Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

 Index 
Texts adopted
Wednesday, 3 October 2001 - StrasbourgFinal edition
Europol: combating counterfeiting and forgery * (procedure without report)
 Protection against counterfeiting of the euro * (procedure without report)
 Vehicles designed to carry more than eight passengers ***III
 Environmental noise ***II
 Energy efficiency labelling for office equipment ***II
 Accident at AZF, Toulouse, and environmental protection policy
 Common asylum procedure
 Immigration policy
 Arms exports
 GALILEO
 Innovation in a knowledge-driven economy
 Exhaustion of trade mark rights
 Conclusions of the UN Conference on racism ***I

Europol: combating counterfeiting and forgery * (procedure without report)
Initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden with a view to the adoption by the Council of a draft Decision amending the Decision of 29 April 1999 extending Europol's mandate to deal with forgery of money and means of payment [10528/2001 - C5-0360/2001 - 2001/0822(CNS) [
C5-0360/2001

(Consultation procedure)

The initiative was approved.


Protection against counterfeiting of the euro * (procedure without report)
Initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden with a view to the adoption of a Council Framework Decision amending Framework Decision 2000/383/JHA on increasing protection by criminal penalties and other sanctions against counterfeiting in connection with the introduction of the euro [10527/2001 - C5-0361/2001 - 2001/0823(CNS) [
C5-0361/2001

(Consultation procedure)

The initiative was approved.


Vehicles designed to carry more than eight passengers ***III
European Parliament legislative resolution on the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee for a European Parliament and Council directive relating to special provisions for vehicles used for the carriage of passengers comprising more than eight seats in addition to the driver's seat, and amending Directives 70/156/EEC and 97/27/EC (C5-0278/2001 - 1997/0176(COD) )
A5-0312/2001

(Codecision procedure: third reading)

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee (C5-0278/2001 ),

-   having regard to its position at first reading(1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(1997) 276 (2) ),

-   having regard to its position at second reading(3) on the Council common position(4) ,

-   having regard to the Commission's opinion on Parliament's amendments to the common position (COM(2001) 217 - C5-0168/2001 ),

-   having regard to Article 251(5) of the EC Treaty,

-   having regard to Rule 83 of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the report of its delegation to the Conciliation Committee (A5-0312/2001 ),

1.   Approves the joint text;

2.   Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council pursuant to Article 254(1) of the EC Treaty;

3.   Instructs its Secretary-General duly to sign the act and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to have it published in the Official Journal of the European Communities;

4.   Instructs its President to forward this legislative resolution to the Council and Commission.

(1) OJ C 379, 7.12.1998, p. 80.
(2) OJ C 17, 20.1.1998, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 276, 1.10.2001, p. 124.
(4) OJ C 370, 22.12.2000, p. 1.


Environmental noise ***II
European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position for adopting a European Parliament and Council directive relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise (6660/1/2001 - C5-0245/2001 - 2000/0194(COD) )
A5-0296/2001

(Codecision procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Council common position (6660/1/2001 - C5-0245/2001 ),

-   having regard to its position at first reading(1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2000) 468 (2) ),

-   having regard to Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,

-   having regard to Rule 80 of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (A5-0296/2001 ),

