protection of women's rights is raised during the EU political dialogue with Iraq at all levels as part of discussions on protection of human rights in general.

Given the current instability in oil prices, will the Council state its position on the introduction of an EU kerosene tax in the aviation sector?

The Council has not received any proposal from the Commission on this subject and cannot take a position on it.

Given the acknowledged need for fiscal discipline implicit in the Stability and Growth Pact, to what extent does the Presidency agree that countries in breach of the budget deficit limit of three per cent of GDP should be subject to sanctions? How appropriate does the Presidency consider the sanctions currently in place to be?

Article 104 of the EC Treaty and Regulations governing the Excessive Deficit Procedure provide a clear legal framework. This culminates in the possible application by the Council of sanctions set out in Article 104, paragraph 11. Member States outside the Euro area do not face sanctions or fines.

While the Commission has the right to initiate any recommendations for sanctions to be applied, the Council has the final say on excessive deficit procedures. This balance between the discretion of the Council and a clear procedural framework has not been questioned by any Member State in the negotiations leading to the recent revision of the Stability and Growth Pact.

Both the existing range of sanctions and the 3% budget reference value were confirmed in the recent review of the Stability and Growth Pact and the ECOFIN Council unanimously adopted their report in March of this year.

The Presidency therefore considers that the framework currently in place is appropriate and that the Council should continue to exercise its judgment within that framework.

Given that Member States were asked to submit their proposals to the Commission for simplification and reduction of EU legislation by mid-October, will the Council ensure that these submissions are freely available on the web, in the interests of transparency?

As the Honourable Member rightly notes, Commissioner Verheugen wrote to Competitiveness Council Ministers in April seeking contributions from national governments to the next phase of the Commission’s simplification programme. [The Honourable Member will be aware that the Commission announced its plans for taking forward this work earlier this week (25 October)].

Governments submitted their contribution directly to the Commission. It is for the Commission and individual Member States to decide whether to release this information.

The simplification project is important strand of the wider campaign to improve the Europe’s regulatory environment. Better Regulation is a Presidency priority. We look forward to continuing to work with EU partners - this Parliament, the Commission and other Member States - to secure real progress on this agenda, during our Presidency and beyond.

Why has the Presidency not made any progress towards a unanimous agreement in Council to renew or make permanent Directive 1999/85/EC⁽¹⁾ which allows Member States to apply reduced VAT rates for renovation and maintenance work on residential property? How well would such a VAT incentive scheme, encompassing both renovation and maintenance work on residential dwellings and energy-efficient building work, complement the Lisbon Strategy and jobs and the EU's aim to cut carbon emissions while maximising energy efficiency? To what extent does the Presidency agree that such a provision should cover the alteration of buildings to meet the special requirements of vulnerable people such as the old and the disabled? What interim measures will the Presidency propose, both now and to the next Presidency, so as to ensure that homeowners and construction companies are protected from additional VAT in the event that the Council fails to reach agreement before the Directive expires on 31 December 2005?

Since July 2003 the issue of VAT reduced rates has been discussed several times by the Council and its preparatory bodies, but no consensus could be reached, despite the efforts of the last four Presidencies.

The Presidency is fully aware that the expiry on 31 December (2005) of reduced rates applicable to labour-intensive services, including the renovation and repair of private dwellings, makes it all the more important for Council to reach agreement on this dossier.

The Presidency would like to assure the Honourable Member that it is committed to making its best efforts to facilitating a unanimous agreement on the VAT reduced-rate package and is taking all the necessary steps to do so. The dossier has been considered by Coreper and will be discussed by Finance Ministers at the ECOFIN Council on 8 November.

The forthcoming meeting of EU Heads of State or Government will consider the future of the European Social Model. Given the high rates of unemployment and tax and the low rates of growth in Europe, what lessons does the Presidency think that Member States can learn from the failure of the European Social Model as they try to promote the Lisbon Agenda?

As the Honourable Member will recall, one of the three key challenges highlighted by Tony Blair, in his keynote speech to this Parliament in June [and again earlier today], was how to respond to the challenge of globalisation, particularly the need to modernise the European Social Model.

As the European Council stressed at its meeting in March 2005, five years after the launch of the Lisbon Strategy, the results are mixed. Alongside undeniable progress, there are serious shortcomings and delay in Europe’s delivery on its ambitious reform commitments. We only have to look at the figures on potential growth and productivity to recognise the scale of the challenge. EU Heads agreed the need for action in March and committed to reinvigorating the Lisbon Strategy, with a particular focus on “jobs and growth”. The submission of National Reform Programmes by each Member State is an important demonstration of this renewed commitment.

It’s vital to focus on delivering the results that matter to our citizens. With around 19 million people unemployed across Europe, and almost half of them long-term unemployed, its clear that much progress needs to be made. For that, we need concerted effort - between Member States, the European Commission and the European Parliament. We need to clearly identify where EU level action is needed and where national and indeed regional governments are best placed to deliver the necessary changes. As the Commission’s paper for the Informal Heads of Government Meeting tomorrow makes clear, “with growth, and more Europeans in more productive jobs, we can achieve the outcomes which meet Europeans’ expectations and values.”….“modernisation is essential to continue to keep Europe’s historically high levels of prosperity, social cohesion, environmental protection and quality of life.”

Why has the Presidency provided such poor facilities and extended such poor treatment to journalists during Ministerial meetings in the United Kingdom since 1 July 2005? To what extent is the Presidency embarrassed by this state of affairs? To what extent has it has had a negative effect on the image and public perception of Britain and Britain's Presidency of the EU? How accurately does this treatment reflect media reports which claim that it is symbolic of the British Government's coolness towards the EU? What steps has the Presidency taken to ensure that journalists are treated with more courtesy and provided with better facilities at meetings during the remainder of the British Presidency?

The informal meetings which take place in the country of the Presidency are exclusively and directly managed by the Presidency's administration.

In the light of the hostile reception given to the President-in-Office of the Agriculture Council when he appeared before the European Parliament, does the British Presidency really believe that it can take effective action in the agricultural sphere, especially when we see attempts being made on a number of key issues - reform the EU sugar regime, the new rural development guidelines and avian influenza - to delay the procedures so that the final decisions on these legislative proposals will be taken under the Austrian Presidency?

The Council wishes to assure the Honourable Member of its firm intention to make progress on the full range of agricultural dossiers currently under examination with co-operation of the European Parliament.

As regards sugar, the Presidency intends to keep up the pace of preparation so as to ensure that the EU will be in a position to present a clear position on sugar at the Doha Round, and will be able to adopt the legislative package, as soon as the European Parliament has given its opinion. Early decisions on the Commission’s reform proposals are vital given the expiry of the existing regime on 1 July 2006.

Regarding the Community's strategic guidelines for rural development, the technical examination of the proposal by the different Council bodies of the Council is well advanced. So the Presidency foresees a discussion on this item by the Council in November. It hopes that the Council Decision will be adopted later, following receipt of the European Parliament's opinion.

With regard to avian influenza, work within the competent Council bodies is also well advanced. The Presidency intends to complete work on this dossier by the December Agriculture Council. The Council has of course activated the urgency procedure and requested the European Parliament to give its Opinion at its mini session in November, so that the Council can still adopt the Directive on avian influenza in December 2005.

The European Commission has taken steps towards the development of a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB), despite the opposition of a number of Member States, including the United Kingdom. The Commission has said that there are no plans to harmonise tax rates and that it will create a system that is more transparent and which offers easier comparisons. What are the Presidency's main objections to the Commission's proposals?

There are, at present, no legislative proposals from the Commission before the Council for a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base, as referred to by the Honourable Member.

Given the UK Presidency's stated aim of reducing bureaucracy, what specific percentage targets for the reduction of the 80 000-page acquis communautaire has the Council set for the Commission and over what period? How far has the Council progressed in setting targets for a reduction in the cost burden of European regulation, and when will those targets be published?

The Honourable Member will be aware that Better regulation – including simplification of existing legislation, strengthened use of impact assessments in and efforts to reduce the administrative burdens on business – is a high priority for the Council and for this Presidency. The Competitiveness Council will hold a policy debate on the Better Regulation agenda at its meeting on 28/29 November and will address the Commission's [recent] Communication on simplification and the result of the Commission's screening package. Pending that debate, the Council is not in a position to set precise targets for simplifying the regulatory framework. It is clear, however, that the Council is fully committed to playing its part. We look forward to continuing to work with this Parliament and the Commission to deliver better quality legislation, that is easier to apply, less burdensome on economic operators and thereby more effective.

The European Commission is supporting the elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council scheduled for January 2006. Hamas, a terror organisation which, time and again, has called for the destruction of the State of Israel and an ascendant power among the Palestinian public, was placed on the EU list of terrorist organisations in June 2004. The EU has clearly stated in the past that armed actions cannot be part of an electoral process.

What actual measures will the EU and the EUEOM implement to prevent the possibility of Hamas gaining official political power, and in what ways will the EU and the EUEOM coordinate its efforts with the Israeli authorities?

The way in which the EU would support the forthcoming elections to the Palestinian Legislative Council, to which the Honourable Member of the European Parliament refers in his question, remains at present under consideration by the Council and the Commission.

The EU unreservedly stands by the view of the Quartet that ultimately those who want to be a part of the political process should not engage in armed activities.

Na sequência de tomadas de posição dos pescadores e suas organizações representativas sobre as consequências do aumento dos combustíveis para o sector das pescas, o Conselho de Ministros da Agricultura e Pescas, de 19 e 20 de Setembro, incompreensivelmente, apenas, e uma vez mais, "tomou nota" da situação, não decidindo nenhuma medida que dê resposta ao problema.

Como os pescadores têm alertado, o aumento do preço dos combustíveis está a causar grandes dificuldades ao sector, estando em causa a viabilidade de muitas embarcações se não forem tomadas medidas imediatas, como, por exemplo, o apoio financeiro que minimize o aumento do custo dos combustíveis.

Saliente-se que o aumento dos combustíveis vem agravar a já difícil situação de muitos pescadores da pesca artesanal que não contam com qualquer apoio que contribua para minorar as consequências dos sucessivos aumentos dos combustíveis.

Pelo que - independentemente de outras acções a longo prazo -, que medidas imediatas de apoio ao sector, nomeadamente à pequena pesca artesanal, pensa o Conselho tomar?

The Council is aware of the importance of this issue to the fishing industry. However, the Council cannot take any decisions on the rising fuel prices for fishermen without a Commission proposal to address the problem. Nonetheless, Ministers at the Agricultural and Fisheries Council in September had a useful exchange of views on this subject.

Οι βρετανικές αρχές προχώρησαν στις 8 Οκτώβρη στη σύλληψη από ειδικές δυνάμεις του Σιν Γκάρλαντ, προέδρου του Εργατικού Κόμματος Ιρλανδίας σε κεντρικό εστιατόριο στο Μπέλφαστ Ιρλανδίας. Η πολιτική δίωξη που ασκείται με ανυπόστατες και χαλκευμένες κατηγορίες σε βάρος του γνωστού για την αντιμπεριαλιστική δράση του ηγέτη του Εργατικού Κόμματος και η σύλληψή του κατά τη διάρκεια του Συνεδρίου του Κόμματος συνοδεύονται από την απειλή έκδοσής του στις ΗΠΑ λόγω των κίβδηλων κατηγοριών που διοχέτευσαν μυστικές υπηρεσίες σε Μέσα Μαζικής Ενημέρωσης για κομμουνιστική συνομωσία υπόσκαψης του αμερικανικού δολαρίου.

Tί μέτρα πρόκειται να λάβει τo Συμβούλιο για να γίνουν σεβαστά τα βασικά δικαιώματα και οι ανθρώπινες ελευθερίες, να σταματήσουν οι διώξεις και οι πολιτικές μεθοδεύσεις σε βάρος του Σιν Γκάρλαντ και να εμποδιστεί η αναίτια έκδοσή του στις ΗΠΑ;

This is not an issue for the Council, but one for the UK and US Governments.

In Somalië is weer een schip gekaapt met hulpgoederen. Het is de tweede keer in enkele maanden tijd dat een boot met noodhulp wordt gekaapt. De hulpgoederen zijn eigendom van het Voedselagentschap van de Verenigde Naties. De hulporganisatie noemt het een schande dat een kleine groep van profiteurs hulpgoederen steelt die bestemd zijn voor hun eigen, noodlijdende Somalische landgenoten.

Zoals u weet, is Somalië helemaal in handen van gewapende bendes en is de arme bevolking het kind van de rekening. Wat is de reactie van de Raad op dit voorval? Is er al overleg geweest met de Verenigde Naties om dit in de toekomst te vermijden? Worden er maatregelen getroffen? Zal het hulpprogramma voor Somalië worden aangepast aan deze situatie?

The Council holds the view that episodes such as the recent hijackings of ships carrying food aid to Somalia can be prevented only by lasting peace in Somalia and the re-establishment of a functioning State. This can be achieved solely through a peaceful and inclusive process, led by the Somalis themselves.

The EU therefore continues to give its full support to the Somali peace and reconciliation process and the Transitional Federal Institutions and to actively work for dialogue and consensus-building among all parties in Somalia.

Le mois prochain, les chefs d'État de l'Union européenne rencontreront dix de leurs homologues méditerranéens à l'occasion du dixième anniversaire du processus de Barcelone célébrant le partenariat euro-méditerranéen. En septembre 2004, la Commission a présenté un règlement visant à la création d'un instrument européen de voisinage et de partenariat.

Comment le Conseil compte-t-il relancer le processus de Barcelone et ce, sans qu'il perde sa visibilité et son contenu dans le cadre plus large de la politique de voisinage? Dans cet instrument de voisinage, une attention particulière est portée à la coopération entre régions. Comme de nombreuses régions d'Europe, je suis convaincu de la nécessité d'une politique s'inspirant du modèle de la politique de cohésion régionale et complémentaire des interventions de la nouvelle politique de voisinage. Dans cet instrument, il est également prévu que le FEDER cofinance le volet de la coopération transfrontalière.

Quel rôle le Conseil compte-t-il attribuer aux régions dans la relance du processus? Quel soutien technique et financier l'Union européenne pourrait-elle apporter aux actions conjointes des régions des deux rives de la Méditerranée?

The Council hopes that, by holding, for the first time ever, of a Euro-Mediterranean Summit of Heads of State and Government on 27-28 November, it will indeed increase the visibility of the Barcelona Process. The event will celebrate the 10th Anniversary of the Barcelona Declaration and give a strong signal in support of the Barcelona Process. The intention is to adopt a Declaration of commitments and a five year work programme with concrete medium term commitments on essential economic, educational, governance, counter-terrorism and migration reforms. This will contribute to making the Process more visible and meaningful and also more relevant to the citizens of the region. The upcoming Summit will also be an opportunity to underline the need to strengthen dialogue at all levels, including between regional and local administrations.

The Euro-Mediterranean Ministerial Conference held in Luxembourg on 30-31 May 2005 recognised the need to bring the Euro-Mediterranean Partnership closer to citizens’ concerns and acknowledged the importance of cities and regions in the area: local and regional authorities need to be more closely involved in, take stock of their common challenges and exchange experiences and best practices.

The European Neighbourhood Policy should enhance the Barcelona Process by building on its achievements and by encompassing measures to develop its regional and national dimensions. With regard to the EU technical and financial support to the Euro-Mediterranean region, the Commission has submitted a proposal for a ENPI (European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument) draft Regulation. This proposal is currently under discussion within the Council.

Με προσφυγή του στο Συμβούλιο της Επικρατείας, το Υπουργείο Δημόσιας Τάξης της Ελλάδας ζητεί την ακύρωση της απόφασης της Αρχής Προστασίας Δεδομένων, που επιτρέπει την υπό όρους λειτουργία εκατοντάδων καμερών λήψης εικόνας και ήχου μόνο για την κυκλοφορία, και ζητεί να λειτουργούν οι κάμερες με όλες τις δυνατότητές τους και να είναι αξιοποιήσιμα τα στοιχεία που συγκεντρώνουν, ακόμη και αυστηρώς προσωπικού χαρακτήρα, από τις διωκτικές και δικαστικές αρχές για πρόληψη και εξιχνίαση σοβαρών αξιόποινων πράξεων κατά τη διάρκεια συγκεντρώσεων, μαζικών συναθροίσεων κλπ. Είναι όμως γνωστό, όπως έδειξε και ειδική έρευνα που διενεργήθηκε με εντολή του Υπουργείου Εσωτερικών του Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου, ότι αυτού του είδους τα μέτρα δεν συμβάλλουν στη μείωση της εγκληματικότητας, ενώ περιορίζουν δραστικά έως εξαλείφουν παντελώς στοιχειώδη δικαιώματα, όπως αυτό της προσωπικής και κοινωνικής ζωής.

Θεωρεί το Συμβούλιο ότι η ασφυκτική αστυνόμευση και η μετατροπή των πάντων σε υπόπτους αποτελεί αποτελεσματικό μέτρο για τη βελτίωση της ζωής ενός λαού, και ότι η παρακολούθηση και καταγραφή των λαϊκών συναθροίσεων συνιστά ωμή παραβίαση θεμελιωδών δημοκρατικών δικαιωμάτων;

As set out in Article 33 of the Treaty of the European Union, measures to maintain law and order and the safeguarding of internal security are a matter for the Member States. In adopting any policing measures, all Member States are bound by common standards on human rights as set out in the European Convention on Human Rights.

As the Home Secretary said in his speech to the European Parliament on 7 September, we all need to be sure that we are striking the right balance between our collective security and our fundamental rights.

On 15 September 2005, a Russian fighter aircraft flying to Kaliningrad equipped with missiles crashed in Lithuania. This time, there were no victims or major damage. This is, however, a deeply alarming incident, which forms part of a wider pattern of issues involving violations of the airspace of EU Member States by Russia, despite the explicit written undertakings given by Russia and the EU and international principles which call for respect for the territorial integrity of all parties.

What is the Council's opinion about the demilitarisation of Kaliningrad Oblast? Does it not think that the heavily armed and fortified region of the Kaliningrad Oblast should be demilitarised so as to increase security in the Baltic region and avoid such accidents in the future?

The Council confirms that it is indeed fully aware of the incident referred to. The Council has not taken a position on the fighter jet crash or the demilitarisation of Kaliningrad.

Komission i2010-strategia on keskeinen väline Lissabonin tavoitteiden, työllisyyden ja kasvun saavuttamiseksi. Strategian ensisijaisena tavoitteena on varmistaa, että Euroopassa muokataan toimintaympäristö, joka tekee mahdolliseksi tieto- ja viestintätekniikan markkinoiden kukoistamisen samanaikaisesti kun taataan, että yhteiskunnalliset ja kansalaisten intressit toteutuvat. Nämä tavoitteet toteutuvat ainoastaan, mikäli niiden saavuttamiseksi taataan riittävät resurssit.

Miten neuvosto aikoo rohkaista jäsenmaita konkreettisiin toimiin, jotta ne saavuttaisivat Lissabonin tavoitteet ja erityisesti i2010-strategiassa esitetyt Euroopan suurinta kasvualaa, tieto- ja viestintätekniikkaa, koskevat investointitavoitteet tutkimukseen ja tuotekehitykseen?

Minkälaista poliittista tukea neuvosto aikoo antaa i2010-aloitteelle? Miten neuvosto aikoo ottaa huomioon parlamentin näkemyksen aiheesta? Miten neuvosto aikoo puolustaa i2010:n tavoitteiden toteutumista? Voiko neuvosto vahvistaa, että nämä näkemykset tulevat huomioon otetuiksi rahoituskehyksistä päätettäessä?