1.   Amends the common position as follows;

2.   Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

Council common position   Amendments by Parliament
Amendment 3
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) To supplement this framework directive, the Commission should propose specific directives laying down quality standards which Member States are required to meet. Such specific directives should cover all noise sources.
Amendment 4
Article 1, paragraph 1, introductory part
   1. The aim of this Directive shall be to define a common approach intended to combat on a prioritised basis the effects of exposure to environmental noise. To that end the following actions shall be implemented progressively:
   1. The aim of this Directive shall be to define a common approach intended to avoid, prevent or reduce harmful effects on human health due to exposure to environmental noise. To that end the following actions shall be implemented progressively:
Amendment 33
Article 1, paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and the Council, no later than . . .* , proposals for specific directives laying down binding quality standards to be implemented by the Member States within a specified timescale. Such specific directives shall cover all noise sources.
* Three years after the entry into force of this Directive
Amendment 11
Article 5, paragraph 1, subparagraph 1
   1. Member States shall apply the noise indicators Lden and Lnight as referred to in Annex I for the preparation and revision of strategic noise mapping in accordance with Article 7.
   1. Member States shall apply the noise indicators Lden and Lnight as referred to in Annex I for the preparation and revision of strategic noise mapping in accordance with Article 7, as well as for acoustical planning and noise zoning .
Amendment 18
Article 7, paragraph 2, subparagraph 2
No later than …… **** , Member States shall inform the Commission of all the agglomerations and of all the major roads and major railways within their territories.
________________
****Eight years after the entry into force of this Directive.
No later than 31 December 2008 , Member States shall inform the Commission of all the agglomerations and of all the major roads and major railways within their territories.
Amendment 20
Article 8, paragraph 1, point (a)
   (a) places near the major roads which have more than six million vehicle passages a year , major railways which have more than 60 000 train passages per year and major airports;
   (a) places near major roads, major railways and major airports;
Amendment 30
Annex VI, paragraph 1.5, subparagraph 1
   1.5. The estimated number of people (in hundreds) living in dwellings that are exposed to each of the following bands of values of Lden in dB 4 m above the ground on the most exposed façade: 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, > 75, separately for noise from road, rail and air traffic, and from industrial sources. The figures must be rounded to the nearest hundred (e.g. 5200 = between 5150 and 5249; 100 = between 50 and 149; 0 = less than 50).
   1.5. The estimated number of people (in hundreds) living in dwellings that are exposed to each of the following bands of values of Lden in dB 4 m above the ground on the most exposed façade: 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, > 75, separately for noise from road, rail and air traffic, and from industrial sources. The figures must be rounded to the nearest hundred (e.g. 5200 = between 5150 and 5249; 100 = between 50 and 149; 0 = less than 50).
Amendment 31
Annex VI, paragraph 1.6, subparagraph 1
   1.6. The estimated total number of people (in hundreds) living in dwellings that are exposed to each of the following bands of values of Lnight in dB 4 m above the ground on the most exposed façade: 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, >70, separately for road, rail and air traffic and for industrial sources.
   1.6. The estimated total number of people (in hundreds) living in dwellings that are exposed to each of the following bands of values of Lnight in dB 4 m above the ground on the most exposed façade: 40-44, 45-49, 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, >70, separately for road, rail and air traffic and for industrial sources.
Amendment 32
Annex VI, paragraph 2.6, subparagraph 1
   2.6. The estimated total number of people (in hundreds) living outside agglomerations in dwellings that are exposed to each of the following bands of values of Lnight in dB on the most exposed façade: 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, > 70.
   2.6. The estimated total number of people (in hundreds) living outside agglomerations in dwellings that are exposed to each of the following bands of values of Lnight in dB on the most exposed façade: 45-49, 50-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, > 70.
Amendment 35
Annex VI, paragraph 2.7
   2.7 The total area (in km2) exposed to values of Lden higher than 60, 65 and 75 dB respectively. The estimated total number of dwellings (in hundreds) and the estimated total number of people (in hundreds) living in each of these areas must also be given. Those figures must include agglomerations.
   2.7 The total area (in km2) exposed to values of Lden higher than 55, 65 and 75 dB respectively. The estimated total number of dwellings (in hundreds) and the estimated total number of people (in hundreds) living in each of these areas must also be given. Those figures must include agglomerations.
The 60 and 65 dB contours must also be shown on one or more maps that give information on the location of villages, towns and agglomerations within those contours.
The 55 and 65 dB contours must also be shown on one or more maps that give information on the location of villages, towns and agglomerations within those contours.

(1) OJ C 232, 17.8.2001, p. 305.
(2) OJ C 337 E, 28.11.2000, p. 251.


Energy efficiency labelling for office equipment ***II
European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position for adopting a European Parliament and Council regulation on a Community energy efficiency labelling programme for office equipment (6760/1/2001 - C5-0246/2001 - 2000/0033(COD) )
A5-0298/2001

(Codecision procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Council common position (6760/1/2001 - C5-0246/2001 ),

-   having regard to its position at first reading(1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2000) 18 (2) ),

-   having regard to the Commission's amended proposal (COM(2001) 142 (3) ),

-   having regard to Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,

-   having regard to Rule 78 of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (A5-0298/2001 ),

1.   Approves the common position;

2.   Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the common position;

3.   Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council pursuant to Article 254(1) of the EC Treaty;

4.   Instructs its Secretary-General duly to sign the act and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to have it published in the Official Journal of the European Communities;

5.   Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

(1) OJ C 267, 21.9.2001, p. 49.
(2) OJ C 150 E, 30.5.2000, p. 73.
(3) OJ C 180 E, 26.6.2001, p. 262.


Accident at AZF, Toulouse, and environmental protection policy
European Parliament resolution on the explosion at a factory in Toulouse (France)
B5-0611 , 0612 , 0614 and 0615/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to Articles 174 and 308 of the EC Treaty,

-   having regard to Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances(1) and in particular Article 11 on emergency plans and Article 12 on land-use planning,

-   having regard to the related Commission Decision 1999/314/EC of 9 April 1999(2) imposing an obligation on the Member States to draw up a report covering the period 2000 to 2002, and having regard to the previous reports on the application of Directive 96/82/EC,

-   having regard to the Council Resolution of 16 October 1989 on guidelines to reduce technological and natural hazards(3) ,

-   having regard to the Council Resolution of 8 July 1991 on improving mutual aid between Member States in the event of natural or technological disaster(4) ,

-   having regard to its resolution of 4 September 2001 on the Commission's seventeenth annual report on monitoring the application of Community law (1999) (COM(2000) 92 - C5-0381/2000 - 2000/2197(COS) )(5) ,

-   having regard to the Council Decision 1999/847/EC of 9 December 1999 establishing a Community action programme in the field of civil protection(6) ,

-   having regard to its position of 14 June 2001 on the proposal for a Council decision establishing a Community mechanism for the coordination of civil protection intervention in the event of emergencies (COM(2000) 593 - C5-0543/2000 - 2000/0248(CNS) )(7) ,

A.   mindful of the huge explosion which rocked the AZF factory at Toulouse, devastating the site and several surrounding residential areas (hospitals, schools, universities, etc.) and killing 29 people and injuring several hundred others,

B.   whereas the consequences of the Toulouse disaster were made more dramatic because the factory was close to residential areas; whereas its proximity to other at-risk industrial sites could have set off a domino effect,

C.   mindful of the long list of dramatic industrial and chemical accidents which have occurred since Seveso in 1976, in particular in Basel (Switzerland), Bhopal (India), Baia Mare (Romania) and Enschede (Netherlands), and the sad procession of mourning and tremendous destruction which followed in their wake,

D.   whereas these accidents, owing to their scale, repeated occurrence and the feeling that they are inescapable, have broken the pact of trust between the public and the legislative and regulatory framework which is supposed to protect it from industrial risks,

E.   whereas the Seveso directives have enhanced the safety of the industrial sites concerned but have also revealed, as accidents have occurred, their shortcomings and the limits to the protection which they can offer, given that some of these tragedies, particularly that in Toulouse, took place at sites which are covered by the scope of the Seveso directives,

F.   whereas this plant, which was built in 1924, had been listed as being in a 'Seveso' area since 1982,

G.   bearing in mind that the chemical sector employs several million people in the European Union, and in particular 900 000 people in France,

H.   whereas classified industrial sites represent enormous potential dangers, particularly if they are used as targets by people with malicious intent, above all since our society now finds itself increasingly exposed to abominable terrorist threats,

1.   Deeply shocked by the terrible accident in the AZF factory in Toulouse, expresses its sympathy and solidarity to the victims, families and populations affected;

2.   Calls on the national governments facing this type of disaster to ensure full transparency with regard to the criminal or accidental causes of such appalling damage to people and property in order to determine who or what is responsible for it;

3.   Congratulates the French authorities on the way in which appropriate aid has been provided to the populations affected, the smooth functioning of aid and the decisions already announced, in particular as regards emergency accommodation;

4.   Calls, in order to express its solidarity with those affected, for the reinstatement of the emergency budget heading enabling EU financial aid to be provided in the event of natural, technological and environmental disasters, to supplement the aid provided by national, regional and local authorities;

5.   Calls for great efforts to be made at the European Union level to step up coordination of existing European civil protection measures, so that in emergencies there is information on the resources in the Member States that can be mobilised, in order to allow rapid intervention, facilitate the work of experts from different Member States and improve communications and notification of the public; to this end calls for sufficient financial and human resources to be allocated;

6.   Notes the impossibility of 'zero risk' in the case of close proximity between an urban population and such petro-chemical industrial complexes and takes the view that the current approach to 'risk management' dating from the time of the Seveso accident, which has prevailed up to now, has been overtaken by events and that it is now necessary and urgent to adopt an approach based on 'risk removal'; asks, consequently, that the lessons learned from the Toulouse disaster should provide the basis for proposals to be made by the Commission to the European Parliament as soon as possible;

7.   Calls urgently on the Member States to initiate an in-depth review of policies on regional and urban planning in the vicinity of risk sites, including as regards the fiscal aspects, in order to prevent any repetition of such disasters; considers that, in the case of high-risk industrial sites, consultation procedures between public authorities and elected representatives, local residents, industry and staff representatives should make it possible to restructure these sites with a view to sustainable development reconciling concerns relating to safety, employment and the environment;

8.   Takes the view that everything possible should be done to safeguard jobs at the sites concerned so as not to add social tragedy to the environmental threat, and that any solution concerning the future of the sites and the jobs must be sought in close cooperation with the employees and the elected representatives;

9.   Strongly opposes, in the context of the solidarity which has always been affirmed by the European Union in its cooperation and development policy, any attempt to relocate dangerous sites to countries where environmental and social standards are lower than those in force in EU territory; urges the Member States and the Union to implement all possible technical and financial measures, and take all political steps, to achieve this objective;

10.   Wishes the legal liability of industry and the authorities responsible for regional planning and land use to be better defined and strengthened in the event of an accident; furthermore, industry should play a more substantial part in compensating those affected and repairing damage; calls on the Commission to submit as soon as possible its proposal for a directive on environmental liability;

11.   Hopes that the opportunity offered by the necessary evolution of European legislation relating to industrial risks will be seized to prompt the Union, in the context of sustainable development, to question the usefulness or purpose of certain chemical products and of certain now obsolete production processes;

12.   Is greatly concerned by the fact that not one of the 15 Member States had fully complied with the provisions of the Seveso II Directive by its transposition date and notes in this respect that the Commission has initiated 6 infringement proceedings against Member States for failure to implement the directive or incomplete implementation thereof;

13.   Calls on the Commission to encourage compliance with the directive by publishing, within three months, a list of sites throughout the European Union which are of concern or which, in the event of an accident, have the potential to cause damage on a scale similar to that brought about by the explosion in Toulouse;

14.   Calls urgently on the Commission to take full account, as soon as possible, of the lessons which must be drawn from this tragedy so as to respond to the needs to strengthen the regulation and control of high-risk establishments when the Seveso II Directive is revised, on the basis of the following elements in particular:

   -
strengthening of safety and control standards in order to prevent major accidents and limit the consequences for people and the environment,
   -
extension of the scope of the directive,
   -
strengthening of standards to reduce industrial discharges into the water and the atmosphere,
   -
extension of safety areas, including retroactively,
   -
improved information to the public on the risks faced and the measures to be taken in the event of a disaster,
   -
organisation of epidemiological studies in areas close to dangerous establishments,
   -
strengthening of the role of health and safety committees in the firms concerned and more account taken of the opinion of employees and trade union organisations,
   -
consideration of the role of the office responsible at European level for monitoring implementation of the Seveso II Directive, the Major Accident Hazards Bureau (MAHB)(8) ;

15.   Regrets that the Member States, despite repeated warnings, do not provide themselves with sufficient numbers of competent and specialised inspectors and calls, consequently, for such staff to be recruited and suitably trained, and for minimum qualification criteria for inspectors to be updated in order to guarantee the same level of safety on classified sites in the EU;

16.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the candidate countries, and to the local authorities of the Toulouse conurbation.