The March Spring Council confirmed knowledge and innovation as the engines of sustainable growth and important elements of a reinvigorated Lisbon “jobs and growth” strategy. ICT take-up is cited among the Lisbon integrated guidelines and should feature in many Member States’ Lisbon National Reform Programmes.

i2010 is an important strand of the EU's ICT work. As Presidency, we hosted a conference in September for governments and business representatives from across the EU, as well a number of other countries, including South Korea, Japan and Switzerland, to explore and actively contribute to defining the i2010 ICT strategy. We would like to see a forward-looking i2010 initiative that commits the EU to developing a competitive, inclusive and innovative information society that helps deliver our Lisbon goals. We welcome this Parliament’s contribution to this important project.

The Council is currently examining the Commission's i2010 proposal. Of course, any funding for i2010 will have to be consistent with the budget agreed for the next financial perspective (2007-2013).

Σύμφωνα με έκθεση των οργανώσεων "Human Rights Watch" και "Διεθνής Αμνηστία" χιλιάδες παιδιά κάτω από 18 χρονών εκτίουν ποινές ισόβιας κάθειρξης σε φυλακές των ΗΠΑ, αφού σε 42 Πολιτείες επιτρέπεται η επιβολή της ποινής της ισόβιας κάθειρξης σε ανήλικους. Από τους 2225 νεαρούς ισοβίτες που κρατούνται σήμερα σε αμερικάνικες φυλακές, το 16% είχε αδικοπραγήσει σε ηλικία 13-15 ετών, ενώ το 59% έχει καταδικαστεί σε ισόβια χωρίς δικαίωμα αναστολής, παρόλο που πρόκειται για την πρώτη εγκληματική τους πράξη. Στην ίδια έκθεση αναφέρεται ότι οι νεαροί μαύροι που είναι καταδικασμένοι σε αυτό το είδος ποινής είναι δεκαπλάσιοι από τους λευκούς.

Έχει γνώση το Συμβούλιο για αυτήν την επαίσχυντη νομική και πραγματική κατάσταση που ισχύει στις ΗΠΑ, και που παραβιάζει κάθε έννοια κράτους δικαίου; Έχει λάβει υπόψη τις συνέπειες της διαβίβασης πληροφοριών στις αρχές των ΗΠΑ, όταν η χώρα αυτή εφαρμόζει νόμους που παραβιάζουν κατάφωρα τα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα και εισάγουν βάναυσες διακρίσεις; Σκοπεύει να αναλάβει πρωτοβουλίες σε διεθνές επίπεδο για να καταδικαστούν τέτοιου είδους ενέργειες και να προστατευτούν τα δικαιώματα των παιδιών και η ανθρώπινη αξιοπρέπεια;

The Council is of course aware of these reports. The EU holds bi-annual human rights consultations with the United States. During those meetings, as well during meetings in the context of the United Nations and other relevant organisations, the EU regularly raises the ratification and application of international human rights standards, including the Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of Forms of Racial Discrimination The EU successfully submitted an amicus curiae letter to the US Supreme Court on the abolition of capital punishment for minors, following which on 1 March this year, the Court held that the execution of juvenile offenders is “cruel and unusual punishment” prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution.

Wie evaluiert der Rat die Entwicklung um die Ruhestandsregelung für Beamte der EU-Kommission, insbesondere, was den vorzeitigen Ruhestand betrifft? Sieht der Rat Anlass zur Sorge?

Trifft es zu, dass nach Anhang XIII Artikel 23 des Statuts der EU-Beamten Beamte bereits mit 50 Jahren in den Ruhestand gehen können, und würde der Rat aus heutiger Sicht wieder so eine Entscheidung zulassen?

The retirement measures to which the Honourable Member refers were introduced in the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities, which entered into force on 1 May 2004.

They form part of an in-depth reform of retirement arrangements for officials which, in particular, raised the minimum pensionable age from 60 to 63 and the minimum age for early retirement from 50 to 55. These decisions affect not only new officials but also, with transitional measures, those in service before the reform's entry into force.

The only officials who would benefit from transitional measures permitting them to retire at 50 would be those who were at least 45 years of age as of 1 May 2004. Moreover, the transitional measures also include financial disincentives for those choosing to retire before the age of 65.

The reform of the Staff Regulations was the most significant part of the EU's work to modernise the institutions under the last Commission. The compromise package agreed included many important elements, including the modernisation of the pay and allowances system as well as the overhaul of the pensions system.

Die Erde ist dem Klimawandel aufgrund natürlicher (Umlaufbahn, Vulkane) und exogener Faktoren (Meteoriten) ausgesetzt. Anthropogene Faktoren der letzten 2000 Jahre sind bislang nicht exakt quantifizierbar. Schätzungen aktueller Studien zufolge werden sämtliche Gegenmaßnahmen in den nächsten 100 Jahren eine Temperaturabsenkung von 0,1°C bewirken.

Stehen EU-Zwangsmaßnahmen zur Energieeinsparung (mit wirtschaftlichen Einbußen, Bürokratieaufwand) in einem angemessenen Verhältnis zu den real erreichbaren Temperatur-Senkungen?

Welche Umwelt- und Infrastrukturvorhaben sieht die Kommission vor, um die Menschheit auf die definitiv stattfindende Verschiebung der Klimazonen vorzubereiten?

Climate Change is happening. The overwhelming scientific consensus is that it is caused by emissions of greenhouse gases from human activities. This has been accepted and re-iterated by the European Union’s Heads of State and government, most recently at this year’s Spring Council meeting. The European Council acknowledged that climate change is likely to have major negative global environmental, economic and social implications. It confirmed that, with a view to achieving the ultimate objective of the United Nations (UN) Framework Convention on Climate Change, the global annual mean surface temperature increase should not exceed 2ºC above pre-industrial levels.

A first step to achieve this target is through the Kyoto Protocol. The EU is committed to meeting its Kyoto target through a series of cost-effective mitigation policies, such as the EU emissions trading scheme. The Commission has also recently put forward a Green Paper on Energy Efficiency which sets out a series of cost-effective options to significantly reduce the EU’s energy consumption. These policies will also have other important benefits, such as strengthening the security of the EU’s energy supply. Under the new phase of the European Climate Change Programme, the Commission will review progress and explore new actions to systematically exploit cost-effective emission reduction options.

The EU will maintain its leadership on climate change policy. However, in discussions on the future international climate change regime, the EU will call for broad international participation on the basis of common but differentiated responsibility, in order to ensure the efficiency of the regime.

The EU will also need to adapt to unavoidable climate change. Member States are already taking various initiatives. The Commission will explore the EU’s role in adaptation policies in view of the need to integrate adaptation fully into EU policy making under the new phase of the European Climate Change Programme, which started⁽¹⁾ with the ECCP stakeholder conference in Brussels.

Rendered animal tallow (animal fat) is included in the Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/EC⁽¹⁾ (WID), and after December this year it will have to be incinerated under very strict conditions. Currently it is used as a fuel in steam boilers in rendering plants and in the production of biodiesel. However, the conditions of the WID directive appear to preclude its use for these purposes. Is this not inconsistent with the Commission's environmental policy of encouraging competitive and efficient alternative energy sources?

The Commission can confirm that the Waste Incineration Directive⁽²⁾ is not intended to discourage uses of waste as competitive and efficient alternative energy sources, and agrees that it is desirable that it does not have such an effect. Indeed, it favours all uses of waste that can contribute to sustainable development. In this respect, the aim of the Directive is to prevent or to limit as far as practicable negative effects on the environment, in particular pollution by emissions into air, soil, surface water and ground water, and the resulting risks to human health, when waste is incinerated or co-incinerated.

The Directive will only apply to the burning of tallow if it takes place in an incineration or co-incineration plant, and the tallow is considered “waste” as defined under the Waste Framework Directive⁽³⁾. In practical cases, it is the competent authorities of the Member States that will assess on whether or not tallow is waste.

The Commission has recently received a number of representations suggesting that the costs of applying the Directive at rendering plants and slaughterhouses outweigh the benefits and will inhibit their use of tallow as a fuel. It is unfortunate that this issue has only been raised recently, and so close to the implementation deadline, even though the Directive was adopted by the Council and the Parliament five years ago, but nevertheless we must still deal with it. The Commission recognises that there is a problem in this respect, and that this issue needs to be further investigated. In this context, the Commission’s services have been instructed to undertake further analysis.

The Thematic Strategy on prevention and recycling of waste will contain measures to improve the implementation of the waste definition. This will address the issue of by-products and the specification of when particular wastes cease to be waste.

Η ορθή και καλύτερη εφαρμογή της νομοθεσίας για το περιβάλλον, τόσο σε παγκόσμιο όσο και ευρωπαϊκό επίπεδο, αποτελεί προτεραιότητα για την αποτελεσματική αντιμετώπιση των περιβαλλοντικών προκλήσεων. Δεδομένων του όγκου και της πολυδιάσπασης του ευρωπαϊκού περιβαλλοντικού κεκτημένου και της ανάγκης για όσο το δυνατόν σαφή και πλήρη γνώση και εφαρμογή του εκ μέρους των αρμοδίων αρχών των κρατών μελών αλλά και των ευρωπαίων πολιτών, το αίτημα για κωδικοποίηση της κείμενης ευρωπαϊκής νομοθεσίας για το περιβάλλον παρουσιάζεται περισσότερο επίκαιρο και επιτακτικό από ποτέ.

Ενόψει των ανωτέρω, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή αν και πότε προτίθεται να προβεί στην ενοποίηση, κωδικοποίηση και ανασύνταξη της υφιστάμενης νομοθεσίας προστασίας του περιβάλλοντος; Στοχεύει η Επιτροπή να βελτιώσει ποιοτικά και να απλοποιήσει τη σχετική νομοθεσία, αποφεύγοντας κάθε περιττή τεχνικότητα που την καθιστά δυσανάγνωστη, δύσχρηστη και ως εκ τούτου μερικώς αποτελεσματική;

Over the last 4 years, the EU has launched a broad strategy to improve the regulatory environment and thus provide a more effective, efficient and transparent regulatory system for the benefit of citizens and reinforce competitiveness, growth and sustainable development, contributing to the Lisbon’s objectives.

The Commission proposed in June 2002 a comprehensive Action Plan for ‘simplifying and improving the regulatory environment’⁽¹⁾ and in February 2003 presented an ambitious simplification programmedesigned to simplify and up-date the existing EU legislation, and reduce its volume⁽²⁾.

In March 2005, the Commission adopted a communication on “Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs⁽³⁾ as a contribution to re-launch the Lisbon strategy, announcing its intention to launch a new phase of its simplification programme by October 2005 building on sectoral approach and with extensive stakeholder involvement.

The Commission attaches great importance to proper and better implementation of environmental legislation. It has engaged in a continuous codification and consolidation programme, which includes, inter alia, Community environmental legislation. As of October 2005, codification is ongoing in respect of acts in fields such as water protection and nature conservation.

But, far beyond codification and what could be seen a looking backward approach, the Commission has, as already said, committed itself to improve the lawmaking process by assessing the impacts of new proposals, holding public consultations and ensuring that policy options are suitable for effective implementation on the ground; the Commission intends to develop further this new approach. This commitment finds its demonstration in particular in the preparation of seven thematic strategies for the environment, which will greatly contribute to modernising environmental policy and legislation. The first thematic strategy was adopted by the Commission on 21 September 2005 and concerns air quality. It will lead, inter alia, to five pieces of existing legislation being merged into one comprehensive ambient air quality Directive. The forthcoming thematic strategy on waste prevention and recycling will also entail, as a follow-up measure, the recast and repeal of four waste Directives. A similar exercise should also be undertaken in the coming years in the field of emissions from industrial installations. These initiatives should be part, among others, of the simplification rolling programme the Commission will adopt in principle on 25 October 2005.

Människor som lever vid Östersjön kan inte längre fiska på samma sätt som förut. I somras gick det inte ens att bada i Östersjön på grund av algblomning. Utfiskning och förorening av vatten är bara ett av de många miljöhot EU står inför. EU:s invånare ger i Eurobarometern uttryck för stora förväntningar på att EU ska föra en ambitiös miljöpolitik. Därför är det mycket oroande att kommissionens arbete med ny lagstiftning på miljöområdet har bromsats in.

– Varför har kommissionen inte klarat av att följa den tidsplan för bland annat de tematiska strategier som utlovats? När avser kommissionen att presentera de tematiska strategier, inklusive strategin för hållbar utveckling, som utlovats?

Our environment is endangered by very important threats and pressures. The Commission remains firmly committed to tackling and pursuing all three dimensions of Sustainable Development, including its environment component, in an integrated and balanced manner and in full compliance with the subsidiarity and proportionality principles. This is reflected in this year’s work programme.

The review of the Sustainable Development Strategy is ongoing and the Thematic Strategies called for in the 6th Environment Action Programme were all foreseen for adoption in the 2005 Commission Legislative and Work Programme. There has been no decision to remove them from the Work Programme or to deliberately delay their adoption.

Rather, given that the review of the Sustainable Development Strategy and the Thematic Strategies are important initiatives that include actions to be taken in many sectors (e.g. agriculture, industry) and concern directly EU citizens, the Commission wants to give them very careful consideration. For instance, the Commission held an orientation debate on the Thematic Strategies in July which showed general support for maintaining ambitious but realistic objectives for the environment. The review of the Sustainable Development Strategy has involved a step-wise approach with extensive stakeholder consultations in 2004 and 2005, a first Commission Communication in February 2005 about the main orientations of the review and adoption of a declaration on guiding principles by the European Council in June.

We are now in a final phase. The Commission adopted the first Thematic Strategy on Air pollution, on 21 September. The Marine Strategy is scheduled for adoption this month and will contribute to addressing some of the issues the Honourable Member is specifically concerned about.

Four Strategies will be adopted in November and December 2005. The remaining Pesticides Strategy will come in 2006 given that two substantial measures to be referred to in the Strategy the revision of Directive 91/414/EEC on placing pesticides on the market and the Eurostat proposal on pesticide statistics will not be ready in 2005. It makes sense to wait until these proposals are ready and present one single package of measures.

The revised Sustainable Development Strategy is scheduled for adoption by the Commission in December. The Commission looks forward to broad-based support from the Council and the Parliament, and endorsement by the Heads of States and Government at the June European Council.

Pergunta-se à Comissão quais as razões que sustentam a sua decisão de atrasar a apresentação, e consequente implementação, das Estratégias Temáticas em Matéria Ambiental, no âmbito do 6º Programa de Acção Ambiental. Dado o incumprimento dos prazos previstos pelo Programa Legislativo da Comissão Europeia, em 2005, em matéria de ambiente, para apresentação das referidas estratégias, para quando prevê a Comissão apresentar as suas propostas?

The Commission’s legislative and work programme foresees the adoption of all Thematic Strategies in 2005. There has been no decision to delay their adoption.

Rather, given that the Thematic Strategies are important initiatives that include actions to be taken in other sectors (e.g. agriculture, industry) the Commission held an orientation debate on them in July. This showed general support for maintaining ambitious objectives for the environment. The Commission therefore confirmed that it was necessary to bring forward the Thematic Strategies in 2005.

Current planning foresees the adoption of six of the seven Strategies in 2005. The Commission adopted the first, on Air pollution, on 21 September. The Marine Strategy is scheduled for adoption this month. The 5 remaining ones will be adopted in the last months of the year. The Pesticides Strategy will come in 2006 given that two substantial measures to be referred to in the Strategy the revision of Directive 91/414/EEC on placing pesticides on the market and the Eurostat proposal on pesticide statistics will not be ready this year.

Lors de la réunion du 19.9.2005 du Comité d'experts du Conseil, la France a mis à l'ordre du jour (document: ENV/05/11), un débat relatif à l'interprétation à donner à l'article 25 de la directive 2001/18/CE relatif à la confidentialité des données d'un dossier OGM. Par ailleurs, la Commission française d'accès aux documents administratifs a rendu, le 8 avril 2005, un avis qui précise que "seules peuvent être regardées comme protégées par l'obligation prévue à l'article 25 (...), les informations relatives au procédé d'obtention de l'OGM ou à sa commercialisation et dont la divulgation serait susceptible de nuire à la position concurrentielle de l'entreprise qui a sollicité l'autorisation.". La décision de la Cour de justice de Münster, le 20 juin 2005, d'obliger la Société Monsanto à publier son étude toxicologique "confidentielle" relative au maïs OGM MON 863, va dans le même sens. Nous estimons que les études toxicologiques et environnementales établies dans le cadre de l'évaluation des risques d'un OGM doivent être communiquées au public, en vertu de l'article 25, paragraphe 4 et de l'annexe II paragraphe C.2 de la directive 2001/18/CE⁽¹⁾.

La Commission européenne partage-t-elle notre avis? Si non, pour quelles raisons juridiques et politiques? Si oui, est-elle d'accord pour mettre immédiatement à disposition du Parlement européen et des citoyens les études toxicologiques et environnementales relatives à tous les OGM approuvés par l'Union et ceux qui sont en cours d'examen pour approbation au sein de l'Union?

Directive 2001/18/EC, on the deliberate release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) into the environment, stipulates that it is the competent authority of the Member State, not the Commission, which decides, after consultation with the notifier of the GM product, which information in the notification should be kept confidential. The Directive also specifies certain information which can in no case be kept confidential. Apart from this, the Member State competent authority is required to respect national legislation in this domain as well as to protect the competitive position of the notifier in its decisions on confidentiality.

There are currently differing opinions among Member States on whether the disclosure of documents such as toxicological studies could be harmful to the competitive position of a notifier and should therefore be treated as confidential. This is why France raised this question at the meeting on 19 September. It is important that Member States and the Commission exchange information on this issue so as to ensure consistency in decision-making. As a general principle, the Commission considers that it is preferable to be as transparent as possible and to limit confidentiality to aspects of the notification which represent a real risk to the competitive position of the notifier. It also considers that documents required for the analysis of a risk assessment should be made available to the public.

The Commission has asked the Member States to submit, in writing, the principles applied in practice in the Member States regarding confidentiality under Directive 2001/18/EC. There will then be a fuller discussion at the next meeting of the competent authorities, provisionally scheduled for 8 November 2005.

Ο Πηνειός ποταμός είναι ζωτικής σημασίας για τη διατήρηση και την ανάπτυξη του οικοσυστήματος της Θεσσαλίας. Σύμφωνα με τελευταίες μετρήσεις είναι από τους πλέον επιβαρημένους ποταμούς της Ευρώπης, με τις ανάλογες αρνητικές συνέπειες στο οικοσύστημα. Τα αίτια για την κατάσταση αυτή εντοπίζονται στην απόρριψη αποβλήτων από βιομηχανίες, σφαγεία, βαφεία κλπ, στη ρίψη σκουπιδιών από διάφορους δήμους καθώς και σε υπολείμματα φυτοφαρμάκων και λιπασμάτων.

Σκοπεύει η Επιτροπή να ενισχύσει μέτρα που θα εμποδίζουν την περαιτέρω ρύπανση του ποταμού και θα βοηθούν στην αποκατάσταση του οικοσυστήματος;

The Honourable Member’s question about the pollution of the River Pinios raises the issue of implementation of EU environmental legislation. There are already a number of instruments in Community environmental legislation which Member States can use to reduce the pollution of rivers and to improve the quality of associated ecosystems. For example, the Water Framework Directive requires Member States to achieve good quality of all waters by 2015. This demands that Member States take a step-by-step approach, which consists, firstly, in the analysis of pressures and impacts, secondly, in the identification and elaboration of the necessary measures to reach the good quality of all waters, and, finally, in the implementation of these measures. Equally, the implementation of a number of other Directives is expected to be relevant in this context. This is for example the case of the Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control, of the Nitrates Directive and of the Habitats Directive.

Appropriate EU legislative instruments, therefore, already exist in this area. The problems mentioned by the Honourable Member in his questions are due to a lack of correct implementation of the existing legislation.