(1) OJ L 10, 14.1.1997, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 120, 8.5.1999, p. 43.
(3) OJ C 273, 26.10.1989, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 198, 27.7.1991, p. 1.
(5) Texts Adopted, Item 6.
(6) OJ L 327, 21.12.1999, p. 53.
(7) Texts Adopted, Item 26.
(8) http://mahbsrv.jrc.it


Common asylum procedure
European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication entitled "Towards a common asylum procedure and a uniform status, valid throughout the Union, for persons granted asylum” (COM(2000) 755 - C5-0101/2001 - 2001/2048(COS) )
A5-0304/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Commission communication (COM(2000) 755 - C5-0101/2001 ),

-   having regard to Title IV of the Treaty establishing the European Community on visas, asylum, immigration and other policies related to the free movement of persons,

-   having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Articles 2 and 6 thereof,

-   having regard to Articles 18 and 19(2) of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights,

-   having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, adopted on 4 November 1950,

-   having regard to the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 relating to the Status of Refugees, as amended by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967,

-   having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948,

-   having regard to the United Nations Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted on 10 December 1984,

-   having regard to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child adopted on 20 November 1989,

-   having regard to the Council resolution of 20 June 1995 on minimum guarantees for asylum procedures(1) ,

-   having regard to the Dublin Convention of 15 June 1990 determining the State responsible for examining applications for asylum lodged in one of the Member States of the European Communities(2) ,

-   having regard to the Action plan of the Council and the Commission on how best to implement the provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam on an area of freedom, security and justice - Text adopted by the Justice and Home Affairs Council of 3 December 1998(3) ,

-   having regard to the conclusions of the Tampere European Council of 15 and 16 October 1999, in particular points 2, 3, 4, 8, and 11 to 27 thereof,

-   having regard to its earlier resolutions on immigration and asylum,

-   having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2725/2000 of 11 December 2000 concerning the establishment of 'Eurodac' for the comparison of fingerprints for the effective application of the Dublin Convention(4) ,

-   having regard to the proposal for a Council directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status(5) and the proposal for a Council directive laying down minimum standards on the reception of applicants for asylum in Member States(6) ,

-   having regard to its position of 13 March 2001(7) on the proposal for a Council directive on minimum standards for giving temporary protection in the event of a mass influx of displaced persons and on measures promoting a balance of efforts between Member States in receiving such persons and bearing the consequences thereof (COM(2000) 303 - C5-0387/2000 - 2000/0127(CNS) ),

-   having regard to Council Decision 2000/596/EC of 28 September 2000 establishing a European Refugee Fund(8) and Commission Decision 2001/275/EC of 20 March 2001 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of that Decision as regards the eligibility of expenditure and reports on implementation in the context of actions co-financed by the European Refugee Fund (notified under document number (C(2001) 736)(9) ,

-   having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the report of the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy and the Committee on Petitions (A5-0304/2001 ),

A.   whereas a common asylum policy is a key component of an EU area of freedom, security and justice, which must be based on the respect for fundamental rights of individuals as expressed in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights, and although this policy is being developed in tandem with the common immigration policy, the specific nature of humanitarian protection, be it through recognition of refugee status in accordance with the Geneva Convention or through complementary forms of protection, should not be undermined by a wider immigration route to entry,

B.   mindful of the need to eliminate the organised networks and 'traffickers' that exploit shamefully the misery of asylum seekers and often lead them to their deaths; concerned at the restrictive application of rules on political refugees, which causes a corresponding rise in illegal immigrants, and also that asylum-seekers' hopes of being permitted to remain in the Member States are shamefully exploited by clandestine immigration networks,

C.   whereas the system of providing protection for refugees and asylum-seekers, in line with the provisions of international law, must not be compromised by measures to combat organised crime and in particular trafficking in human beings,

D.   whereas the European Council meeting in Tampere established a two-stage approach with the final objective of a common asylum procedure and uniform status for the European Union and expressed the European Union's full commitment to the Geneva Convention and other human rights instruments; this commitment was more recently confirmed in Articles 18 and 19 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights,

E.   whereas national legal provisions in this area vary; whereas, however, it is necessary, in establishing a common European legal area, to create common legal standards for asylum as in other areas of law,

F.   concerned at the influx of asylum-seekers from geographical zones where they are persecuted collectively because of their membership of a particular ethnic, cultural or religious group,

G.   whereas, in view of the Community principle of incorporating the gender dimension into all policies (mainstreaming), a common asylum policy must recognise and protect the legal position of women who seek asylum or any other form of protection from the Member States, with special regard to the particularly difficult situation of women who come from States with regimes that do not respect the principle of gender equality,

H.   whereas the adoption of minimum standards should not be based on a lowest common denominator, nor affect the aim in the second stage of achieving high standards for the protection of refugees, which respect the internationally agreed regime for the protection of refugees, including the principles of non-discrimination, no geographic limitation and non-refoulement,

I.   whereas a common asylum policy should ensure a full and inclusive common interpretation of the Geneva Convention which includes persecution of the individual by both state and non-state agents as grounds for the granting of asylum, and should also include harmonised appeals procedures, before a system of mutual recognition of asylum decisions could be implemented,

J.   whereas the right to asylum requires that the circumstances of the individual are fully taken into account, for example, through information explaining the asylum procedure and the protection that it affords,

K.   whereas it considers that asylum-seekers and family members accompanying them must be provided with decent accommodation, food, clothing and a daily allowance providing a minimum level of resources for the length of the asylum procedure, the duration of which must be reduced significantly through the use of efficient, just and effective procedures; whereas asylum-seekers should be granted a limited right of movement within the host State and the right, subject to certain conditions, to seek employment,

Safe country concept

L.   whereas, in order to speed up the procedures for dealing with asylum applications, Member States use the concept of "safe countries of origin” and "safe third countries”,

M.   whereas any use of the safe country concepts as part of a common EU asylum policy should be based on human rights considerations and should not be related to diplomatic and trading links nor reduce the rights of an individual; any list of safe countries of origin or safe third countries should be indicative only, and it should be possible to override such a list in individual cases,

N.   whereas, Member States and the European Union should speak with one voice as regards their position on human rights and democracy vis-à-vis third countries; whereas differing opinions, translated into differences in policy, weaken the Union's external policy and strengthen governments which do not observe principles of democracy and human rights,

O.   whereas it is imperative that Member States take a common approach with regard to the admission of refugees; whereas the current situation, in which refugees from particular countries are admitted by some Member States and not by others, must become a thing of the past as soon as possible; whereas the concept of 'safe countries' must be defined unequivocally,

Single procedure

P.   whereas a single procedure for processing claims for asylum and other forms of complementary protection is to be welcomed as it could render the asylum application process fairer and more efficient; whereas it must be guaranteed that an individual's application is first examined as an application for asylum then considered as a claim for complementary protection; such a single procedure should not downgrade the integrity of the asylum application system, by regarding refugee status, as recognised under the Geneva Convention, and complementary forms of protection as interchangeable,

Q.   whereas applicants for refugee status should be able to make applications for asylum outside the Union and outside their country of origin; it is imperative that such a system is seen as additional and complementary to an assessment of claims on the territory of Member States and should not permit the Member States to escape their international obligations under the Geneva Convention nor other humanitarian commitments; furthermore, such a procedure should not be introduced or applied where it could increase the chance of persecution of the individual,

R.   whereas obstacles to the removal of asylum-seekers from the territory of the Union may prevent deportation of persons not covered by the Geneva Convention or other humanitarian protection and therefore deportation should not be included in a single procedure,

S.   whereas it considers that, in the context of this policy, Member States will be called upon to encourage and organise voluntary return to the country of origin for asylum-seekers whose applications have been rejected, and to offer them material aid as well as other forms of support,

Uniform status

T.   whereas, once an individual meets the conditions in the Geneva Convention, he or she is a refugee even before entering EU territory and being officially "recognised" as such, and, in light of the forthcoming Commission proposal for a Directive on the approximation of rules on the recognition and content of refugee status and the proposal on subsidiary forms of protection, the treatment accorded to those seeking recognition as refugees should be of an equivalent standard as given to refugees after recognition of their status,

U.   whereas the recognition of refugee status under the Geneva Convention entitles refugees to rights under the Convention; whereas these rights should be harmonised at a high level in a common policy and should reflect the rights in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, in particular, Articles 7, 14 and 15 thereof,

V.   whereas consideration should perhaps be given to whether the rights granted to persons enjoying subsidiary protection should be consistent with the rights granted to refugees and whether, as regards the right to family reunification, Member States may maintain or introduce more favourable arrangements than those established by EC law which may in no circumstances be used to justify lowering the level of protection already guaranteed by a Member State,

Responsibility sharing

W.   whereas Member States have a duty to share responsibility in meeting their international obligations; such sharing of responsibility must not involve Member States setting numerical ceilings on refugee intake, since this could distort the application of the criteria for recognising refugee status,

X.   whereas the forthcoming replacement of the Dublin Convention should be a Community instrument, whose legal status could overcome some of the existing legal problems with the current application of the Convention,

Y.   whereas numerous petitions have been received by its Committee on Petitions; whereas asylum-seekers will in future be free to apply in respect of their asylum procedure to its Committee on Petitions,

Conclusions

1.   Calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that work on the minimum standards concerning asylum policy within the EU does not prejudice the final objective of a high level of common standards; hopes that the abovementioned proposal for a Council directive on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status will complete the legislative process quickly;

2.   Calls on the Commission and the Council to ensure that a common European asylum policy:

   -
maintains high standards for refugee protection, by giving full effect to the Geneva Convention;
   -
makes use of concepts such as safe third country, safe country of origin and accelerated procedures and procedures for manifestly unfounded applications, though this use should be limited to where justified, and includes legally binding guarantees, as set out in paragraph 3 below;
   -
includes the harmonisation of the appeals procedures prior to any inclusion of the principle of mutual recognition of judicial decisions;