In this context, the Commission is particularly worried that Greece is one of only two EU countries which have not yet delivered the crucial first step of the Water Framework Directive, the environmental assessment of pressures and impacts under this Directive.

Consequently, the Commission has commenced a legal procedure against Greece for not complying with the relevant provisions of the Directive. A few days ago, on 18 October 2005, the Commission has sent final warnings to Greece – as well as to Italy and Spain – for not complying with basic provisions under the EU Water Framework Directive. The timely designation of their river basin districts, which should have been done already in June 2004, is one of the important building blocs needed to achieve good quality of all water resources.

These legal steps are complementary to already ongoing scrutiny of the implementation of the Directive on Nitrates Pollution from Agricultural Sources and the Habitats Directive. In relation to this latter, the Commission refers for more detail to its response to written question E-1700/05 by Mr Dimitrios Papadimoulis.

At the same time, the Commission would like to recall the comprehensive funding instruments that are available for water protection and to assist in implementation of the Community acquis when the funding conditions are met. This is particularly the case for the Cohesion Fund Regulation and the Rural Development Regulation under the new Common Agricultural Policy.

Vid det nyligen avslutade FN-toppmötet i New York beslutades på initiativ av ett antal kvinnliga utrikesministrar att skapa en fredsförebyggande kommission för att bistå länder att hantera övergången från konflikt till hållbar fred. Erfarenhet visar att kvinnors engagemang i fredsförebyggande arbete är oerhört viktigt. Hur kommer kommissionen att agera för att europeiska kvinnor och representanter för kvinnoorganisationer från EU-länderna blir delaktiga i detta?

The establishment of the Peacebuilding Commission is one of the centrepieces of the decisions taken by the more than 170 Heads of State and Government who gathered in New York for the United Nations (UN) Summit this September.

This should become operational already by the end of this year. This is good – the Peacebuilding Commission fills a current gap in the UN system. It should allow the international community to respond to the needs of countries emerging from a conflict in a more effective and coordinated way, and ensure a better transition from immediate post-conflict assistance to the development of strategies for a peaceful and sustainable development in the longer term.

As Europeans we can bring leadership and expertise to the Peacebuilding Commission, based on our longstanding experience of peacebuilding all over the world.

In relation to the Distinguished Member’s question, the Commission would in this context like to underline that it fully agrees on the importance of the involvement of both women and men in peacebuilding. We need to ensure the involvement not only of European women and organisations in the process, but also, and this is particularly important, the women of the country struggling to rebuild after a conflict.

Gender equality is a fundamental principle of the EU’s foreign and security policy and external relations. The EU is in this context fully committed to implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1325 of October 2000 concerning women, peace and security. This was underlined by the Council earlier this year (GAERC February). It can be noted that several Council bodies are in fact right now working on specific recommendations on how to implement this Resolution in concrete terms within the European Security and Defence Policy.

What role does the Commission see for Parliament in the area of foreign policy?

The Commission attaches great importance to Parliament’s contribution to shaping the Union’s foreign policy. Together with other RELEX Commissioners, the Commissioner in charge of External Relations made this clear during the confirmation hearings of this Commission and the Commission values the constructive two-way exchanges with Parliament on this important policy area.

The Parliament’s formal role in the Common Foreign and Security Policy/European Security and Defence Policy is defined by the limits of the Treaties. But in practical terms the Parliament has made full use of its consultative and supervisory opportunities.

The Commission sees foreign policy in a broader sense covering the full range of external actions of the European Union including development policy and trade policy. Other first pillar policies, such as the environment, energy, research and transport, also all have an important external dimension, and the Parliament exercises important powers as co-legislator and as one arm of the budgetary authority. Besides this, the Commission is attentive to the need for Parliament’s assent to the accession of new Member States and the conclusion of certain international agreements. Indeed, in the revised Framework Agreement between our two institutions, the Commission has renewed and even heightened its commitment to keeping the Parliament informed about the negotiations for and conclusion of international agreements.

The Commission sees the Parliament as a valuable player in projecting European values around the world. This it does by means of its work in the Election Observation Missions, where this Commission has been happy to continue the tradition of appointing Members of Parliament as Chief Observers; by means of the continuing dialogue with parliaments around the world carried on in the inter-parliamentary delegations, and participation of Members of the Parliament as observers at international conferences such as the recent United Nations summit in New York where, as stated on an earlier occasion, the Commission very much appreciated the contribution of the Parliament delegation.

In conclusion, the Commission sees a very important role for the Parliament in foreign policy and external relations and it continues to consider a good working relationship with the Parliament and its committees as vital for the conduct of a strong and efficient European foreign policy.

Depois da decisão do Grupo de Trabalho da ONU sobre os cinco cidadãos cubanos detidos nos EUA, em 27/5/2005, que considerou que "o julgamento não se realizou num clima de objectividade e imparcialidade", o Tribunal de Recurso do 11º Círculo de Atlanta, dos EUA, no passado dia 9 de Agosto, decidiu, unanimemente, anular o julgamento de Miami e, portanto, revogar as condenações dos cinco, ordenando um novo julgamento.

No entanto, até ao momento, os cinco cidadãos (António Guerrero, Fernando Gonzalez, Gerardo Hernández, Ramon Sabañino e René González) permanecem presos e continuam a ser negados os vistos às esposas de René e de Gerardo pela Administração dos EUA, impedindo-as de visitar os maridos.

Não considera a Comissão que, nesta situação, a Administração dos EUA devia libertar de imediato os cinco cidadãos, presos há cerca de sete anos, depois de o Tribunal de Atlanta ter anulado o julgamento que os condenou?

Não considera inadmissível que as esposas de René González e de Gerardo Hernández sejam impedidas de visitar os seus maridos?

The Commission is aware of the case from press reporting.

However, it sees no legal or other basis on which it could offer an opinion either on the legal proceedings to which the five individuals are subject, or on conditions relating to prison visits in this case.

Although the European Union strictly respects human rights, foreign aid continues to be given to countries that repeatedly ignore international standards such as those laid down in the Geneva Convention. Although foreign aid is sometimes directed towards specific projects such as housing for refugees and the provision of food to the needy, and given that the poorest countries in the world often suffer from high levels of corruption, how does the Commission ensure that public funds help in the protection and promotion of human rights throughout the world?

Respect for Human rights is an essential element in all the association and partnership agreements between the EU and third countries. Human Rights are equally a very important topic in the global and joint action plans we have set up with our partner countries in the framework of the European Neighbourhood Policy which has introduced an element of conditionality. With some countries, as for example with Tunisia, we have set up through the Neighbourhood Action Plan a human rights subcommittee where the implementation of commitments will be assessed and monitored.

Generally speaking, mechanisms of consultation and of political dialogue are set out in all these agreements with third countries. Serious violations of human rights and democratic principles have led in some cases to suspension or restriction of cooperation between the EU and the country concerned, for instance for Zimbabwe and Burma, where EC cooperation with the government has been suspended and only social programmes directly benefiting the populations continue to be funded.

Corruption is also part of the policy dialogue with third countries. For instance, in the Cotonou Partnership Agreement between the EU and ACP⁽¹⁾ countries, specific provisions under articles 9 and 97 are made for consultations between partners for serious corruption cases which can lead to appropriate measures, suspension of cooperation being the last resort. The fight against corruption is an issue considered in the preparation and the implementation of all EC development cooperation programmes. A standard clause for the fight against fraud and corruption is included in all the models of the financing agreements concluded by the Commission with beneficiary countries.

In accordance with the EC Development policy, good governance (and hence the protection of Human Rights) is considered as a cross cutting theme and is therefore systematically taken into account while designing and implementing the Commission's cooperation programmes.

Support to Human Rights and Democratisation is a priority area of EU cooperation with third countries. For the period 2000 to 2005, more than € 1 billion has been allocated by the Commission for programmes in developing countries and countries in transition providing technical and financial assistance in the following fields: Democratisation, Human Rights, Rule of Law, Elections, Support to Parliaments, Support to the Judiciary and good Governance.

Dans le cadre du Processus de Barcelone, dont le dixième anniversaire sera célébré en novembre de l'année en cours, il est prévu de mettre en œuvre à compter de 2007 six instruments pour les relations extérieures de l'UE, dont un instrument européen de voisinage et de partenariat. Certes une rationalisation des actuels instruments était nécessaire, mais l'instrument tel que proposé par la Commission, qui est destiné à un groupe de pays hétérogènes et membres de partenariats divers, pourra-t-il réellement être efficace? En effet, comment la Commission compte-t-elle répondre aux besoins spécifiques des pays partenaires méditerranéens dont les difficultés économiques et les enjeux démographiques ne sont plus à démontrer? Comment parviendra-t-elle à maintenir des financements adéquats pour la lutte contre la pauvreté dans l'instrument? En effet, certains pays concernés par l'instrument de voisinage sont également des pays en développement, qui ne seront donc plus éligibles au nouvel instrument de financement de la coopération au développement européen et de la coopération économique. Plus précisément, cet instrument mentionnera-t-il l'aide nécessaire à apporter à ces pays pour atteindre les Objectifs du Millénaire? Comment la Commission compte-t-elle concrètement intégrer ces objectifs dans l'instrument?

Through the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) the EU aims at promoting an area of stability, prosperity and friendly neighbourhood involving both our Eastern and Southern Neighbours.

The ENP works on the basis of bilateral Action Plans that identify priorities for action. Action Plans are jointly agreed with each partner, and keyed to its particular needs and capacities.

The European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), which should be operational from 2007 and replace both Co-operation Instrument financing assistance to Southern Mediterranean Countries (MEDA) and Technical Assistance to the Community of Independent States (Tacis), is a policy driven instrument, specifically conceived to support the ENP and the implementation of the ENP Action Plans.

Experience shows that linking more closely assistance and policy increases ownership and impact.

Many neighbouring countries are developing countries (not only across the Mediterranean). Thus ENPI has sustainable development and poverty reduction among its explicit objectives.

“Poverty reduction” and other Millennium Development Goals (MDG) objectives are Action Plan priorities. They will be part of our policy dialogue and supported with community assistance.

The specific needs and circumstances of each country, already reflected in ENP Action Plans where these have been adopted, will also be fully taken into account in our country programming.

Under ENPI the Commission has proposed a substantial increase in the assistance budget for neighbouring countries, and we count on the support of the Parliament in achieving this.

Prieš dvi savaites Kaliningrado srityje įvyko Europos Sąjungos ir Rusijos parlamentinio bendradarbiavimo komiteto susitikimas. Europos Parlamento nariai galėjo susipažinti su Kaliningrado sritimi ir jos problemomis. Susidaro įspūdis, kad atsiveria daugiau galimybių Europos Sąjungos ir šios Rusijos Federacijos srities bendradarbiavimui. Rusijos Dūma artimiausiu metu priims įstatymą dėl specialios ekonominės zonos Kaliningrado srityje, kuris turėtų plačiau atverti vartus investuotojams iš ES; srities gubernatoriumi tapo įtakingas Rusijos Federacijos politikas G. Boosas; Rusija pradėjo noriai kalbėti apie Europos Sąjungos ir Rusijos bendradarbiavimo "bandomąjį projektą" šioje srityje.

Kaip Europos Sąjungos Komisija numato pasinaudoti naujomis aplinkybėmis tam, kad Europos Sąjungos bendradarbiavimas su šia sritimi taptų pavyzdiniu visai Rusijai, kad šios srities gyventojai galėtų lengviau išvažiuoti į kaimynines ir kitas Europos Sąjungos šalis? Ar po to, kai Lietuva ir Lenkija prisijungs prie Šengeno susitarimo, bus išlaikytos nemokamos vizos šių šalių piliečiams įvažiuoti į Kaliningrado sritį ir kaliningradiečiams - į minėtas valstybes?

The Commission continues to be interested to cooperate with Russia to further promote development of Kaliningrad for the benefit of the whole Baltic region. Significant efforts have been made, including with regard to assistance. The Commission is happy to note that recent economic and trade indicators show that Kaliningrad is developing fast. Kaliningrad is making good use of the economic opportunities created by the EU enlargement.

Kaliningrad is a unique region, which deserves and gets exceptional attention from the EU. It is easy to agree that Kaliningrad should become an example of successful EU-Russia cooperation. But, it is difficult to see how it could become a ‘pilot project’ of EU-Russia cooperation. Development of regional legislation must be in line with the legislation of the Russian Federation. Tax benefits granted to Kaliningrad can hardly be made a general practice in Russia. And extension of similar amounts of EU-assistance to other regions of Russia would be financially impossible.

With regard to movement of people, the recently initialled Agreement on visa facilitation will ensure easier travel and contacts of people between the EU and Russia through a number of simplified procedures for issuing short-term visas. After the entry into force of the Agreement, its provisions are applicable to Kaliningrad residents, Lithuania and Poland, including after the accession of Lithuania and Poland into the Schengen agreement.

Estos últimos días han tenido lugar una serie de hechos importantes en relación con la situación del Sáhara Occidental y que, desde la perspectiva de la UE, deberían entenderse como una nueva oportunidad para desbloquear definitivamente el contencioso que en relación con esta región viven las autoridades de Marruecos y el Frente Polisario. Teniendo en cuenta, por un lado, la liberación de los presos marroquíes retenidos hasta entonces en los campamentos saharaouis en Argelia, y, por otro, la delicada situación que viven los presos saharaouis en las prisiones marroquíes de El Aaiún,

¿Piensa instar la Comisión a las autoridades marroquíes a que liberen a los presos políticos saharaouis retenidos en El Aaiún? ¿Piensa adoptar la Comisión alguna medida de presión en el caso de que Marruecos no acepte llevar a cabo tal liberación?

La Commission a suivi de très près les événements survenus les derniers mois au Sahara Occidental. La Commission a aussi participé activement aux discussions au sein du Conseil qui ont amené à plusieurs démarches de haut niveau auprès de toutes les parties. La Commission ne dispose pas, pour ce type d’aspects politiques, d’autre cadre juridique que celui des démarches de l’Union Européenne et, dans ce contexte, elle maintiendra son appui à une solution respectueuse des droits de l’homme.

La Commission, dans l’attente que tous les efforts déployés par les différents intervenants puissent faire évoluer rapidement et en sens positif la question en objet, maintient néanmoins une position ouverte quant à l’insertion de la question dans l’agenda du prochain Conseil d’Association et ceci en fonction des éventuelles discussions au sein du groupe de travail Maghreb-Mashrek du Conseil.

As the Commission knows, Russia is refusing to sign border agreements regarding the EU`s external border in two EU Member States: Latvia and Estonia.

It is clear that the signing of the border treaties between these countries and Russia is an imperative for the EU since they are the EU's most easterly external borders. In order to avoid a situation where different EU regions enjoy varying security levels, particularly cross-border security, this issue requires the specific attention of the EU, and it should be included in the EU-Russia dialogue, especially when EU-Russia negotiations on visa facilitation and re-admission are going on.

I and my colleagues in Parliament were surprised and disappointed to hear from Council and Commission officials (e.g. Mrs Ferrero-Waldner and Mr Solana) that the issue of the Latvian-Russian and Estonian-Russian border agreements are bilateral issues.

Does the Commission consider that this issue is bilateral and must be dealt with by the national governments of Latvia and Estonia? What are the Commission's plans and suggestions regarding the future action required for the conclusion of the Latvian-Russian and Estonian-Russian border agreements?

There is a clear EU interest in promoting the early signature and ratification of the Latvian-Russian and Estonian-Russian border agreements since they concern the external borders of the EU. For this reason signature and ratification of these agreements are a priority of the road map of the EU/Russia Common Space on Freedom, Security and Justice, agreed at the EU/Russia summit on 10 May 2005. The issue was most recently raised by Vice-President of the Commission in charge of Justice, Liberty and Security and by the Presidency at the meeting of the EU/Russia Permanent Partnership Council on Justice and Home Affairs on 13 October. They clearly spelled out the EU's position that legal certainty of the borders is a precondition for a stable EU-Russia relationship and for improved cooperation at the common border. The Commissioner in charge of External Relations personally raised the matter at a meeting with the Russian Ambassador on 14 October and urged the need for a flexible and pragmatic solution. The Commission will take all opportunities to encourage the early resolution of this issue.

On 4 December 2005, presidential elections are to be held in Kazakhstan. The President, N. Nazarbayev, has confirmed Kazakhstan's determination to seek the chairmanship of the OSCE in 2009. The forthcoming elections should be a litmus test for this country's determination to seek and long-term goal of securing the chairmanship of the OSCE.

Is the European Commission following the developments in Kazakhstan in the field of human rights and fundamental freedoms as well as freedom of the media? Is the Commission monitoring recent developments in Kazakhstan during the election campaign? What is the Commission's opinion about the law on political parties in Kazakhstan? Is it in conformity with international democratic standards?

Issues of human rights and democratisation are regularly raised under our political dialogue on the occasion of the annual meetings of the EU-Kazakhstan Co-operation Council in the framework of the Partnership and

Co-operation Agreement and, in the Sub-committee on Justice and Home Affairs.

Kazakhstan’s progress in democratisation and protection of human rights is significantly slower than its progress in establishing a market economy.

Particularly worrisome issues are the excessive accumulation of powers in the person of the President and the institutional system of the country, the strong dependence of the judiciary on the executive, excessive control over the civil society by the security services and systemic corruption.

However, some positive aspects should be also mentioned, notably the introduction of an open-ended moratorium on the death penalty and the establishment of an Ombudsman. The Commission, amongst other things, is urging the complete abolition of the death penalty and the strengthening of the Ombudsman.

The Commission is monitoring with concern recent developments during the election campaign through the Commission Delegation in Almaty and is aware of a number of developments currently taking place in Kazakhstan.

The media situation is worsening with the closure of several newspapers following doubtful Court decisions, forcible removal from circulation of regularly registered newspapers, and pressure on private dealers and media distributors.

Political freedom is deteriorating with repeated detentions of representatives of the democratic opposition, dispersals of peaceful demonstrations, a case of arson attack against a local office of Mr Tuyakbai, the opposition candidate for President, and use of official resources to obstruct opposition parties in disseminating their campaign materials and ideas.

A number of control visits to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and opposition movements’ premises by law-enforcement bodies have been reported. Wide-ranging pressures on State employees and students to induce them to vote for the President in office have been independently confirmed.

The Commission has on several occasions underlined that only free and fair elections in line with the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) commitments would give a real chance to Kazakhstan for its bid to chair the OSCE in 2009. It is only this basis that the EU should consider its support for the Kazakhstan’s bid for the OSCE Chairmanship in 2009.

The Commission would like to draw the attention of the Parliament, and specifically of the Honourable Members who will monitor the elections, to the key issue concerning Kazakhstan Presidential elections. An electronic voting system is expected to be introduced in up to 20% of polling stations around the country which could involve up to 35% of voters. The system lacks manual audit capabilities, does not provide a paper trail, and provides widespread opportunities for abuse. Moreover, the prevalent opinion is that the system violates the secrecy of the vote. There is a need to tackle the question of acceptable international election control/verification standards and to satisfactory agreed norms in this respect.

The Commission is very well aware of the Law on Political Parties adopted in Kazakhstan in July 2002. This law, amongst other things, raised the threshold for minimum party membership from 3.000 to 50.000. It should be noted that the population in Kazakhstan is about 15 million people. This law still represents a threat to political pluralism and is still a hindrance to the full development of political parties.

The Commission supported the OSCE/ODIHR (Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights), that gave its expert opinion of the new Law On Political Parties concluding that the new registration procedures impose a “substantial restriction on the freedom of association and on the rights of citizens to establish political parties” and consequently “restrict the participation of citizens in political and democratic processes”.

However it should also be noted that it is exactly this Law that obliged the opposition to gather its forces. The unified opposition block “For a Just Kazakhstan” put forward a single presidential candidate as a result of this Law.

Contacten met beleidsverantwoordelijken en politieke leiders in Kosova en kennisneming van analyses van eminente waarnemers van de Kosovaarse situatie hebben me duidelijk gemaakt dat een definitief statuut voor Kosova hoogdringend is. Om de penibele sociaal-economische toestand met een werkloosheidsgraad van 70% te keren kan enkel een statuut de onontbeerlijke hefboom voor economische opleving bezorgen. De jonge Kosovaarse instellingen hebben geen reële beslissingsmacht inzake begroting en belastingen, wat de essentie van het democratisch proces is. Instellingen moeten gebonden zijn aan een statuut. De beste standaard voor een staat is een statuut. Standaarden en statuut moeten hand in hand gaan. De stabiliteit van de Zuidoost-Europese regio komt in gevaar bij een mislukking. De jongste verkiezingen in Kosova toonden de massale wil tot onafhankelijkheid.

Om al deze redenen mijn vraag: welke initiatieven zal de Commissie nemen om Kosova snel voorwaardelijke onafhankelijkheid te verlenen, zoals ook het EP aanbeveelt?

The ultimate responsibility in decision-making to facilitate the political process designed to determine Kosovo’s future status is in the hands of the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General, in accordance with the orientations of UN Security Council resolution 1244.

Six years after the adoption of this resolution, the Commission is very pleased of the recent recommendation (7 October) by the UN Secretary-General that talks on Kosovo's future go ahead. It is now confident that the Security Council will endorse this decision so that the process can be launched before the end of this year.

The Commission has made the United Nations aware that there is a common objective in all the Western Balkans, including Kosovo, to become members of the European Union family. It expects that the future status of Kosovo will contribute to the long-term sustainable stability of Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro and of the whole region in its approximation towards the EU.

The Commission has also made clear to all the countries of this region, including Serbia and Montenegro (via an explicit reference in the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) Feasibility Report) that it expects they will work closely and constructively together to fulfil their European perspective.

Until the resolution of its final status is reached, the Commission is making all efforts to keep Kosovo firmly anchored in the Stabilisation and Association process (SAP).

It is making sure that our political and financial instruments⁽¹⁾ are consistent and mutually reinforcing with the implementation of the Kosovo Standards with a long term EU approximation optic, to counterbalance the perception that once the status talks start, standards will no longer be necessary.

The Commission is also ready to play its part in the contribution of the European Union to the efforts of the international community in supporting the UN Special Envoy for the status talks and in implementing any post-UNSC Resolution 1244. It supports the idea of a streamlined international presence, handing over as much responsibility as possible to local authorities which should be our direct interlocutors in the future.

On Tuesday September 13, 2005 the Guardian newspaper reported that a Chinese cosmetics company is using skin harvested from the corpses of executed convicts to develop beauty products for sale in Europe. Agents for the firm have told would-be customers it is developing collagen for lip and wrinkle treatments from skin taken from prisoners after they have been shot. The agents say some of the company's products have been exported to the UK (and most likely to other EU states), and that the use of skin from condemned convicts is 'traditional' and nothing to 'make such a big fuss about'. Doctors and politicians say the discovery highlights the dangers faced by the increasing numbers seeking to improve their looks. Apart from the ethical concerns, there is also the potential risk of infection. In the light of these shocking revelations what plans does the Commission have to bring forward European regulations to control cosmetic treatments such as collagen and to put a stop to this outrageous trade?

The Commission is appalled by the information put forward by the Honourable Member, concerning the fact that skin harvested from the corpses of executed convicts may be used to develop beauty products for sale in Europe.

First of all human collagen for lip and wrinkle treatment is not considered as a cosmetic product under Community legislation. The Commission would like to note also that in any case, because of the risk of transmission of communicable diseases, the EU law prohibits the use of human cells, tissues and products of human origin in cosmetic products.

Therefore, those products fall under the scope of the Tissues and Cells Directive.

This directive was adopted by the European Union in March last year and establishes the quality and safety requirements for human tissues and cells. This Directive does not allow practices such as those described in the media in relation to obtaining collagen for beauty products.

The Directive (2004/23/EC) ensures that the increasing number of patients in Europe, who are treated with human tissues and cells, can trust that these substances are safe and also of good quality.

The Tissues and Cells Directive includes provisions on standards, among other things, for the donation of human tissues and cells. It also deals with the requirements for the authorisation of their procurement and the authorisation of the tissue establishments that undertake activities covered by the Directive.

The Directive also incorporates a provision to regulate import of tissues and cells from third countries. The Directive states clearly that Member States shall take all necessary measures to ensure that all imports of tissues and cells from third countries are undertaken by tissue establishments authorised for that purpose. Member States and tissue establishments, which receive such imports, shall ensure that they meet standards of quality and safety equivalent to the ones laid down in the Directive.

The Directive also states as a matter of principle that tissue and cell application programmes should be founded on the philosophy of voluntary and unpaid donation, altruism of the donor and solidarity between donor and recipient. Article 13 states that “The procurement of human tissues or cells shall be authorised only after all mandatory consent or authorisation requirements in force in the Member State concerned have been met” .

The Directive has to be transposed into national law by no later than 7th April 2006.

Once in force, the Directive will explicitly respond to the concerns expressed in the Parliamentary question.

However, Member States cannot escape their responsibility that the key elements, in particular those of the ethical nature, of the Directive are enforced already today.

The Commission would like to assure the Honourable Member that it will examine further the information provided.

The EU’s Comprehensive Negotiating Proposal to the WTO stresses the importance of ensuring that trade liberalisation does not undermine EU efforts to improve the welfare of animals. Will the Commission therefore make animal welfare one of the criteria for identifying Europe’s sensitive products that need to be protected in the context of such liberalisation?

The recent Eurobarometer survey on farm animal welfare reports that across the EU more people are concerned about the welfare of chickens than of any other species, and the EU’s Directive on Laying Hens (1999/74/ΕC)⁽¹⁾ makes major progress in addressing that. This progress is threatened by imports of dried and liquid egg products from hens kept in worse conditions abroad. Will the Commission list egg products as sensitive products in the WTO negotiations for the Agreement on Agriculture?

In his question the Honourable Member request that animal welfare should be a relevant criterion for the selection of sensitive products in the framework of the ongoing Doha trade negotiations on agriculture.

Sensitive products are a concept introduced by the Framework Agreement agreed on 1 August 2004 which provides for a different treatment for sensitive products than for non-sensitive products but contains no specific reference to animal welfare. Whether treatment as sensitive is better for the specific products the Honourable Member refers to depends on the modalities which remain to be agreed upon in Geneva.

Nevertheless, as far as the progress in the Doha negotiations is concerned, the Commission can assure the Honourable Member that it is fully committed to a balanced deal across all the three agricultural negotiating pillars, taking into consideration non-trade concerns in December this year at the Hong Kong Ministerial Meeting. As the Honourable Member knows, here is still considerable work to be done to finally come to a full modalities agreement in Hong Kong, including the number and the nature of sensitive products, a issue which is of high importance for the EU.

Handeln idag har ofta procentuella påslag på sina varor. Detta ger dåliga konkurrensfördelar för varor inom samma varugrupp med högt inköpspris. Det blir således svårt att konkurrera med varor av högre kvalitet. Ett påslag i ”kronor/euro etc” skulle ge bättre och jämnare konkurrensförutsättningar. Ett exempel:

Konventionellt odlade tomater kostade förra veckan 8 kr i inköpspris; ekologiska tomater hade ett inköpspris på 14 kr. En procentuell ökning på 100 % ger ett pris på 16 kr respektive 28 kr i handeln. Prisskillnaden ökar från 6 till 12 kr kilot mellan tomaterna. Hanteringskostnaden är ungefär densamma så detta motiverar ej större påslag, utan endast momsen borde ha den effekten.

Finns det möjligheter för ekologiska odlare att hävda att detta är konkurrenshämmande och strider mot lagstiftningen då de missgynnas på bekostnad av konventionella odlare?

Finns det möjligheter att göra uppgörelser mellan odlare och handlare i ett land om fasta istället för procentuella påslag per varugrupp, utan att detta skulle strida mot några konkurrensregler?

The Honourable Member is concerned about the allegedly fixed mark-ups that retail stores practice on agricultural products. He cites cases where the retail stores practice results in higher mark-ups (in absolute terms, e.g. in Euros) on organic products. He asks if such higher mark-ups are against competition rules and if the agricultural producers and retailers of a country could under competition rules enter agreements to fix mark-ups in Euros/crowns per product group.

Community competition rules do not prevent individual retail stores to set their mark-ups as they wish.

In the case at hand higher mark-ups for organic products may reflect the high demand for such products rather than an attempt to discriminate against them.

There are no Community provisions imposing same mark-ups for conventional and organic products, neither in per cent nor in certain amounts of money.

Article 81 (1) (a) of the Treaty prohibits fixing directly or indirectly purchase or selling prices or any other trading condition. Therefore any price fixing between private parties may constitute a violation of Community law, if such price fixing affects the trade between the Member States.

Without knowing the details of the case and the products involved it is impossible to say whether certain agreements between private parties on prices constitute price fixing prohibited by Article 81 (1) or a violation of the applicable Common Market Organisation.

La hausse du prix du pétrole, la lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique, l’incendie du tunnel du Fréjus, la sécurité routière, les coûts induits par la dégradation des infrastructures due aux transports routiers sont autant de facteurs qui militent aujourd’hui pour qu'une priorité absolue soit accordée au développement du fret ferroviaire, en vue de combattre l’engorgement des routes.

Or, la réactualisation du Livre blanc des transports, de 2001, commence sous de très mauvais augures. Non seulement les grands projets d’infrastructures ferroviaires sont au point mort faute de financement, mais de plus, le 12 juillet, M. Barrot a participé à une réunion du lobby patronal routier qui privilégiait ouvertement, dans la perspective d’une révision du Livre blanc, la route au détriment du rail.

M. Barrot aurait ainsi déclaré, lors de cette réunion, qu’il serait « plus vigilant sur la pertinence des investissements ferroviaires », et qu’il ne serait pas hostile à ce que les nouveaux États membres investissent dans des autoroutes, tout en indiquant que la tarification des péages pour les camions de plus de 3,5 tonnes devait être très raisonnable.

La Commission va-t-elle enfin réellement impulser une politique volontariste de développement du fret ferroviaire, basée sur une coopération entre les grandes entreprises européennes de service public du chemin de fer?

La Commission travaille actuellement à la révision du Livre blanc prévue pour le début 2006, ce qui implique un large processus de consultation auquel prendront part tous les secteurs et tous les acteurs concernés.

Cette consultation ne remet aucunement en cause les objectifs du Livre blanc et l’engagement politique de la Commission de contribuer au développement du rail. L’approbation des premier et deuxième paquets ferroviaires témoigne des progrès réalisés. La Commission reste impliquée dans l’adoption du 3ème Paquet. Sans anticiper les résultats de la révision à mi-parcours, deux pistes de réflexion nous semblent fondamentales :

d’une part, améliorer les infrastructures, notamment dans le domaine ferroviaire. Il faut rappeler que 22 des 30 projets prioritaires des réseaux transeuropéens concernent le rail, soit 80% des investissements. La Commission a démontré sa politique volontariste proposant dans les perspectives financières 2007-2013 le budget communautaire requis pour un effet de levier suffisant. C’est au Conseil et au Parlement de décider. Sans attendre, le Vice-président de la Commission en charge des transports a nommé dès juillet des coordonnateurs pour faire avancer 5 projets concrets particulièrement compliqués et promouvoir l’interopérabilité grâce à ERTMS⁽¹⁾. A ce sujet, le Vice-président, après la communication du 4 juillet qui met à plat les enjeux de l’interopérabilité pour le développement du rail, s’est personnellement déplacé pour l’inauguration de la première liaison ERTMS transfrontalière (Vienne/Budapest) ;

d’autre part, une utilisation plus optimale des infrastructures existantes. A cet égard, il faut à rappeler que, dans de nombreux pays, il existe aujourd’hui une concurrence effective. Ainsi, au Royaume Uni et en Allemagne où le marché est ouvert depuis 1995, la croissance du fret ferroviaire, a été respectivement de +60% et de +40% entre 1995 et 2004.

En ce qui concerne les nouveaux Etats membres, ceux-ci ont des besoins spécifiques que la Commission ne peut pas ignorer, et il convient d’améliorer les infrastructures ferroviaires tout en veillant parfois aussi à l’amélioration des infrastructures routières, notamment, dans un souci de sécurité : la protection des citoyens et des travailleurs ne doit pas être limitée à un seul mode de transport.

Indépendamment de la révision du Livre blanc, encourager le développement du fret ferroviaire en Europe continuera d’être une priorité de la Commission qui prévoit à cet égard en 2006 une communication sur le développement de corridors dédiés au fret ferroviaire.

Οι αρχηγοί των κρατών μελών της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, στα πλαίσια του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου της 16ης και 17ης Ιουνίου 2005, αποφάσισαν να εγκαινιάσουν μια περίοδο περισυλλογής στο ζήτημα της επικύρωσης της Συνταγματικής Συνθήκης. Στη σχετική δήλωση αναφέρεται ότι στην ευρεία και εντατική συζήτηση που θα γίνει γύρω από το θέμα αυτό, όλα τα Ευρωπαϊκά Όργανα θα παράσχουν τη συμβολή τους με την Επιτροπή να διαδραματίζει σ´ αυτή ιδιαίτερο ρόλο.

Προτίθεται η Επιτροπή να πληροφορήσει το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο για τις ενέργειες που έκαμε σ´ αυτούς τους τρεις μήνες ή που προγραμματίζει να κάμει κατά την περίοδο περισυλλογής που λήγει ουσιαστικά το πρώτο εξάμηνο του 2006, προς συμμόρφωση με την πιο πάνω δήλωση του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου;

La Commission a pris bonne note de la déclaration adoptée le 18 juin 2005 par les chefs d’Etat ou de Gouvernement des Etats membres de l’Union européenne au sujet de la ratification du Traité établissant une Constitution pour l’Europe. Comme le Président de la Commission a eu l’occasion de l’indiquer devant le Parlement le 27 septembre 2005, dans les circonstances actuelles, la Commission est favorable à une réflexion approfondie sur l’avenir du projet européen et est prête à jouer le rôle spécifique que l’on attend d’elle pendant cette période.

La Commission a récemment présenté sa contribution à la période de réflexion sous la forme d’une communication destinée au Conseil, au Parlement et aux autres institutions et organes de l’Union ; cette contribution prend la forme d’un plan D pour « dialogue, débats et démocratie ». Elle contient une série de mesures destinées à assister les débats nationaux dont l’organisation relève en premier lieu de chaque Etat membre. Elle liste ensuite une série d’actions à prendre au niveau communautaire par la Commission telles que des visites de groupes de commissaires dans les Etats membres, l’organisation de tables rondes pour la démocratie, le soutien aux panels européens de citoyens, etc. Dans toute la mesure du possible, la Commission souhaite que ces initiatives soient prises conjointement avec les autres institutions, et en premier lieu le Parlement.

Is the Commission aware of the allegation that the European Football Club is being used for money-laundering?

If the Commission is not aware of this issue, does it intend to contact UEFA about it?

If the Commission is aware of this allegation, what steps is it taking to investigate the allegation?

Le sport professionnel, du fait de son attrait pour de larges franges de la population, est l’enjeu d’intérêts financiers de plus en plus importants liés notamment à la publicité autour des compétitions et des droits de retransmission télévisuels. Cette tendance est particulièrement perceptible dans le cas du football, où les clubs les plus connus tendent à devenir de véritables entreprises introduites et cotées sur les marchés financiers. En outre, certains matchs sont utilisés comme support pour des paris, ce qui accentue les enjeux financiers. Dans ces conditions, le secteur sportif ne peut en aucune façon se considérer immunisé contre la menace que fait peser la criminalité organisée sous la forme du blanchiment d’argent.

L’efficacité de l’approche relative à la lutte contre le blanchiment, au sein de l’Union européenne ou au niveau international, dépend de l’implication des acteurs concernés (institutions financières et certains acteurs commerciaux et professions) qui, en raison de leur exposition particulière à ce type de délit, sont appelés à appliquer des mesures renforcées visant à prévenir et détecter le blanchiment d’argent.

Le dispositif anti-blanchiment mis au point par la Commission répond à la nécessité d’ériger des barrières solides contre l’infiltration du crime organisé dans tous les secteurs économiques. Il revient donc aux Etats membres d’appliquer les règles telles qu’elles ont été définies dans les textes communautaires. The first EU anti-money laundering Directive (1991), as modified by the second one (2001), has been adopted precisely with the aim of protecting the legal economy from criminal misuse. When the FATF agreed upon a revision of its standards in June 2003, the existing Directive needed to be updated in order to continue to reflect best international practices embodied in the revised Forty Recommendations as well as the commitment of the European Community to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. Selon les dispositions de la troisième directive anti-blanchiment, qui fut adoptée par le Parlement et le Conseil il y a peu, financial institutions and designated non financial businesses and professions ont une obligation de vigilance envers leur clientèle afin d’identifier avec précision l’identité de celle-ci et le bénéficiaire final des transactions financières qui sont réalisées. En outre, le rôle of such institutions and designated professions consiste à identifier à un stade précoce les opérations pouvant se prêter à du blanchiment d’argent dans le secteur sportif, comme dans tous les autres secteurs, afin d’alerter les autorités nationales compétentes chargées de la lutte anti-blanchiment.

En réponse à l’honorable parlementaire, la Commission souhaiterait indiquer qu’elle ne dispose pas d’informations selon lesquelles certains clubs de football européens seraient utilisés à des fins de blanchiment d’argent. Elle rappelle qu’elle ne dispose pas de pouvoirs d’enquête en la matière et qu’il revient aux Etats membres de l’Union européenne d’établir les contrôles adéquats, en particulier lorsqu’un club sportif est racheté par des individus ou des capitaux dont l’origine est inconnue.

What action is the Commission taking and does it plan to take regarding misleading direct mail marketing to ensure that citizens are protected from companies pursuing such practices now and in the future?

For example, I have received correspondence from a number of my constituents, and complaints have been made from various EU countries about the dishonest business practices employed by the European City Guide (ECG).

The ECG is an online company which sends out misleading forms to businesses requesting information and inviting them to enter their directory. Whilst these forms give the impression that entry is free, once they are completed and signed, the businesses actually enter a contract which requires them to pay fees. The company then sends letters threatening legal action if payment is not made, and debt collection agencies are employed to intimidate businesses into paying. A campaign has been set up against the ECG and a petition has been tabled to the European Parliament.

The Commission is committed to ensuring a high level of consumer protection throughout the EU.

Regarding business-to-business misleading advertising, the Misleading Advertising Directive⁽¹⁾ bans misleading advertising, including advertising directed to business customers, such as the European City Guide scam. The enforcement of EU consumer legislation lying in the hands of national courts and authorities, there is limited room for action by the Commission.

As far as non-regulatory measures regarding unfair practices in business-to-business relationships are concerned, the Commission would like to point out that it also supports the development and application of Codes of Conduct. In addition, it will soon publish a “Legal study on unfair commercial practices within business-to-business e-markets”.

Notwithstanding, as regards the specific and recurrent case of the European City Guide, the Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that, despite the absence of enforcement competence by the Commission, the Commissioner responsible for Health and Consumer Protection, wants to follow this subject closely. In this sense, he will personally write to his counterparts in the Member States concerned by the practices, such as the one by the European City Guide, drawing their attention to the weak enforcement of the respective Community legislation.

What are the latest figures available to the Commission on the total economic benefits to European citizens of the existence of the European single market?

A comprehensive study on the total economic impact of the Internal Market was carried out in 1996 and published in 1998. It concluded that in 1994, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was between 1.1% and 1.5% higher than it would have been if the Internal Market did not exist. For the same year, the employment gain was estimated to have accounted for over 300.000 jobs.