3.   Calls for adequate procedural guarantees to be included to protect individual applicants including:

   -
on arrival in the European Union, all asylum-seekers must be given information, in a language they understand, on their fundamental rights and those corresponding to their status, and must be able to communicate with the outside world and with legal representatives and NGOs in particular;
   -
the provision of legal assistance in accordance with Member States' legal assistance provisions;
   -
full information to be obtained at an early stage in the procedure and an individual assessment of the application;
   -
the possibility of a full examination if the applicant presents specific indications which might outweigh a general presumption of a safe third country or safe country of origin;
   -
the processing of asylum applications by a qualified body, accompanied by a competent independent interpreter, regardless of whether the asylum application is being assessed according to a regular or accelerated procedure;
   -
the manifestly unfounded or abusive character of an application should be established by the authority or the court competent to determine refugee status;
   -
a suspensive appeal should be guaranteed against all unsuccessful applications;

4.   Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that the principle of mutual recognition can be applied to both positive and negative asylum decisions;

5.   Specifically in relation to the use of the safe country concepts, calls:

   -
for a requirement, in relation to the determination of a country as 'safe', for the country in question to observe standards of international law for human rights and the protection of refugees;
   -
for a procedure for reaching agreement on a common list of safe countries of origin or safe third countries, which should take account of recent developments and be based on human rights considerations; such a list should however be merely indicative and it should be possible to override it in individual circumstances, so as not to undermine the principle of individual assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Geneva Convention;
   -
for a coordinated approach to be taken to obtaining full information on the third country concerned; for country reports to provide Member States with an insight into the situation in countries giving rise to movements of refugees, which should, in order to enable greater objectivity, be drawn up by the diplomatic staff of several Member States, with the diplomatic staff of the Commission playing a coordinating role;
   -
for the views of the UNHCR, the International Red Cross and non-governmental organisations working in the area of human rights to be taken into consideration, when the EU and Member States draw up country reports;
   -
for country reports to be made public, together with the conclusions on which the concept of 'safe countries' is based, in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents(10) ;
   -
for a system that ensures that the individual will be admitted by the third country, and have appropriate access to asylum procedures;
   -
on the Commission to monitor the transfer to safe countries and to provide an annual report to Parliament;

6.   Calls for a single procedure for the recognising of refugee status and the granting of complementary forms of protection:

   -
based on a procedural hierarchy which examines the possibility for recognition of refugee status according to the Geneva Convention in the first instance, followed by a consideration of any complementary forms of protection thereafter;
   -
allowing an appeal against the refusal to recognise refugee status;

7.   Calls for the processing of asylum decisions to be carried out within a strict timetable to be achieved through:

   -
Member States providing adequate means, in terms of both human and financial resources, to ensure the speedy processing of asylum applications;
   -
the harmonisation between Member States of the time taken to process applications;

8.   Calls on the Commission and Council to ensure consistency in terms of the rights accorded to refugees and those granted complementary form of protection;

9.   Calls for the Member States to strive for consistency in their interpretation of the Geneva Convention, and for the Commission or another body to develop mechanisms to monitor and ensure this consistency, for example by issuing non-binding opinions on Member States' interpretation of the Geneva Convention at the administrative level;

10.   Calls on the Commission to consider the following complementary measures:

   -
measures to combat the root causes of migration, such as partnerships with countries of origin, including former colonial states, with the aim of creating just societies that respect human rights and of fostering economic improvements, which could lead to decreased migration flows to the European Union, while reducing unemployment in the home countries;
   -
measures to improve access to EU territory for those fleeing persecution, ensuring that any controls put in place by Member States to control immigration and entry to the territory do not in fact hinder access to asylum procedures and undermine Member States' international commitments to offer protection;
   -
a complementary procedure for asylum applications made outside the EU and outside the country of origin, but one which must be additional to an assessment of claims on the territory of Member States and should not permit the Member States to escape their international obligations under the Geneva Convention nor other humanitarian commitments;

11.   Calls on the Commission to prepare a detailed study of the reasons for persecution of refugees and, in addition to conventional reasons for persecution, such as political persecution or civil war, to examine in particular:

   -
persecution of refugees by non-state organisations,
   -
persecution of women in certain states and regions, and the legislation laid down in such states and women's social position,
   -
persecution of minorities;

12.   Wishes even greater attention to be given by the Union to conflict prevention, with the Council and Commission cooperating closely by means of a special European diplomatic service in this area;

13.   Concerned that, in its legal acts so far, the Commission has submitted no proposals on a common repatriation policy for asylum-seekers whose applications have been rejected, and calls on the Commission to remedy this omission without delay;

14.   Calls on the Commission to develop resettlement programmes for asylum seekers whose applications have been rejected, devoting particular attention to ethnic minorities and unaccompanied minors;

15.   Calls on the Commission, the Council and the Member States to work closely together with the UNHCR, the High Commissioner for Refugees, and other important international organisations in order to enable them to fulfil effectively their coordinating role in the reception of refugees in regions affected by conflict; appropriate financial support for the UNHCR from the Union and the Member States is urgently needed;

16.   Calls for the EU organisation, ECHO, which carries out good work, to cooperate even more closely in many third countries with the relief organisations of the Member States and with the UNHCR, in order to avoid the fragmentation of assistance and in view of the fact that providing relief to refugees in their own region is generally preferable to large flows of refugees to distant countries; considers that EU delegations in third countries should play a coordinating role in this regard;

17.   Considers that there is an urgent need to set up educational projects in refugee camps in regions affected by conflict, as such projects can help prevent large groups of young people who are denied an education for a long period going to countries far from their native land; education should therefore come within the definition of humanitarian assistance;

18.   Urges the Member States to make a formal request to the Commission for a Commission proposal on asylum, prior to making use of the powers conferred upon them pursuant to Article 67(1) of the EC Treaty, and urges the Council to give full consideration to the views of the European Parliament pending the forthcoming introduction of co-decision in this area;

o
o   o

19.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.