Since then, there have been partial assessments. Among the latest are:

The Communication on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of the Internal Market included a new round of macroeconomic estimates of the impact of the 1992 programme. According to these estimates, EU GDP in 2002 was 1.8 percentage points, or €164.5 billion, higher thanks to the Internal Market. In addition, about 2.5 million jobs had been created in the EU since 1992 as a result of the opening up of frontiers between Member States;⁽¹⁾

A study by Commission services based on accounting data of EU firms, has found evidence of a significant impact of the Internal Market programme on productivity. Efficiency, as measured by the productivity of assets, increased by approximately 25% between 1993 and 2001;⁽²⁾

In the field of Public Procurement, a study for the Commission estimated the economic benefits from the application of EU Directives. Results show that the application of the transparency procedures required by the Directives could reduce prices of goods, services and works contracts by approximately 30%. The study also showed that the success rates of foreign firms operating in other Member States to win contracts are actually comparable to those of domestic firms bidding in their home countries.⁽³⁾

Can the Commission please share its thoughts on the next steps regarding the Atypical Workers' Directive?

La proposition de directive sur les conditions de travail des travailleurs intérimaires, à laquelle se réfère sans doute l'honorable parlementaire, est toujours sur la table du Conseil. Il lui appartient de se prononcer sur la proposition modifiée de la Commission qui a intégré bon nombre des amendements du Parlement lors de l'examen en première lecture de la proposition initiale.

Bien entendu, à l'instar de toute initiative de la Commission, cette proposition se doit d'être appréciée au regard des évolutions législatives qui l'entourent. C'est pourquoi, dans sa communication du 27 septembre 2005⁽¹⁾, la Commission a indiqué qu'elle se réserve le droit de réexaminer la proposition sur les travailleurs intérimaires à la lumière de la future discussion d'autres propositions.

Durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 639/2003⁽¹⁾ wird das Alter der Kühe und Kalbinnen für die Gewährung der Ausfuhrerstattungen von 36 Monaten auf 30 Monate herabgesetzt. Früher waren gemäß Verordnung (EG) Nr. 615/1998⁽²⁾ Tiere bis zu einem Alter von 36 Monaten für die Gewährung der Ausfuhrerstattung zugelassen.

Viehzüchtern in Berggebieten ist das Leben somit erschwert: Sie sind an Herbstabkalbungen im Alpzyklus gebunden. Außerdem entwickeln sich Bergrinderrassen mit Alm- und Weidenutzung wegen der rauen Umwelt langsamer und können unter Beachtung der biologischen Gegebenheiten erst im Alter von 24 Monaten gedeckt werden.

Die Kommission wird dringend ersucht, für die alpinen Bergrinderrassen eine Ausnahmeregelung zu gewähren und das Exportalter für die Bergrinder wieder auf 36 Monate anzuheben.

The decision to reduce from 36 to 30 months the age for eligibility for export refunds for female pure-bred animals was taken on the basis of statistics on our exports of pure-bred bovine animals which showed that mainly young pure-bred female animals were exported. Today the request is still predominant for the category of animals under 30 months.

From a technical point of view, the Commission believes that with an average mating age at 24 months, young heifers and even in some cases young cows of alpine mountain cattle breeds can still benefit from refunds when exported.

In addition from an administrative point of view, it appears difficult to set up a specific regime for alpine mountain cattle breed as requested given the fact that the export nomenclature used to define eligible categories of animals does not allow such specificity. Moreover, some of those breeds are also kept and raised by breeders outside mountain area, where the conditions of production are different.

Finally, public concern in relation to exports of live animals with refunds has been continuously rising. The Commission agrees that mainly exports of cattle for slaughter have been subject to heavy criticism in the past. But pure-bred animals, because of long distance transport, have also been criticised.

In view of all these elements, the Commission is not in a position to proceed to the requested adjustment.

Behandlingen av kommissionens förslag till förordning om registrering, utvärdering, godkännande och begränsning av kemikalier (REACH) pågår som bäst i Europaparlamentet. Utgångspunkten för parlamentets behandling av ärendet är det förslag som kommissionen lade fram den 29 oktober 2003 (KOM(2003)0644 slutlig). Mitt under denna behandling i parlamentet har tydligen kommissionen nu planer på att lägga fram ett nytt förslag till förordning. Att göra detta utan att invänta parlamentets ställningstagande är exceptionellt. Vad är orsaken till att kommissionen inte inväntar Europaparlamentets första behandling innan man agerar?

Uppgifter i media har gjort gällande att EU-kommissionen har författat ett modifierat förslag till kemikalielagstiftningen REACH. Detta informella dokument är daterat den 20 september 2005. Kommissionens nya förslag innehåller flera av de synpunkter som framförts i utskotten för industri och den inre marknaden, två av de utskott som har behandlat REACH. Kommissionens agerande har väckt irritation inom miljörörelsen. Kritik har framförts mot att kommissionen genom sitt agerande försöker påverka parlamentets fortsatta behandling av REACH.

Kan kommissionen klargöra orsaken till att den mitt under pågående debatt i EU-parlamentet lägger fram ett nytt dokument om kemikalielagstiftningen REACH? Vilket är syftet med detta dokument?

The Honourable Member may rest assured that the Commission has no plans to submit a new proposal for a Regulation concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH).

The Commission would like to recall that in its Communication to the spring 2005 European Council it has stressed with regard to the proposed REACH regulation, the need to arrive at a decision which will be consistent with the Lisbon goals as regards the competitiveness of the European industries and encouraging innovation, and which will achieve a marked improvement in health and environment to the benefit of Europe’s citizens. The Commission further signalled its willingness to cooperate fully with Parliament and with Council in search for pragmatic solutions to key issues which have emerged in the examination of REACH in order to improve its workability. This approach has been broadly welcomed.

In the course of the examination of REACH in Council and in Parliament the responsible Commissioners have been frequently exhorted to indicate their positions on the main issues which have emerged, and which have been the subject of specific amendments by the responsible committees and/or by the Council Presidency.

In response to such requests, and in the perspective of encouraging early progress towards a political agreement in Council, and a first reading in Parliament, the Commissioner for Enterprise and Industry and the Commissioner for the Environment have considered it opportune to put the Commission negotiators in the position to participate in the debate.

The Commission will only present an amended proposal in the light of the first reading in the Parliament.

Η ελληνική κυβέρνηση προτίθεται να προωθήσει την τιτλοποίηση ληξιπρόθεσμων οφειλών, ως δημόσια έσοδα που θα καλύψουν μέρος του δημοσίου ελλείμματος το οποίο προήλθε μετά την απογραφή στην οποία προέβη το 2004.

Η τιτλοποίηση οφειλών είναι ένα καθαρά προσωρινό μέτρο το οποίο δεν βελτιώνει στην ουσία την πραγματική οικονομική κατάσταση για την οποία υπάρχουν άλλωστε και σημαντικές αποκλίσεις από τις προβλέψεις της κυβέρνησης στο ύψος των φορολογικών εσόδων, λόγω υπολειτουργίας των ελεγκτικών μηχανισμών, και στον ρυθμό ανάπτυξης.

Σε ποια φάση βρίσκονται οι διαβουλεύσεις της Επιτροπής με την ελληνική κυβέρνηση στο θέμα της αποδοχής ή όχι της τιτλοποίησης των ληξιπρόθεσμων οφειλών ως μηχανισμού κάλυψης του δημοσίου ελλείμματος;

Ποιες προϋποθέσεις, όρους και εγγυήσεις θα ζητήσει η Επιτροπή και η Eurostat σε περίπτωση αποδοχής του αιτήματος, εφόσον σε άλλες χώρες μέλη έχει απορρίψει παρόμοιο αίτημα ή σε άλλες χώρες δεν απέφερε τα αναμενόμενα αποτελέσματα;

The Commission is aware of the Greek authorities’ intention of securitising claims, notably in relation to tax arrears.

From the accounting viewpoint, Eurostat is currently in contact with the Greek statistical authorities on the treatment of that operation. While the Greek authorities have already provided some general description of their intention, Eurostat has not received yet full documentation.

According to the accounting rules, the impact of securitisations on the government deficit depends notably on the transfer of risks to the private sector. To be recorded as deficit reducing, the government must have shifted most risks and rewards to the private sector; otherwise, the securitisation is recorded as borrowing. The assessment of all relevant elements (possible substitution of assets, guarantees, existence of a deferred purchase price, management of the assets, etc.) for each specific transaction is only possible after a careful analysis of the contract.

More generally, Eurostat intends, as soon as possible, to clarify for all Member States the rules on securitisation operations in the ESA 95 Manual on government deficit and debt. This is due to the fact that problems of interpretation of existing rules have recently appeared, especially as regards the provision of guarantees and the transfer of risks and benefits by government.

Hungarian Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány pressed for lifting the visa obligation for Chinese citizens in a lecture given at Qinghua University, Beijing, on 9 September, 2005.

As quoted by the Hungarian and international media, Gyurcsány stated that Hungary is among those EU countries that support the abolition of the visa requirement for Chinese visitors and added that there are only a few states left within the EU who wish to maintain it.

Has the Commission any plan to lift the Chinese visa obligation?

Could the Commission, please, comment on the statement of the Hungarian Prime Minister in light of the ongoing 'construction' of the common EU visa policy?

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to priority written question P-3399/05 by Ms Kinga Gál on the same subject.

Il 22 luglio 2005, la Commissione Europea (Direzione Generale Giustizia, Libertà e Sicurezza) ha redatto una "Bozza di Raccomandazione in merito ad un codice di condotta per le Organizzazioni Non Profit (ONP)". In tale documento si afferma addirittura che "esistono prove che le ONP siano state utilizzate per finanziare il terrorismo e per commettere altri crimini”. Nonostante sia riconosciuto il ruolo delle stesse come “fondamentale nello svolgimento di attività e servizi umanitari ai cittadini in aree di vitale importanza”, nella bozza vengono elencate una serie di proposte di controllo che ne stravolgerebbero le attività, fino a snaturarne il significato. Nel documento non vengono mai menzionate le ragioni per le quali le ONP vengono classificate come “vulnerabili al crimine”´. È sicuramente auspicabile ottenere trasparenza e certezza dell’operato, ma proporre di designare un organismo di supervisione che risponda ai governi pregiudica ogni forma di autonomia e libertà d' azione delle ONP.

Non ritiene la Commissione di dover ritirare la proposta, che di fatto sottoporrebbe le ONP ad un controllo che ne nega la legittimità democratica, e di promuovere invece un dialogo strutturato con le "organizzazioni no profit" su tutt'altre basi, elaborando regole non unilaterali bensì condivise dalle ONP?

The Honourable Member is surely aware of the Financial Action Task Force (“FATF”) “Special Recommendations” on terrorist financing. The task of the FATF is to coordinate and spearhead the international campaign against criminal money laundering and terrorist financing. Special Recommendation VIII requests that countries should address the vulnerabilities of the non profit sector to terrorist financing.

Furthermore, the Conclusions of the European Council of 16-17 December 2004 invited the Commission to come up with proposals to prevent the misuse of non-profit organisations to terrorist financing by the end of 2005. Additionally, the Council Declaration on the EU response to the London bombings of 13th July 2005 calls on setting up “a Code of Conduct to prevent the misuse of charities by terrorists”.

In this context, the Commission is planning to issue this year a Communication on Terrorist Financing, which will contain a Recommendation to Member States to encourage compliance with the first principles of a Code of Conduct.

The draft Commission Communication has been significantly revised on the basis of comments received during the public consultation. Through the Communication the Commission will promote a structured form of dialogue with the non-profit sector. The Communication will represent a start of a new phase in the debate with the non-profit sector on the issue. The Commission foresees to organise a conference in 2006 with the participation of the non-profit sector and public bodies to find a common understanding of the problem of prevention and fight against misuse of non-profit organisations to terrorist financing and other criminal ends.

Finally, the Commission would like to emphasise that the aim of the Recommendation and Framework for a Code of Conduct is not in any way to undermine the vital humanitarian and other important activities carried out by non-profit organisations of the European Union. The purpose of the planned Commission proposal is to encourage non-profit organisations to take reasonable measures to protect themselves from vulnerabilities to terrorist financing and other forms of criminal abuse.

El Consejo Europeo de Barcelona de los días 15 y 16 de marzo de 2002 acordó un nivel mínimo para las interconexiones eléctricas equivalente a un 10% de la capacidad de generación instalada en cada Estado miembro para mejorar la fiabilidad y la seguridad de las redes, la seguridad del abastecimiento y el funcionamiento del mercado interior. Las interconexiones forman parte de las Redes Transeuropeas de la Energía y son un elemento indispensable para que los operadores del mercado de la electricidad tengan acceso a otros mercados nacionales.

¿Podría indicar la Comisión en qué estado se encuentra la interconexión eléctrica entre Francia y la Península Ibérica, así como las consecuencias que su reforzamiento tendría para España, Portugal y el Mercado Ibérico de la Electricidad?

The Parliament and Council Decision on the Transeuropean network in the field of Energy specifies the priority projects “EL.3 France-Spain Portugal”, which have in particular the objective to increase electricity interconnection capacities between these countries.

France and Spain have agreed to add some 1 200 MW of additional capacity by 2006 to the current 1400 MW with the objective of reaching 4 000 MW in the future. Towards that end, a number of feasibility studies are exploring various alternatives for transporting extra wattage across the Eastern, Central and Western Pyrenees. Under the Transeuropean Network budget line, studies of various interconnections between Spain and France were supported for a total of € 2.5 million.

The current 1400 MW interconnection capacity between Spain and France is only 2.3 % of the capacity installed in Spain. In consequence, the line in the Eastern Pyrenees is used at the limit of its capacity, which leads to frequent congestion, and most of the time even exceeds the available limit. Even the envisaged target of 4000 MW transmission capacity is still well below the 10% target.

The Spanish and Portuguese Governments signed an agreement in 2001 to develop a common Iberian power market. A new east-west interconnection between Sines (PT) and Balboa (ES) is under construction as well as an upgrade for the connection between Aldeadavilla (ES) and Recarei (PT). In addition, the north-south connection in Portugal will also be strengthened (Valdigem–Viseu–Anadia). The present transmission capacity between Portugal and Spain is above the 10% target, which makes it feasible that up to 10% of Portugal's power demand can be imported from and/or through Spain.

However, it should be noted that although already in 2003 9% of Portuguese demand were imported from Spain, the average congestion levels from Spain to Portugal in the first half of 2004 were 25%, and reached 66% in July 2004 and 47% in August 2004 (see COMP.M. 3440 EDP/ENI/GDP – recitals 80-83).

El anuncio de una OPA recientemente lanzada por un grupo energético español ha generado dudas sobre si esta operación podría distorsionar la competencia en el sector energético de España y Portugal y si sería compatible con los objetivos del Tratado de garantizar un entorno competitivo justo.

¿Cuáles son los plazos para la notificación? ¿Ha solicitado la intervención de la Comisión algún Gobierno u organismo de defensa de la competencia de un Estado miembro? ¿En qué fecha?

The concentration Gas Natural/Endesa has been notified to the Spanish competition authority on September 12, 2005 on the assumption that it does not have a Community dimension. On Endesa’s request, the Commission is now carefully verifying if this assumption is correct and will announce the result of this investigation as soon as possible.

Pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Merger regulation⁽¹⁾, “concentrations with a Community dimension shall be notified to the Commission prior to their implementation and following the conclusion of the agreement, the announcement of the public bid […]”

Pursuant to the same article, “notification may also be made where the undertakings concerned demonstrate to the Commission a good faith intention to conclude an agreement or, in the case of a public bid, where they have publicly announced an intention to make such a bid […].”

Always on the assumption that the Gas Natural/Endesa has not a Community dimension, on September 21 the Portuguese antitrust authority requested the Commission, pursuant to Article 22 of the EC Merger Regulation, to assess the competitive impact of this concentration in the territory of its State. On October 7, the Italian antitrust authority joined this request. The Commission will decide on those requests by October 27 2005.

In Question Time last January I asked the Commissioner when his proposal would be produced. It is now October, well past the promised date. When does he now promise to make the proposal? Meanwhile we continue to have no clear picture of organised criminal gang activity across the Union - a lack which is good for the criminals but bad for the citizens.

As the Honourable Member is aware, the Commission is devoted to developing high quality statistics on crime and criminal justice. In the medium term, the project aims at collecting available indicators and statistics in different areas and enhancing the quality of those; in the longer term, harmonised statistics on crime and criminal justice will be developed. The work follows several different but coordinated strands. The harmonisation of statistics on crime and criminal justice will require great economic and human resources, both in the Member States and in the Commission, and will have to be done step by step and on the basis of knowledge, so that all Member States agree the usefulness of the harmonised definitions and rules, and the validity of the produced statistics.

As regards organised crime in general, Europol has decided not to take part in the work to develop long-term harmonised quantitative measures, but to devote their energy to develop qualitative information for the Organised Crime Threat Assessment, which will be published for the first time in 2006. This will assess the threat that organised crime poses, as a basis for adequate measures.

The formidable methodological problems posed by differing national statistical systems were examined by a task force of experts from twelve Member States convened by Eurostat in May-June 2005. Based on the task force’s evaluation of data already available in the Member States, data collection will begin late 2005 with information based upon police reports and prison populations. The Commission is in the process of engaging independent experts to complement that collection.

The task force confirmed that quantitative information on organised crime does not at present exist in the Member States in any systematic form, but the Commission has initiated a number of studies which it is hoped will provide some useful guidelines to enable organised crime to be included in the data collection. By 2007 Eurostat will propose a common module on victimisation for inclusion in national surveys in order that this information may be more easily comparable.

To be able to provide for a continuous and overall evaluation of the Action Plan on Drugs 2005-2008, the Commission has created a set of assessment tools/indicators, in collaboration with the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) and Europol, for each action of the Plan. Data on this field is collected regularly by the EMCDDA as well as Europol, allowing an overview of the situation in the EU in this field.

In the particular field of racist crime, the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC) is also a very active player. The EUMC produces reports on racism, and, in particular, made public last spring a specific report on racist violence. In order to overcome the stumbling blocks to data collection identified in that report, and in order to improve the quantity and quality of the data available on racist violence, the EUMC will undertake in 2006 a pilot survey on victims on racism. The Commission supports these efforts.

A Communication that is planned for late 2005 will outline the development for the coming years, and set up an expert group to advise the Commission, in addition to the Task Force.

Will the Commission indicate if it has drawn up a specific report on tangible actions undertaken by the EU to combat and ultimately eradicate the scourge of AIDS in the developing world?

In the affirmative will the Commission make this report available immediately to the Members of this Parliament?

Depuis l’année 2000, la Commission a décidé d’apporter une réponse intégrée aux grands défis posés par les trois principales maladies transmissibles, notamment le VIH/Sida, le paludisme et la tuberculose à travers un cadre politique et stratégique cohérent et unitaire. C’est dans cette optique que le 26 octobre 2004 la Commission a adopté le deuxième rapport sur l’état d’avancement du Programme d’Action de la Communauté européenne sur le VIH/Sida, paludisme et tuberculose. Ce rapport⁽¹⁾ a, entre temps, été transmis au Conseil et au Parlement.

Le but principal du rapport sur l’état d’avancement du Programme d’Action était de fournir un cadre complet des progrès et/ou des résultats obtenus pour chacun des secteurs d’actions sélectionnés : impact des interventions, accessibilité aux médicaments ainsi que l’appui à la recherche et développement de nouveaux outils thérapeutiques de lutte contre ces maladies.