(1) OJ C 274, 19.9.1996, p. 13.
(2)OJ C 254, 19.8.1997, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 19, 23.1.1999, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 316, 15.12.2000, p. 1.
(5) OJ C 62 E, 27.2.2001, p. 231.
(6) OJ C 213 E, 31.7.2001, p. 286.
(7) Texts Adopted, Item 3.
(8) OJ L 252, 6.10.2000, p. 12.
(9) OJ L 95, 5.4.2001, p. 27.
(10) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.


Immigration policy
European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication to the Council and the European Parliament on a Community immigration policy (COM(2000) 757 - C5-0100/2001 - 2001/2047(COS) )
A5-0305/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Commission communication (COM(2000) 757 - C5-0100/2001 ),

-   whereas, for the first time, the Treaty of Amsterdam confers on the Community powers and responsibility in the fields of immigration and asylum,

-   having regard to the conclusions of the Tampere European Council meeting of October 1999,

-   having regard to Article 15(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union: "Nationals of third countries who are authorised to work in the territories of the Member States are entitled to working conditions equivalent to those of citizens of the Union",

-   having regard to Article 63 of the EC Treaty,

-   having regard to its resolution of 6 July 2000 on illegal migration and the discovery of the bodies of 58 illegal immigrants in Dover(1) ,

-   having regard to the proposal for a Council Act establishing the Convention on rules for the admission of third-country nationals to the Member States(2) ,

-   having regard to the Council Decision of 11 June 1992 on the establishment of a Centre for Information, Consultation and Data Exchange on Asylum (CIREA),

-   having regard to the Council Resolution of 4 March 1996 on the status of third-country nationals residing on a long-term basis in the territory of the Member States(3) ,

-   having regard to the Council Resolution of 20 June 1994 on limitation on admission of third-country nationals to the territory of the Member States for employment(4) ,

-   having regard to the Council Resolution of 30 November 1994 relating to the limitations on the admission of third-country nationals to the territory of the Member States for the purpose of pursuing activities as self-employed persons(5) ,

-   having regard to its resolution of 8 October 1998 on cooperation with Mediterranean countries on matters of immigration(6) ,

-   having regard to the Council Recommendation of 27 September 1996 on combating the illegal employment of third-country nationals(7) ,

-   having regard to the amended proposal for a Council directive on the right to family reunification(8) ,

-   having regard to Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin(9) ,

-   having regard to the amended proposal for a Council Directive establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation(10) ,

-   having regard to the proposal for a Council directive concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents(11) ,

-   having regard to the proposal for a Council regulation laying down a uniform format for residence permits for third-country nationals(12) ,

-   having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the report of the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy, the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Petitions (A5-0305/2001 ),

A.   whereas the Tampere European Council of 15/16 October 1999 emphasised the need to manage all stages of migration flows more effectively (Conclusion 22),

B.   whereas the Tampere European Council expressly stated that "The European Union must ensure fair treatment of third country nationals who reside legally on the territory of its Member States. A more vigorous integration policy should aim at granting them rights and obligations comparable to those of EU citizens. It should also enhance non-discrimination in economic, social and cultural life and develop measures against racism and xenophobia" (Conclusion 18),

C.   whereas, with this Communication, the Commission has made an important contribution to implementing the decisions of the Tampere European Council on migration policy, which are marked by new political approaches,

D.   whereas demographic trends show a slowing down in population growth, a reduction in the size of the working population and an increase in the number of people aged over 65,

E.   whereas the implications of those demographic trends are leading to concerns about the maintenance of social security schemes and the economic damage caused by the lack of a corresponding number of workers with appropriate qualifications,

F.   whereas several Member States have taken steps to legalise the situation of a large number of immigrants who are long-term residents in the Union without established residence status,

G.   whereas the Member States ought to adopt legislative means of opening up legal channels for entry into the EU, so as to make for structured immigration resulting in manageable migratory flows,

H.   whereas legal immigration into the Member States is currently governed by national legislation, which varies widely from country to country, and has increased sharply since the early 1990s, and whereas it is exacerbated by illegal immigration, trafficking in, and the smuggling, of human beings; recalls that illegal residence and illegal employment marginalise and isolate large sections of the population, creating social and economic dysfunction in the Member States,

I.   whereas the purpose of the future Community policy on immigration is to combat all the forms of crime often linked to trafficking in human beings,

J.   whereas more openness and transparency with respect to migratory movements, together with a greater commitment to implementing labour law in the Member States, will help to reduce illegal immigration, particularly its worst forms, namely smuggling and trafficking in human beings,

K.   whereas some Member States have begun taking on labour from third countries in order to offset shortages in certain categories of workers,

L.   whereas it is desirable that the Member States should pursue an immigration policy within a Community framework of rules and procedures based on indicative target figures, taking into account the fact that there are differences between the Member States with respect, inter alia, to links with countries of origin, integration policy and labour market needs,