Dans plusieurs pays, la Commission appuie, à travers l’aide budgétaire, les programmes de santé des pays partenaires mais les enveloppes financières spécifiquement allouées au VIH/Sida ne sont pas quantifiables. Les ressources financières allouées au secteur santé à travers les programmes par pays ont diminué en conséquence (le support annuel est passé en moyenne de 393 millions € entre 1998-2002 à 246,6 millions € entre 2003-2006). Outre les contributions fournies par le biais de l’aide budgétaire et sectorielle, les ressources allouées spécifiquement à la lutte contre les trois maladies ont enregistré une nette augmentation, passant de 59,3 millions € par an entre 1994-2002 à 259 millions € par an entre 2003-2006, tous instruments confondus (Fonds Européen de Développement, lignes budgétaires thématiques, Fonds Recherche). En particulier, entre 2003 et 2006 on a assisté à une augmentation progressive des montants de la ligne budgétaire concernant l’assistance communautaire aux pays en développement pour la lutte contre les trois maladies, des fonds régionaux pour les Pays d’Afrique, des Caraïbes et du Pacifique (ACP) ainsi que des ressources allouées à travers le 6ème Programme Cadre de la Recherche pour les trois maladies, quatre fois supérieures par rapport au 5ème Programme Cadre.

Ainsi, pour la période 2003-2006, la Commission, via le 6ème Programme Cadre de Recherche, consacre un montant de 200 millions € à l’initiative EDCTP⁽²⁾. Cette initiative pilote, appelée Partenariat des pays européens et en développement sur les essais cliniques, bénéficie d’une contribution équivalente (200 millions €) de la part des Etats européens participants et met l’accent sur le développement de nouveaux médicaments, vaccins et microbicides contre les trois maladies en question ainsi que sur le renforcement des capacités des pays de l’Afrique subsaharienne en matière de recherche clinique. A ces fonds viennent s’ajouter environ 220 millions € supplémentaires pour la mise en œuvre d’un grand nombre de projets de recherche fondamentale et préclinique pendant la durée du 6ème Programme Cadre.

La Commission a fourni une contribution substantielle au Fonds Global pour la Lutte contre le VIH/Sida, le paludisme et la tuberculose ainsi qu’à d’autres initiatives de partenariat comme l’International Initiative for AIDS Vaccine (IAVI), la Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) et l’ International Partnership for Microbicides (IPM). La contribution totale de la Commission au Fonds Global s’élève – entre 2001 et 2005 – à 432,5 millions €. En 2006, la contribution de la Commission en faveur du Fonds Global pour la lutte contre le VIH/Sida, paludisme et tuberculose s’élèvera à presque € 90 million, dont € 62 million à valoir sur le Fonds Européen de Développement.

The Commission recognises the importance of the bio-ethanol industry and also the fact that EU farmers who are guardians of the rural environment could and would seriously contribute to controlling climate change by alternative use of agricultural land for the production of alternative and renewable energy resources.

As alternative energy sources are vital for our future, will the Commission comment on the uptake of available EU funds, by the Member States, for the creation of European biofuels projects and if they consider the uptake to be satisfactory or not?

With the 2003 reform of the Common Agricultural Policy farmers may now grow any biomass for energy purpose without loosing decoupled income support.

Under the decoupled income support, farmers do not have to declare how they use their agricultural areas. Therefore the Commission information on energy crops cultivated on land eligible for decoupled support is limited. More precise information is available for farmers’ applications to the set-aside and energy crops regimes.

Under the set-aside regime which allows growing non-food crops on obligatory set-aside land an area of about 900 000 hectares is used for energy crop production.

In addition, the 2003 reform introduced a specific energy crop premium of € 45 per hectare for a maximum guaranteed area of 1.5 million hectares. In 2004, the first year of application, the energy crop premium was granted for about 300 000 hectares.

The Commission expects that the number of hectares which apply for the energy crop premium will increase in 2005 and the following years.

The current production of energy crops is not sufficient to achieve the EU targets on renewable energy for 2010.

A report on the implementation of the energy crop premium is scheduled for the end of 2006 and, where appropriate, will be accompanied by proposals for amendment. For biofuels, a market share of 2% should be reached this year, increasing to 5.75% by 2010. Member States had to report to the Commission on the development in this area in 2004 and 2005, and the Commission will present a report to the European Council and Parliament in 2006, based on this information. Further actions may be proposed by the Commission if appearing necessary to achieve the envisaged objective.

Biofuels result in different life cycle greenhouse gas savings depending on how they are produced. It is desirable for policy to take account of this and encourage the introduction of more desirable biofuel technologies.

The European Union has provided significant financial support over the years to research and development in the field of biofuels. In the fifth framework programme, biofuels were supported in the Quality of life and Energy thematic programmes. In the current sixth framework programme, a number of Integrated Projects in the field of biofuels are being financed.

The Commission is currently preparing a Biomass Action Plan to further promote the debate on encouraging biomass, including biofuels. Moreover, a specific Communication on biofuels will take up this debate and complement the strategies outlined, in particular concerning the supply of biofuels feedstock and the global context for the EU biofuels policy.

DG Competition recently stated that the English Premier Football League must ensure that the broadcasting rights on offer make 'a meaningful slice of the cake' available to a second broadcaster".

The Premier League should by now have shown the Commission that it is 'realistically' implementing a 2003 agreement on the marketing of football TV broadcasting rights. Will the Commission confirm that they have indeed received a reply from the English Premier League and will they indicate if they intend to send out a statement of objection or not?

The Commission can confirm that there have been ongoing discussions with the Football Association Premier League (FAPL) over their collective sale of media rights in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. In December 2003, the FAPL proposed a set of commitments, which contained a rule that no one buyer would win all live TV rights in the United Kingdom from 2007 onwards. This set of commitments was subject to a public consultation in 2004 and discussions on the outcome of that consultation continued in 2004 and 2005.

In June 2005, the FAPL submitted a revised proposal, which the Commission indicated was insufficient. In a meeting between the Commissioner in charge of Competition and the FAPL on Tuesday 18 October 2005, the FAPL submitted significantly revised proposal which moved the two sides closer to an amicable result in this case. In particular, the FAPL have agreed that the rights will be sold to the highest bidder on a standalone basis, subject to a rule that no one buyer can buy all of the packages of live TV rights. The Commission has considered this proposal and replied to the FAPL on Friday 21 October 2005, requesting FAPL to take a clear position regarding a number of clarifications. The Commission can further confirm that it received a reply from FAPL in the evening of Monday 24 October, and that it is currently giving this reply its full consideration.

Las Directivas 2003/54/CE⁽¹⁾ y 2003/55/CE⁽²⁾ establecen los criterios básicos para una adecuada liberalización de los mercados de gas y electricidad. Las Directivas contienen unos requisitos mínimos de libre competencia necesarios para alcanzar unos precios razonables, al mismo tiempo que promueven un servicio de calidad, la protección de los consumidores más vulnerables y la seguridad del suministro. Las Directivas garantizan que a partir del 1 de julio de 2007 todos los clientes domésticos pueden elegir libremente el proveedor de electricidad y gas.

¿Cuáles cree la Comisión que son los principales obstáculos en la actualidad para la creación de un verdadero Mercado Europeo del Gas y la Electricidad?

Most of the provisions in Directives 2003/54 and 2003/55 should have been transposed by Member States by 1 July 2004. The most important requirements were the opening of competition to all non-household customers, the establishment of ex-ante regulation for access to electricity and gas networks, and the separation of transmission and distribution system operators from the other parts of vertically integrated businesses.

Most Member States have now fulfilled these requirements. However there were several where implementation was up to one year behind schedule. There remain seven Member States which have not yet notified the measures taken to transpose the Directives and infringement cases are underway.⁽³⁾

The Commission is currently preparing a comprehensive report on the implementation of the Directives, as envisaged in the texts (Article 28 – electricity, and Article 31 – gas). Work is still ongoing on the report but, aside from the above delays in implementation, the important obstacles to real competition relate – amongst others - to the levels of concentration in many markets concerned, to the lack of available interconnection capacity between Member States, to different levels of powers and independence of regulators, to insufficient transparency in certain markets, to the lack of liquidity in certain wholesale markets and possibly inadequate unbundling provisions. It is anticipated that some of these issues will be progressively resolved both the Directives, the Regulation for Cross Border Electricity Exchanges (1228/03), and the forthcoming Regulation on Gas Transmission.

In order to clarify the competitive conditions in european gas and electricity markets the Commission launched an inquiry into the european gas and electricity sectors on 13 June 2005. The sector inquiry, which is an enforcement tool under european Competition law, was triggered following complaints about price increases and lack of customer’s choice. First results of the inquiry can be expected at the end of 2005. The final report is foreseen for 2006.

Following the final votes of the European Parliament, after the submission by the Turkish Government to the Turkish Parliament of the Protocol extending the customs union to the ten new Member States and after its ratification, the Protocol will be transposed into the Turkish legislation and will have binding force erga omnes, i.e. inside and outside Turkey, regarding its relations with the EU and the third countries. If its ratification is recognised as a ratification of an international treaty by the Turkish Constitution, it will have constitutional force. If the submission of the Protocol is accompanied by Turkey's unilateral statement on Cyprus - even if the latter is considered by European legislation as devoid of legal effect- the unilateral statement will have the same force as the law, in the light of the aforegoing.

What measures have the European institutions undertaken, especially the European Commission, in order to avoid a situation where the declaration is submitted for ratification and remains just a political declaration without legal implications?

The Commission welcomes the signature by the EU and Turkey of the Additional Protocol to the Ankara Agreement. The Commission expects that Turkey will ratify and fully implement the Protocol in good faith and in due course. This was stressed by Commissioner in charge of Enlargement during his visit to Turkey in early October.

It is the Commission’s understanding that when the Turkish Parliament will have approved the ratification of the Protocol, the Turkish President will sign the decision expressing the consent of the Republic of Turkey to be bound by the Protocol, and that this instrument will be deposited with the Secretariat General of the Council.

The declaration by the European Community and its Member States, in response to the declaration by Turkey made at the time of signature of the Additional Protocol, set out clearly that Turkey’s declaration is unilateral, does not form part of the Protocol and has no legal effect on Turkey’s obligations under the Protocol. The ratification procedure relates only to the Protocol.

In view of the decision announced by BNFL on 30 September 2005 to sell off key operations, including British Nuclear Group, i.e. the business that maintains the safety of the UK´s nuclear power stations:

Can the Commission give assurances that, if the private sector becomes involved, there will be no short cuts on safety and security at the £470 million loss-making Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant and that there will be adequate transparency and accountability on these issues?

Every operator must comply with Community and national regulations on safety and security.

With respect to nuclear material safeguards, all nuclear operators, whether private or public, are obliged under the provisions set out in Title II, chapter 7 of the Treaty stablishing the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) to fully account for their nuclear inventories. The Commission ensures the operators’ compliance with their legal obligations.

For nuclear safety, the competent national authorities are responsible for the implementation of Community regulations, as set out in Title II, Chapter 3 of the Euratom Treaty on Health and Safety, irrespective of any internal financial restructuring of the industry.

The national safety and radiation protection authorities are entrusted with the necessary controls; the Commission has the mission of independently monitoring and verifying the respect of the Euratom Treaty, including its health and safety provisions, as well as the secondary legislation based on it.

Finally, the Commission has proposed a Directive setting out basic obligations and general principles on the safety of nuclear installations. The Directive is still under discussion.

Το φαινόμενο των εγκλημάτων τιμής στις χώρες της Ε.Ε. εξακολουθεί να παραμένει ανησυχητικό. Με βάση στοιχεία Μη-Κυβερνητικών Οργανώσεων, 5000 γυναίκες πέφτουν θύματα εγκλημάτων τιμής ετησίως σε παγκόσμια κλίμακα, ενώ ένας μεγάλος αριθμός αφορά την Ευρώπη κυρίως γυναίκες προερχόμενες από τρίτες χώρες, μετανάστριες μέλη μουσουλμανικών κοινοτήτων.

Διαθέτει η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή ποιοτικά και ποσοτικά στοιχεία για το φαινόμενο αυτό και σκοπεύει να λάβει συγκεκριμένες πρωτοβουλίες για να παροτρύνει τα κράτη - μέλη να αντιμετωπίσουν το φαινόμενο αυτό με στόχο την προάσπιση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων και του κράτους δικαίου στην Ε.Ε.;

Τέτοια κρούσματα αφορούν γυναίκες τουρκικής ιθαγένειας όπως φαίνεται και στο ψήφισμα του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου σχετικά με τον ρόλο των γυναικών στην Τουρκία στην κοινωνική, οικονομική και πολιτική ζωή (Ρ6_ΤΑ(2005)0287). Έχει λάβει η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή υπόψη την διάσταση αυτή στις ενταξιακές διαπραγματεύσεις με την Τουρκία; Σκοπεύει να προωθήσει μία συντονισμένη πολιτική ευαισθητοποίησης και ενημέρωσης για το φαινόμενο αυτό στα κράτη μέλη αλλά και στις υποψήφιες χώρες;

The Commission does not have reliable data available on the extent of honour killings in Europe. Given the lack of good quality statistics on crime at the EU-level, the Commission is committed to developing a system of EU comparable statistics on crime and criminal justice, in cooperation between Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security and Eurostat.

The Commission will shortly issue a Communication on the establishment of a system for comparable statistics on crime and criminal justice, which will present a long-term action plan to develop comparable statistics. Moreover, in order to contribute to better statistical surveying of violence against women, young people and children in particular, and to harmonized and comparable data collection, the Commission has identified as one of its priority areas under the Daphne Programme the development of indicators and related data collection on violence.

The Commission supports efforts to prevent and eliminate crimes against women committed in the name of honour by encouraging Member States in particular to:

address the root causes of patriarchal violence with the aim of changing the attitudes in societies and communities that encourage, accept or at least tolerate violent behaviour in the name of honour;

collect data on honour-related violence and create statistics;

enact and implement appropriate legislation based on international resolutions to combat patriarchal violence;

adopt gender equality policies;

cooperate with, support and learn from civil society and grassroots organizations.

The Commission can in particular through the Daphne II Programme provide assistance to local-level organisations that provide, inter alia, long-term and short term education and training of all groups of society to prevent the occurrence of honour-related violence. The Daphne Programme can also support social services, in collaboration with non-governmental organisations, to ensure protective and supportive measures for victims through shelters/alternative housing and counselling.

During the accession negotiations, political reforms in Turkey and their implementation will continue to be closely monitored by the Commission and women’s rights will remain a priority. The negotiating framework agreed on 3 October, which will form the basis for negotiations, requires Turkey to “consolidate and broaden legislation and implementation measures” in the area of women’s rights.

In Turkey steps have already been taken towards ensuring greater protection of women’s rights. A new Parliamentary Committee on Violence against Women and Children began its work this month. Among other things, it will conduct research on the causes of honour killings in Turkey and propose measures aimed at preventing such crimes.

The Law N° 5251 on the organization and duties of the Directorate General for Women's Status from October 2004 provides for this government department to "conduct work for the prevention and elimination of all forms of violence against women". Violence against women had also been highlighted in the conference held on 26 and 27 June 2005 in Elazig, organised by the Turkish Government and the Commission und funded within the gender equality framework strategy programme.

The new Turkish Penal Code, which entered into force in June 2005, envisages life imprisonment for crimes against life that are motivated by “tradition and customs”. The Commission is aware of two recent court decisions where, in accordance with the new code, the perpetrators of honour killings have been sentenced to life imprisonment.

Suomen eduskunta on muuttanut maan poliisilakia niin että se tekee mahdolliseksi armeijan virka-avun saannin matkustajalentokoneiden alasampumiseen terrorismin torjunnan nimissä. Voisiko komissio kertoa, onko tällainen siviilikohteiden tuhoaminen mahdollisesti peräisin EU:n lainsäädännöstä tai Suomen hallituksen EU:lle antamista sitoumuksista, ja jos on, ovatko kaikki EU-jäsenmaat sitoutuneet ampumaan alas siviililiikenteen lentokoneita?

There does not exist any EC legislation or EU common position or joint action on the issue of the interception of civil aircrafts in case they are under a terrorist threat. How a Member State uses its military means remains in the sole competence of the Member State in question.

Finland nor any other Member State has given any commitment at EU level to adopt national legislation that would permit using military means to intercept civil aircrafts in case of terrorist attack. However, the issue is by no means a novelty; several Member States have already respective legislation in place that permits using military capabilities in case of terrorist attacks, e.g. Denmark, United Kingdom, Latvia, the Czech Republic etc. The question has also been extensively debated at the North Atlantic Organisation (NATO) and at the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL).

Ο εποικισμός σε βάρος της Κύπρου από την Τουρκία, αποτελεί σύμφωνα με το διεθνές δίκαιο έγκλημα πολέμου. Υπάρχουν δυο σχετικές εκθέσεις του Συμβουλίου της Ευρώπης, η μία του κ. Cuco και η άλλη του κ. Laakso, οι οποίες καταδικάζουν την τουρκική πολιτική σε βάρος της Κύπρου και τονίζουν ότι ο εποικισμός είναι ένα από τα βασικά εμπόδια στην εξεύρεση βιώσιμης λύσης.

Είναι σε θέση η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση και προτίθεται, εφόσον της ζητηθεί από την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία, να θέσει υπό την δική της εποπτεία και έλεγχο απογραφή πληθυσμού σε ολόκληρο το νησί για να εξακριβωθεί ο ακριβής αριθμός του γηγενούς πληθυσμού και των εποίκων;

As regards the issue of monitoring and supervising a census, the Commission does not have the necessary competence in this respect and considers that the Council of Europe is the appropriate institution to undertake such action. Nonetheless, the Commission would provide any possible support to such an initiative.

A comprehensive solution to the Cyprus problem will obviously have to address the issue of settlers.

W dniu 8 września 2005 rosyjskie przedsiębiorstwo Gazprom i niemieckie koncerny E.ON-Ruhrgas i BASF podpisały umowę o budowie gazociągu na dnie Bałtyku. Gazociąg ma połączyć Niemcy i Rosję omijając kraje nadbałtyckie i Polskę. Polska uważa, że inwestycja ta zagraża zarówno bezpieczeństwu energetycznemu naszego kraju jak i również naszym interesom ekonomicznym jako, że zamraża budowę przez Polskę drugiej nitki gazociągu Jamalskiego.

Jakie jest stanowisko Komisji Europejskiej w tej sprawie i czy inwestycja ta będzie wspomagana z budżetu UE?

The trans-European energy networks (TEN-E) guidelines⁽¹⁾ define a number of priority projects for increasing the EU’s security of energy supplies, amongst which is a new additional gas supply route from Russian sources to Northern Europe. Given the expected significant increase in EU gas demand over the coming years, it is clearly in the EU’s interest to promote the development of new gas transport infrastructure.

Two potential routes have been under discussion for some time, namely:

An off-shore pipeline from Russia directly to Germany via the Baltic Sea (“North European Pipeline ” – possibly with branches to the Scandinavian and Baltic states),

From Russia via Belarus and Poland to Germany along the existing Yamal Pipeline (“Yamal II”), including its variant from Russia via the Baltic States to Poland, Germany (“Amber”).

The final route of the Yamal Europe Gaspipeline is clearly the decision of the commercial actors involved, in consultation with the interested national authorities.

Financial assistance from the Community budget for infrastructure projects can be provided only in the framework of the TEN-Energy annual work programme if there is an application submitted following the call for proposals and it is selected for funding.

Under the call for proposals of the TEN-Energy 2003 an application was made by a consortium of European and Russian companies to investigate technical feasibility of the North European Pipeline including environmental, safety and health matters. The project was selected for funding. However, the applicant did not sign the grant agreement offered by the Commission and the feasibility study did not start. There was no application under the 2004 call for proposals for this project. Thus, the North European Pipeline project has not received so far any funding from the Community budget.

Regarding other routes, under the Call for Proposal TEN Energy 2004, a study proposed by Poland has been selected for funding to investigate the feasibility of the two alternative projects “Amber” and “Yamal II”. For both routes, it includes investigations of technical, economic, financial, legal and market issues and the impact on the environment. The aim is to provide the basis for a decision as to which of the two on-shore alternatives is more advantageous taking all relevant aspects into account. The final Commission Decision on the funding is expected to be made shortly.

What measures is the Commission proposing to take in relation to intra-EU passenger and ferry services operating under flags of convenience and subjecting workers to pay and conditions below the minimum standards applicable in the EU? Does the Commission intend to submit a proposal for a directive on this issue?

As regards regular passenger and ferry services between the Member States, the Commission had presented a proposal intended to ensure for third-country seafarers, who are employed on ships engaged in such trades, comparable terms and conditions of employment to those applicable to Community citizens. This proposal was the subject of long controversial discussions within the Council of Ministers that failed to reach a majority agreement. For this reason, the Commission was bound to withdraw its proposal in October 2004.

Following the withdrawal of this proposal, the Commission is exploring other ways likely to attain the same objectives. In the framework of the social dialogue committee for maritime transport, the Commission is discussing how the social partners could contribute to achieving the goals of the proposal. While these discussions are ongoing, the Commission does not intend to present a new proposal on manning conditions.

Is the Commission aware of the fact that, according to a press article in the Wall Street Journal Europe of 30 May, a number of US-based companies, such as Western Union, America Online and Wal-Mart, have granted to US law enforcement authorities access to the personal data of their customers, including EU citizens. In addition, the shipping company FedEx has granted customs' inspectors access to the company's database of international shipments, which includes, among other things, the name and the address of a shipper?

Does not the Commission think that, since these data also concern EU citizens, the fundamental right of those citizens to privacy and data protection, as conferred by EU Directives, is being violated?

Which measures does the Commission intend to take to stop this breach of EU law?

Will the Commission raise this issue with the US Administration, with EU Member States and with national data protection authorities?

The question refers to a press report describing the cooperation of various American based companies with United States (US) law enforcement agencies which may entail the disclosure of EU customers’ personal information to such enforcement agencies.

Whether the disclosure of EU customers’ personal information from various American based companies to US law enforcement agencies constitute a violation of the EU citizens’ fundamental rights to privacy and data protection notably as recognized by the data protection Directives must be examined on a case by case basis. The disclosure of EU citizens’ personal information to US enforcement agencies does not necessarily mean that the personal right to data protection of these individuals has been violated. To reach a conclusion therein, it is necessary to know the facts and circumstances by virtue of which each US based company collected the personal information of EU citizens in the first place.

In this context the Commission would like to recall that, in accordance with the data protection Directives, the analysis of the lawfulness of the reported disclosures must be carried out primarily by national data protection authorities, which are the bodies competent, among others, for the application of the national provisions that implement the data protection Directive, including the monitoring of international transfers. To engage in such activity, national data protection authorities are endowed with investigative, effective powers of intervention and the power to engage in legal proceedings.

The Commission trusts that national data protection authorities, either triggered by third party complaints or on their own initiative, will exercise their obligations towards ensuring the application of the Directive, in particular the monitoring of international transfers, to guarantee the protection of personal data of EU citizens. The Commission is not aware of the existence of any claim made to national data protection authorities nor has been informed by the latter of any problems in this matter. However, the Commission will raise this issue with US authorities competent for data protection matters.

The European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation (EIUC) is the only educational institution active at European level which is explicitly mandated to reinforcing and disseminating the core Community values of respect for human rights and democracy. The European Parliament's Committee on Culture, Committee on Foreign Affairs and Committee on Civil Liberties have called for continued EU funding for the EIUC by incorporating references in the EP Report on Lifelong Learning, to its reintegration in the Lifelong Learning Action Programme.

Will the Commission ensure that, irrespective of whether the EIUC's budget is allocated under Education or RELEX, it will continue to be fully funded, and will it support its reintegration in Article 42 of the Integrated Action programme in the field of lifelong learning to that end?

Will the Commission further undertake that it will ensure that the EU's continuing commitment to the important principles of human rights and democracy are not undermined by the dispute between Commissioners Figel and Ferrero-Waldner about the source of the EIUC budget?

The Commission reaffirms its continuing and deep commitment to promoting education and training in the fields of human rights and democracy. The Commission intends to propose a thematic programme for the promotion of democracy and human rights worldwide, replacing the current European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights.

With regard to the European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation in Venice, this is currently funded from Budget Line 19.04.01, under the external relations Heading of the budget.

In the Proposal for a Decision establishing an integrated action programme in the field of lifelong learning that is now in the legislative procedure of adoption, the institutions that the Commission proposes should be designated for operating grant funding under Article 42(2) of the draft Decision are those with intergovernmental representation in their governance or funding. The European Inter-University Centre for Human Rights and Democratisation does not fulfil this criterion and, for this reason, has not been included in the list.

The Commission would point out that institutions or associations active in the fields of education and training which are not included in the designated list in Article 42(2) will be able to receive operating grant funding, in response to calls for proposals under Article 42(3), if they meet the eligibility and selection criteria defined in those calls.

Hace unas semanas se produjo un incidente en la Bahía de Algeciras. La gabarra Eileen vertió mas de 7 000 litros de fuel frente a las costas de Cádiz. ¿Tiene la Comisión información sobre las deficiencias de este buque, en particular las detectadas en la inspección a la que fue sometido en diciembre de 2004? Puesto que la mayor parte de la contaminación marina proviene de pequeños derrames como éste, ¿ha previsto la Comisión nuevas iniciativas para reforzar los requisitos legales de los buques más pequeños en materia de seguridad?

Por otra parte, ¿puede confirmar la Comisión si el buque monocasco Moskovsky Festival ha fondeado o ha realizado alguna maniobra de carga de fuel recientemente en la Bahía de Algeciras?

With regards to the spill caused by the vessel “Eileen”, the Commission, on the basis of the information available, has found no apparent relation between the deficiencies reported in the inspection of December 2004 and the recent pollution off the coast of Cadiz. The deficiencies were mainly related with the personal equipment.

The Commission shares the concerns raised by the Honourable Member about the global impact of a high number of relatively small spills, often linked to the ships’ operations. In this context, Article 10 of the Directive 2005/35/CE on ship-source pollution and on the introduction of penalties for infringements provides for "accompanying measures" which will help enforce the system of dissuasive sanctions to better prevent ship-source pollution. Such "accompanying measures" will notably focus on the tracing of pollution and the early identification of ships discharging polluting substances in violation of the Directive. The Commission has already started to work on the development of such "accompanying measures" in the perspective of the entry into force of the Directive in April 2007.

According to the information published by the classification society Lloyd’s Register, the “Moskovsky Festival” is a double hull oil tanker. The conditions of operation of this vessel into the Bay of Algeciras is a matter of national competence.

Under the single market agreement to enable the free movement of working people throughout the EU, what action does the Commission propose taking and within what timescale against the educational authorities in Italy and France, who currently persist in failing to recognise the professional qualifications of experienced teachers from other Member States, thereby preventing them from pursuing their careers in French and Italian schools, colleges and universities?

The Commission monitors the application by Member States of the rules on the recognition of professional qualifications in the teaching sector on a constant basis. And it believes that the European citizens are its greatest ally in this task the most reliable source of information on how these rules are applied in practice. They contact the Commission regularly and report the difficulties they are confronted with when applying for the recognition of their qualifications in other Member States.

The Commission’s actions aimed at dismantling existing barriers to labour mobility vary according to the circumstances. The Commission works closely with national administrations, for instance via SOLVIT, or other informal contacts. However, where such contacts fail to produce a satisfactory outcome, the Commission opens infringement proceedings against those Member States who repeatedly breach Community rules.

There are no infringement procedures currently pending against either France or Italy concerning the recognition of qualifications for the purposes of the right to exercise a teaching profession. If the Honourable Member has any specific information about cases of maladministration by the Italian or French authorities with regard to the recognition of teachers’ diplomas, the Commission will of course investigate.

However, in relation to other questions of cross-border mobility of teaching staff the Commission can provide the following additional information:

In relation to the recruitment of teachers, the Commission would like to draw the attention to the latest developments in this area. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) clarified in the Burbaud case that the organisation of competitions as a means of recruitment is not as such contrary to EU law. Fully qualified professionals may however not be required to undergo recruitment procedures designed to select candidates who are not fully qualified for a training course which will lead to a final qualificationwhich is a precondition for access to a post in the public sector. The Commission services are currently holding discussions with the French authorities to assist them in setting up of a legal framework that could be applied for such competitions across all professions in the public sector;

The Commission has opened a number of infringement cases against Italy concerning entry barriers that language lecturers face when they present themselves for competitions.;

Another issue concerns the taking into account of qualifications in the recruitment procedure (e.g. by granting points for qualifications in the recruitment procedure in order to place persons on a higher place on the reserve list). An infringement procedure is pending against Italy on this issue.

Finally the issue of taking into account professional experience for the purposes of access to the public sector and for determining professional advantages (e.g. salary; grade) is an important issue. In view of the ECJ's case law the Commission considers that migrant workers' previous periods of comparable employment acquired in another Member State must be taken into account by Member States' administrations for the purposes of access to their own public sector and for determining professional advantages in the same way as applies to experience acquired in their own system. The Commission has opened numerous infringement procedures against a number of Member States including Italy and France. France has adopted a set of new rules on the issue of taking into account of professional experience for the purpose of determining the salary; the Commission continues to monitor the way in which the new rules are applied in practice. In relation to Italy the ECJ recently concluded that the Italian authorities had infringed the principle of free movement of workers because they did not appropriately take into account the professional teaching experience acquired by migrant teachers who entered a competition for a teaching vacancy at an Italian state school (decision of the ECJ of 12 May 2005). In relation to the question of taking into account of professional experience for the purpose of determining professional advantages another infringement procedure is pending against Italy (C-371/04).

Στην Ελλάδα υπάρχει ο θεσμός των "αναπληρωτών καθηγητών" που καλύπτουν ανάγκες στη μέση εκπαίδευση και οι οποίοι έχουν αποφοιτήσει από την ελληνική τριτοβάθμια εκπαίδευση (όπως και οι μόνιμοι συνάδελφοί τους), εκτελούν τα ίδια ακριβώς καθήκοντα με αυτούς και τοποθετούνται για να διδάξουν - στη μεγάλη τους πλειοψηφία - σε απομακρυσμένες περιοχές της ελληνικής επικράτειας. Παρόλα αυτά, αμείβονται με άδικο τρόπο, αφού δεν πληρώνονται τους καλοκαιρινούς μήνες που τα σχολεία είναι κλειστά, ούτε λαμβάνουν πρόσθετους μισθούς τα Χριστούγεννα και το Πάσχα (όπως παίρνουν όλοι οι μόνιμοι συνάδελφοί τους) ενώ τελούν και σε καθεστώς μιας ιδιαίτερα ψυχοφθόρας αβεβαιότητας, αφού ποτέ δεν είναι σίγουρο αν θα κληθούν να εργασθούν.

Είναι σύμφωνες με την αρχή της ίσης αμοιβής για ίση εργασία οι παραπάνω ρυθμίσεις; Πώς μπορεί να παρέμβει η Επιτροπή για την παύση τού ιδιότυπου αυτού "ρατσισμού" κατά των "αναπληρωτών καθηγητών" μέσης εκπαίδευσης;

The Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC), the Union of Industrial and Employers’ Confederations of Europe (UNICE) and the European Centre of Enterprises with Public Participation (CEEP)⁽¹⁾ obliges the Member States to introduce rules in order to implement the principle of non-discrimination between fixed-term workers and comparable permanent workers as regards employment conditions and periods of service qualifications. The Directive applies to fixed-term workers who have an employment contract or employment relationship as defined at the national level.

Greece has notified the Commission that the Directive in the respects mentioned above has been transposed by Decree 81/2003 and subsequently for the public sector by Presidential Decree 164/2004. Both of these Decrees contain rules on the principle of non-discrimination between fixed-term workers and comparable permanent workers in respect of employment conditions and periods of service qualifications. In the view of the Commission these rules are in conformity with the requirements stipulated by the Directive.

The question whether the treatment of supply teachers in Greece is in accordance with the rules laid down at the national level in order to transpose the Community legislation in this field is in the first instance a matter for the competent Greek authorities. The Commission can intervene if the rules at the national level in practice are applied in a manner which is contrary to Community law. It can be added that the Commission for the moment has no indications that this would be the case.

Czy Komisja ma - przynajmniej wstępny - kalendarz negocjacji przedakcesyjnych z Macedonią, a następnie z innymi krajami Europy Południowo - Wschodniej (Serbia, Czarnogóra, Bośnia i Hercegowina, Albania)? W kontekście daty rozpoczęcia negocjacji z Turcją nasze relacje z Europą Południowo - Wschodnią nabierają bowiem specjalnego znaczenia.

There is no timetable for accession negotiations with the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia or with any of the other countries of South East Europe mentioned by the Honourable Member (Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania).

The Honourable Member will recall that accession negotiations take place once the Council has decided so, following an application for accession by the aspiring country, in accordance with Article 49 of the Treaty on the European Union. The Council decides on the basis of an Opinion emitted by the Commission.

The countries of the Western Balkans are all potential candidates for membership and the European Union has repeatedly stated that their future lies within the EU. However, at this stage, only Croatia is a candidate negotiating its accession.

The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia tabled its application for membership in March 2004 and the Council requested the Commission to prepare an Opinion in May of the same year. The Commission will adopt its Opinion on 9 November. The Commission is in no position today to pre-empt its recommendation, notably on the possible opening of accession negotiations with that country.

In the case of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia and Montenegro, no application for membership has been filed by these countries, which indeed have not yet concluded Stabilisation and Association Agreements (SAA) with the European Union. A recommendation on possible conclusion of negotiations for a SAA with Albania could be presented by the Commission in the near future; similar negotiations have just started with Serbia and Montenegro, and will also probably start in the next few months with Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Relations with south-eastern Europe are a high priority for the EU, regardless of the opening of accession negotiations with Turkey. The European perspective of this region is particularly significant in the context of forthcoming developments in the area, such as the opening of status talks on Kosovo. Important progress on the road towards the EU has been achieved throughout the region, reflecting both the reform efforts of the countries in question and the political will on our side. However, in most cases there is still a long way to go. The pace of advancement of each country and, hence, the timetable for steps ahead, depends on its own progress in fulfilling the established criteria for coming closer and eventually joining the Union.

¿Ha iniciado la Comisión, o se propone iniciar, algún procedimiento de infracción por violación de las medidas comunitarias en materia de seguridad aérea?

La Commission a entamé, le 3 octobre 2005, plusieurs procédures d’infraction pour non communication des mesures nationales de transposition de la directive 2003/42/CE⁽¹⁾ du Parlement et du Conseil, du 13 juin 2003, concernant les comptes rendus d'évènements dans l'aviation civile.

En outre, la Commission a ouvert plusieurs procédures d’infraction concernant la mauvaise application du règlement (CE) No 549/2004⁽²⁾ du Parlement et du Conseil, du 10 mars 2004, fixant le cadre pour la réalisation du ciel unique européen, notamment en ce qui concerne la création et la notification à la Commission des autorités nationales de surveillance prévue à l’article 4 du règlement.

Spolu s kolegami z poslaneckého klubu EPP-ED som si nedávno symbolicky adoptoval politického väzňa Antonia Diaz Sanchéza odsúdeného v marci 2003 kubánskym režimom na 20 rokov väzenia. O jeho situácii ma informujú zástupcovia občianskeho združenia Človek v ohrození a nadácie Pontis zo Slovenska. Začiatkom októbra som dostal list od manželky A. Sancheza - Gisely (členky hnutia Ženy v bielom - kandidátky na cenu Andreja Sacharova), v ktorom píše o zhoršenom zdravotnom stave manžela a o tom, že mu odopierajú zdravotnícku starostlivosť. Pomery na Kube sa dlhodobo nemenia. Rád by som sa opýtal Európskej komisie, ako môžeme diplomatickou cestou dosiahnuť, aby A. Sanchez a iní, za svoje politické presvedčenie neprávom väznení, mali lepší prístup k adekvátnej zdravotníckej starostlivosti?

La Commission se félicite de cette nouvelle expression de support de la part de membres du Parlement à l’égard de personnes emprisonnées à Cuba en raison de leurs idées politiques. Elle partage la profonde inquiétude pour le sort des prisonniers politiques à Cuba.

Lors de sa visite à Cuba au mois de mars dernier, le Commissaire en charge du Développement a rencontré plusieurs familiers de prisonniers politiques, dont Mme Gisela Sanchez Verdecia, épouse de M. Antonio Diaz Sanchez, ainsi que plusieurs représentants de la dissidence pacifique. Le commissaire a évoqué lors de cette visite, avec tous ses interlocuteurs officiels y inclus le Président Castro, la question des prisonniers politiques. La délégation de la Commission à La Havane maintient un contact étroit et permanent avec les membres des familles de prisonniers politiques et les organisations de droits de l’homme à Cuba, notamment la Commission cubaine pour les Droits de l'Homme et la Réconciliation Nationale.

L’Union Européenne a appelé de manière ferme et réitérée depuis mars 2003 les autorités cubaines à libérer tous les prisonniers politiques et assurer que, entre temps, ces prisonniers ne sont pas soumis à des souffrances ou à des traitements inhumains. Récemment, dans un communiqué de presse du 24 juillet 2005, la Commission a exprimé son inquiétude sur l’évolution de la situation politique à Cuba et a dénoncé les nouvelles arrestations de dissidents à La Havane. La Présidence, au nom de l’Union, a exprimé cette même préoccupation dans deux déclarations, le 15 et le 25 juillet 2005, et a réitéré la demande de libération de tous les prisonniers politiques.

Le 29 septembre 2005, l’Union Européenne a également, dans une nouvelle déclaration, appelé les autorités cubaines à « entreprendre des actions immédiates afin d’améliorer les conditions de détention de tous les prisonniers politiques à Cuba, maintenus dans des conditions en dessous des Standards Minimaux des Nations Unies en matière de Traitement des Prisonniers ». L’amélioration des conditions de détention inclut, certainement, l’accès des prisonniers politiques à des soins de santé adéquats.

La Commission reste en faveur du maintien d’une politique d’engagement constructif par un dialogue politique avec les autorités cubaines, accompagnée du renforcement des contacts avec la dissidence et des représentants de la société civile. La décision du Conseil du 13 juin 2005 a justement renforcé la nécessité d’utiliser ce dialogue pour appuyer des avances concrètes en matière de droits de l’homme. Cette politique d’engagement constructif est, pour la Commission, celle qui a le plus de chances d’aboutir dans la libération de tous les prisonniers politiques à Cuba.

Σύμφωνα με την ευρωπαϊκή στρατηγική για τα Δυτικά Βαλκάνια, που υιοθετήθηκε στο Ευρωπαϊκό Συμβούλιο της Θεσσαλονίκης (Ιούνιος 2003), προβλέπεται η χρηματοδότηση, από το κοινοτικό πρόγραμμα CARDS, κοινών σχεδίων "διδυμοποίησης" (twinning) φορέων της ευρύτερης δημόσιας διοίκησης των κρατών μελών με αντίστοιχους φορείς των χωρών των Δυτικών Βαλκανίων, με στόχο την ενίσχυση της διαδικασίας εκδημοκρατισμού και τον εκσυγχρονισμό των θεσμών, στο πλαίσιο της ευρωπαϊκής τους προοπτικής.

Ποια σχέδια υπέβαλαν οι ελληνικές αρχές κατά το χρονικό διάστημα 2004-2005 και ποια υλοποιούνται στις χώρες των Δυτικών Βαλκανίων; Ποια σχέδια έχουν υποβληθεί από άλλα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ; Γενικότερα, πώς προχωρά η υλοποίηση της διαδικασίας της "διδυμοποίησης" στα Δυτικά Βαλκάνια, σύμφωνα με την απόφαση του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου της Θεσσαλονίκης;

The Commission has launched twinning projects in the framework of the CARDS since 2001, i.e. before the adoption of the European strategy for the Western Balkans at the Thessaloniki European Council in June 2003.

Between 2001 and 2005 the Commission has initiated 54 CARDS twinning projects and called on the public administrations of the Member States to propose public sector expertise to that effect. According to the presently available data, Greece has submitted 25 twinning proposals for these projects and the Greek administration has been selected to implement two projects.

More generally it has been recognised that twinning, as a tested institution building instrument for targeted administrative co-operation, should be more widely used to follow up on the Thessaloniki European Council conclusions in order to strengthen the process of democratisation and stabilisation in the Western Balkans. This is and will be reflected in an increasing number of CARDS twinning projects .

During the discussion on the Commission's presentation of the New Legal Framework for Payments (NLF) to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, it was stated that the results of DG Competition's sectoral inquiry into debit and credit cards is expected next year. It seems likely that there could be some overlap with NLF. If so, would the Commission agree that Parliament should have available to it the relevant parts of this inquiry when it discusses this directive?

More generally, it seems possible that other parts of the sectoral inquiry could also be relevant. Can the Commission indicate whether it is intending to coordinate at least provisional responses to the sectoral inquiry with the New Legal Framework and make the information available to Parliament?

The proposal for a New Legal Framework (NLF) for payments has been fully considered by the Commission services from the angle of ensuring that it is pro-competitive in its effects. Directorate General (DG) Internal Market and DG Competition closely co-operated in the preparation of the proposal. It has also undergone a proper impact assessment.

The NLF proposal focuses on the relationship between payment service providers and their users and addresses relevant competition aspects in this respect, including harmonization of market access conditions of national payment markets and improved market transparency for users. The sector inquiry into retail banking is a distinct exercise, based on the competition rules. Payment services are one part of the inquiry.

The Commission will, of course, share the results of its sector inquiry with the Parliament once available. However, the Commission does not expect that the findings of the sector inquiry will change the justification and impact assessment on which the current proposal for the New Legal Framework (NLF) for payments is based. The Commission therefore sees no obstacle to discussing this important piece of proposed legislation before the findings of the sector inquiry are available.

Volgens recente berichten zou Zweden invoerbeperkingen willen opleggen voor de invoer van likeuren uit andere EU-lidstaten. Zweden heeft nog een staatsmonopolie wat sterke alcoholische dranken betreft.(het zgn. "Systembolaget"), dat indertijd werd ingesteld om het drankprobleem van vele Zweden te bestrijden.

De Zweedse overheid zou nu plannen om een invoerbeperking op te leggen voor likeuren die haar landgenoten in het buitenland, vooral in de grensstaten gaan aankopen. Reden is dat het drankverbruik de jongste jaren terug angstwekkend is gestegen. Dit lijkt mij echter in strijd met het principe van de interne markt en het vrij verkeer van goederen. Vooral de buurlanden en de Europese likeurproducenten zullen hiervan de dupe worden. Gaat de Zweedse overheid op die manier geen intern probleem trachten op te lossen ten nadele van andere Europese lidstaten? Zal de Commissie dit toelaten en zo ja, onder welke voorwaarden? Zal dit geen tegenreactie uitlokken van andere lidstaten, zodat het hele vrij verkeer op de helling komt?

The question of the Honourable Member seems to concern a possible proposal by the Swedish Government to restrict the import of the alcoholic beverage of the type “liqueur” into Sweden on the basis of the protection of public health. The Commission was not aware of the existence of such a proposal, which has not yet been notified under Directive 98/34/EC.

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that the Commission decided on 7 July 2004 within the infringement procedure of Article 226 of the EC Treaty to bring Sweden before the European Court of Justice for maintaining a ban on Swedish consumers using independent intermediaries to import alcoholic beverages for their private use into Sweden from other Member States. Having regard to the public health objective that it is supposed to achieve, the Commission believes that the ban represents a disproportionate obstacle to the free movement of goods in contravention of Articles 28 and 30 of the EC Treaty. In the Commission’s view, the protection of public health can be achieved by other means that are less restrictive for trade between Member States, such as public information campaigns and introducing procedures which check the age of those buying alcoholic drinks.

Furthermore, the Commission would like to bring the Honourable Member’s attention to the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Franzén case (Case C-189/95, Harry Franzén, judgment of 23 October 1997). The European Court of Justice confirmed in that judgment that for public health reasons, the existence and the operation of a domestic monopoly on retail of alcohol beverages, such as “Systembolaget”, was compatible with the EC Treaty, more particularly with Article 31 concerning national monopolies. Article 31 of the EC Treaty does indeed not require national monopolies having a commercial character to be abolished, but requires them to be adjusted in such a way as to ensure that no discrimination regarding the conditions under which goods are procured and marketed exists.

The Commission will follow the developments regarding possible intentions to restrict the import of alcoholic beverages into Sweden with utmost attention.

Η τριτοβάθμια συνεταιριστική οργάνωση της Ελλάδας (ΠΑΣΕΓΕΣ), με υπόδειξη της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης, παρακρατεί παράνομα και καταχρηστικά από τους αγρότες 10 έως 25 ευρώ για κάθε αίτηση διόρθωσης λαθών που έκανε ο Οργανισμός Πληρωμών και Ελέγχου Κοινοτικών Επιδοτήσεων Προσανατολισμού και Εγγυήσεων (ΟΠΕΚΕΠΕ) κατά τον υπολογισμό της ενιαίας ενίσχυσης που δικαιούται κάθε αγρότης στα πλαίσια της νέας ΚΑΠ. Η παρακράτηση αυτή είναι παράνομη και καταχρηστική γιατί τα έξοδα διαχείρισης της ενιαίας ενίσχυσης αποτελούν δημόσια δαπάνη, και σύμφωνα με γενικό κανονισμό, απαγορεύεται οποιαδήποτε παρακράτηση από τις αγροτικές επιδοτήσεις, και κυρίως γιατί οι αγρότες καλούνται να πληρώσουν όχι δικά τους λάθη, αλλά τα λάθη του ΟΠΕΚΕΠΕ.

Έχει γνώση η Επιτροπή για το θέμα και τι ενέργειες θα κάνει για να σταματήσει την παράνομη παρακράτηση και να επιστραφούν όσα χρήματα έχουν καταχρηστικά παρακρατηθεί;

The Commission will remind the Greek authorities of the legal obligation that payments of direct aids to farmers have to be made in full without any reductions to cover administrative costs. In addition, in the framework of the clearance of account procedure this important aspect of the implementation of the single payment system will be verified.

Farmers who are dissatisfied with the way the payments have been executed should request clarification from the Greek authorities and ask for full payment. They also have the option of using the legal remedies in force at national level.

Kommissionen indledte den 7. juli en antidumpingundersøgelse vedrørende importen af ”fodtøj med overdel af læder” fra Kina og Vietnam. Undersøgelsen blev iværksat efter kraftigt pres fra en organisation, der repræsenterer virksomheder, der står for under halvdelen af produktionen i EU af de pågældende varer.

Sagen har allerede haft skadelige konsekvenser for den globalt orienterede del af den europæiske fodtøjsbranche, og om få måneder vil konsekvenserne slå igennem på detailhandlen og forbrugerne i EU, der vil opleve stigende priser allerede inden en eventuel antidumpingtold er blevet gennemført.

Kan Kommissionen bekræfte, at den kun vil foreslå en antidumpingtold indført, såfremt den mener, at dette vil være i fællesskabets interesse? Kan den samtidig oplyse, hvorledes den agter at sikre, at såvel hele fodtøjsbranchens som forbrugernes interesser bliver inddraget i vurderingen af, hvad der er i fællesskabets interesse?

Any industry operating in the European Community, or any producers representing such industry, has the legal right to lodge an anti-dumping complaint containing evidence that it suffers from an injury caused by dumping practices. If this complaint contains sufficient elements showing evidence of injurious dumping, the Commission has no choice but to initiate an investigation.

In this specific case, a complaint was received from more than 800 footwear producers in the Community, representing around 60,000 employees. Those companies represent a major proportion of the European footwear industry, i.e. in this case more than 40% of the overall Community production of footwear with uppers of leather. Those producers are deemed to legally represent the Community footwear industry.

It should be underlined that the opening of an investigation is obviously without prejudice to its outcome. The on-going investigation will determine whether there is dumping, injury and a causal link between them.

In the event that the investigation confirms the allegations of injurious dumping then the Commission will be faced with the task of balancing the various interests of all parties concerned including those of EU producers, importers, distributors and consumers and to determine whether it, on balance, is in the Interest of the Community to impose measures.

Like in any other anti-dumping investigation, the Commission has given the opportunity to all economic operators, directly concerned by any imposition of measures, to come forward and to co-operate to the investigation by providing their views and any relevant information necessary to analyse to what extent they would be affected by any measures. Association of consumers have also been contacted in that respect.

The investigation will entail a thorough analysis of those comments, in order to ensure that any measures would only be imposed if it is determined that, on balance, the economic interest of retailers and consumers, does not carry more weight than those of the Community industry and the effect of the remedial action. The Commission will conduct this analysis with the utmost care.

Trifft es zu, dass EU-Beamte nach Anhang XIII Artikel 23 des Statuts der EU-Beamten bereits mit 50 Jahren in den Ruhestand gehen können?

Laut Anhang XIII, Artikel 23 des Statuts der Europäischen Beamten, kann ein Beamter, der zum Zeitpunkt der Reform des Statuts (1.5.2004) bereits 45 Jahre alt war oder 20 Dienstjahre abgeleistet hat, ab dem Alter von 50 Jahren aus dem Dienst ausscheiden. Seine Ruhegehaltsbezüge werden dementsprechend gekürzt (Anhang XIII, Artikel 23, Absatz 2)⁽¹⁾.

It is important to note that this provision was included in the transitional measures applying to the revised Staff Rules to ensure the legitimate expectations of existing staff were protected. Since the reform of the Staff Regulations, the usual minimum age for early retirement has been raised to 55. Moreover, in practice retirement before the age of 55 has always been extremely rare in the Commission, probably because the reduction in the pension payable is very substantial in such cases. Retirement before the old normal retirement age of 60 is also relatively uncommon.

El año 2003 el Gobierno Español presentó a la Comisión Europea cinco proyectos para la ejecución del Trasvase del Río Ebro cuya cantidad ascendía aproximadamente a 1 200 Millones de euros. La financiación de estos proyectos procedía, en parte, de los Fondos Estructurales correspondientes a Regiones Objetivo 1 (Valencia, Murcia y Andalucía) y, el resto, de los Fondos de Cohesión. Estos proyectos fueron estudiados en la Dirección General de Política Regional.

Teniendo en cuenta que posteriormente el Gobierno Español retiró dichos proyectos, pregunto a la Comisión:

¿A qué proyectos se han destinado esos fondos, cual es su nombre y su situación administrativa? ¿Ha habido algún descompromiso automático de los Fondos implicados? ¿El Plan Agua presentado por el Gobierno Español ha sido propuesto para ser financiado por estos fondos? y en caso afirmativo ¿qué proyectos del Plan Agua y cuáles son las cifras solicitadas?

The projects for the Ebro transfer were submitted for Community financing by the Spanish authorities in December 2003 and January 2004, as a set of four large projects with a total cost of € 2,728 Million and requested Community financing of € 1,262 Million. The situation concerning the possible Community financing of works included in the Spanish National Hydrological Plan (SNHP) was the subject of intense discussion between all parties concerned, in particular as regards to the proposed transfer of 1050 Hm³ of water per year from the Ebro river to the Spanish Mediterranean coastal regions of Cataluña, Valencia, Murcia and the province of Almería in Andalucía. There was no unanimity between the different Spanish regions regarding this transfer. After the change of government in Spain as a result of the general elections of March 2004, the new Spanish authorities declared that the “Ebro transfer” would be withdrawn and substituted by alternative projects. These requests for co-financing were officially withdrawn by letter from the Spanish Permanent Representation of 29 June 2004.

Therefore, the “Ebro transfer” projects have never been approved by the Commission and no funds were ever committed to co-finance these projects.

Through Royal Decree 2/2004 of 18 June 2004, the new Spanish government modified the articles and projects in the NHP law related to the Ebro river transfer and proposed, for the watersheds affected, a set of alternative priority and urgent measures.

These measures have been presented by the Ministry of Environment on the 2nd of September 2004 under the new name of Programme A.G.U.A. (Actuaciones para la Gestión y la Utilización del Agua – Interventions for the Management and the Use of Water).

A series of urgent interventions in the Mediterranean watersheds in the framework of the A.G.U.A. programme is intended to deliver to the same regions plus the province of Málaga, in Andalucía, a total of 1.063 Hm³ of water per year (practically equivalent to the proposed 1.050 Hm³/year proposed to be transferred from the Ebro, though affecting a larger area) through a mixture of measures including water savings and management improvement, the reuse of treated wastewaters and the construction of desalination plants.

On October 1st, 2005, the estimated investment for the more than one hundred AGUA interventions was € 4,360 Million. In declarations to the press at the presentation of the A.G.U.A. programme, the Spanish Minister for the Environment stated that Spain counts on € 1,362 Million of Community funds.

Following the latest information received from the Spanish Ministry of Environment, from the investment envisaged of € 4,360 Million, € 432 Million correspond to 11 projects in implementation phase, € 26 Million to projects completed, € 71 Million to projects for which a call for tenders has been published, € 3,350Million to projects being in project definition phase and € 481 Million for projects for which feasibility studies are ongoing.

Will the Commission undertake to review the Electromagnetic Fields Directive (2004/40/EC⁽¹⁾), given the consensus among leading scientific experts in this field of the damage that this Directive will inflict on the future development and provision of medical devices across the EU, in particular the impact on clinical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which is potentially disastrous?

Directive 2004/40/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risk arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields) is designed to protect workers against excessive exposure to MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) and electromagnetic fields which scientific experts agree is dangerous for health as well as other radiations. It was drafted by the Commission based on the results and recommendations issued by ICNIRP (International Commission for Non Ionizing Radiation Protection), an independent world wide recognized organisation using the expertise of technicians, scientists and doctors working in the field.

The Parliament and the Council (unanimously) agreed in April 2004 that it is essential to have the same standards for the health and safety of workers regarding electromagnetic fields since the risk is the same for nurses and doctors throughout Europe. The Directive was adopted unanimously and has to be implemented by April 2008.

The Commission is aware of the concern expressed by some doctors and scientists about the coming into force of this Directive. To this effect, the Commission would like to recall that the risk of MRI is a real one for everybody who is exposed to it regularly and that this directive will give a solid protection to doctors and nurses exposed to MRI and should have no negative impact on the quality of health care.

In any case, the Directive foresees a review mechanism every five years based on the implementation reports received from the Member States. Any unintended effect on the quality of health care will be addressed in this context-

Der Straßenverkehr ist einer der größten Energieverbraucher und darüber hinaus für mehr als ein Fünftel aller CO2-Emissionen in der Europäischen Union verantwortlich. Eine Möglichkeit, den Straßenverkehr umweltfreundlicher zu machen, ist die Nutzung von Biokraftstoffen. Besonders interessant erscheint die Verwendung von Rapsmethylesther, so genanntem Biodiesel, der aus Raps, also nachwachsendem Rohstoff gewonnen wird. Biodiesel würde zu einer Senkung der Russemissionen beitragen. Bei der Verbrennung würde Rapsmethylesther etwa ebensoviel CO2 abgeben, wie die Pflanzen während des Wachstums aufgenommen haben. Raps kann in der EU produziert werden, weshalb die Verwendung von Biodiesel zur Unabhängigkeit von Erdölimporten beiträgt. Darüber hinaus würde eine verstärkte Nachfrage nach Biodiesel und damit nach Raps auch einen positiven Impuls für die Landwirtschaft bedeuten.

Sind der Kommission Studien über den Einsatz von Rapsöl als alternativem Treibstoff bekannt, aus denen sich dessen ökologische Sinnhaftigkeit ergibt? Wenn ja, könnte Biodiesel nicht auch einen Beitrag zur Erreichung der Kyoto-Ziele leisten?

Welche Vorraussetzungen müssten für eine Wettbewerbsfähigkeit von Biodiesel vorliegen? Wäre es von Seiten der Kommission denkbar, Rapsöl über Verbrauchssteuern wettbewerbsfähig zu machen?

The Commission agrees completely. The Union has committed itself to use more transport biofuels. It is true that biofuels are expensive (biodiesel would need an oil price of about €75/barrel to become as cheap as conventional fuel, bioethanol €95). But they are one of the few measures we have that can significantly reducing transport’s dependence on oil and its ever-growing emissions of greenhouse gases. In addition, they offer important benefits for economic activity in rural areas.

The Union has already done several things to promote biofuels. In 2003, it adopted Directives setting targets for their use⁽¹⁾ and making it easier to adjust consumption taxes to support them.⁽²⁾ The reform of the common agricultural policy will help biofuels by permitting farmers to choose the markets they grow crops for. Biofuels also receive support from Community financial instruments like the European Regional Development Fund, the Rural Development Programme and the Energy Crops Credit. The Research and Technological Development (RTD) framework programmes are supporting research into “2nd-generation” biofuels that can be made from wood and wastes. If the remaining technical obstacles can be overcome, it is hoped that these will offer greater greenhouse gas savings.

The biofuels directive set the objective of a 2% market share for biofuels at the end of 2005. It is becoming clear that this will not be achieved. At best, if all Member States achieve the targets they have set, the share will be 1.4%. In the light of this, and the added importance given to biofuels by high oil prices, the Commission will look closely, in its forthcoming Biomass Action Plan, at what more needs to be done. And it will bring forward a more detailed communication on aspects of biofuels policy in early 2006.

In 2003 startte de Europese Commissie een grootscheepse zogenaamde antidiscriminatiecampagne. Ook een groot aantal landelijke, zowel als EU-organisaties, zoals werkgeversorganisaties, vakbonden en niet-goevernementele organisaties, zijn actief betrokken in de campagne. De meeste campagneactiviteiten worden niet centraal vanuit Brussel georganiseerd, maar landelijk en regionaal in elke lidstaat afzonderlijk.

Op 13 oktober 2005 trachtte ik op de betreffende website informatie te bekomen over de zogenaamde nationale partners en de nationale campagne in de lidstaat België. Ik werd zowaar geconfronteerd met het feit dat deze informatie enkel in het Frans beschikbaar is. Een versie in de Nederlandse taal, de taal van het meerderheidsvolk van België, de Vlamingen, is gewoonweg niet beschikbaar.

Is de Europese Commissie op de hoogte van het feit dat de Vlamingen de meerderheid uitmaken van de bevolking van de lidstaat België en dat ook het Nederlands, naast het Frans, een officiële taal is van het koninkrijk België? Vindt de Europese Commissie niet dat zoiets in deze campagne - die officieel verscheidenheid en respect voor de andere wil bevorderen - totaal onaanvaardbaar is? Wie is hiervoor verantwoordelijk? Heeft de lidstaat België enkel een Franse versie bezorgd of is het zo dat de diensten van de Europese Commissie het enkel nodig achtten de Franse versie van de betreffende tekst op de officiële website van de Europese Commissie te plaatsen?

The website of the information campaign ‘For Diversity. Against Discrimination’ (www.stop-discrimination.info) is available in all 20 EU languages. From the index page information is available according to language rather than country. To access country specific information, all further webpages of the site are accompanied by a drop down menu in the right hand column. For information about the Belgian campaign, in both Dutch and French, Belgique/België should be selected.