M.   whereas the situation in national labour markets and the immigration policies pursued by the individual Member States differ so widely from one another that it is nearly impossible to lay down detailed provisions at European level on which and how many workers will be authorised to enter and reside in the respective Member State, but that they may be laid down for the entry, residence and integration of migrant workers,

N.   whereas the problems resulting for the Member States from current demographic trends cannot be resolved simply by immigration, and whereas more effective measures to develop human resources in the EU and structural social and employment policy reforms are required,

O.   whereas a properly managed immigration policy - combined with cooperation measures, including information campaigns in the countries of origin of potential immigrant workers - would help to combat illegal immigration,

P.   whereas effective management of immigration presupposes the availability of reliable and detailed statistics about immigration into the Union,

Q.   whereas the EU has shared responsibilities for cooperation and development aid vis-à-vis the least-developed and other countries and whereas, in accordance with its historic experience as a region from which people emigrated, the EU should adopt an exemplary common immigration policy on a par with its economic importance and in accordance with that responsibility,

R.   welcoming the creation, in the general budget for the 2001 financial year, of a preparatory action (heading B7-667 : 'Cooperation with third countries on migration') which is intended to restrict illegal immigration and to strengthen democracy and the rule of law through the implementation of projects and programmes for cooperation with countries of origin and of transit, but considers its funding and its objectives to be inadequate,

1.   Notes that, pursuant to the Treaties of Amsterdam and Nice, as well as the outcome of the Tampere European Council, various measures are to be taken and legal instruments adopted at EU and/or Member State level with respect to migrant workers, asylum-seekers and temporary refugees;

2.   Understands by the term "migrant worker" a third-country national who, for the purpose of taking up paid employment or pursuing activities as a self-employed person, enters the EU legally;

3.   Welcomes the Commission document as an opportunity to debate thoroughly the most important aspects of migration with a view to laying the foundations for a European policy in that field;

4.   Welcomes the fact that, in its communication, the Commission is making a first attempt to discuss the complex issue of migration as a whole and, in so doing, to highlight migration on economic grounds and to propose the properly managed reception of migrant workers in accordance with the Member States" requirements and capacities;

5.   Welcomes, given the emphasis in the communication on the immigration of skilled labour, a long-term in-depth discussion on measures to mitigate negative effects (i.e. brain drain) and promote positive effects (e.g. migrant participation in development projects, etc.) in the migrants' home countries, as well as the role of partnerships and Union programmes in this context; points out the importance of cooperation and networks on labour market issues between regions inside and outside Member States;

6.   Regrets that the need for partnerships between the Union and countries of origin and transition, though stressed by the Tampere European Council, has not been further developed in the communication, calls for the Commission to include this in its work in the near future;

7.   Notes, further, that, in the short term, immigration may well contribute to population growth and to offsetting sectoral labour shortages but that, in the long term, it cannot counter demographic shifts and solve the problems - such as the maintenance of social security schemes - resulting therefrom;

8.   Supports the right of long-term residents who are third-country nationals and lawfully resident in a Member State to freedom of movement and residence within the European Union;

9.   Recalls that, pursuant to Rule 174(10) of its Rules of Procedure (Right of petition), citizens of third countries may lodge petitions;

10.   Endorses the Commission's view that a well-shaped Community immigration policy could counteract undeclared work and thus contribute to action against unemployment and promote stable, secure employment; points out that undeclared work has a significant negative impact on public finances and leads to the evasion of rules on health and safety at the workplace, agreements on working hours and minimum wages and distorts cooperation between the social partners;

11.   Stresses the need to take action against those who knowingly supply, employ and exploit illegal migrants;

Managing immigration

12.   Takes the view that the various historical, economic and social features in the individual Member States make it impossible to lay down a uniform requirement in labour from third countries which would cover the entire territory of the Union and that the Union has no powers in law in this field;

13.   Welcomes measures to regulate freedom of travel for third-country nationals resident in the Union;

14.   Notes that immigrants are expected to respect the community of values - as set out in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights - and to show a willingness to integrate into society in the Member States, but stresses that Member States are also obliged to respect the rights and freedoms of third-country nationals; takes the view that integration into society in the Member States must be promoted;

15.   Considers that, among integration measures, special emphasis should be placed on the various forms of political involvement and in particular the right of long-term residents to vote in local elections;

16.   Stresses that migrants" countries of origin must be consulted on the "brain drain" issue, while the question of admission of students and researchers on the basis of our national needs and the interests of the third countries should be addressed in parallel;

17.   Stresses, like the Commission, that EU legislation should provide for a flexible overall scheme based on a limited number of statuses designed so as to facilitate rather than create barriers to the admission of economic migrants;

Framework legislation at European level

18.   Calls, therefore, on the Commission and Council to lay down uniform European framework legislation which covers at least:

   (a)
the conditions governing entry and residence for migrant workers,
   (b)
a flexible, coherent concept for the issuing of visas,
   (c)
a graduated system of residence permits for migrant workers,
   (d)
mobility within the Union of third-country nationals holding a residence permit for one Member State and the conditions for free movement of third-country nationals within the Union;

19.   Calls for Parliament to have a clear role in this process;

20.   Considers that current procedures do not allow the Union and its Member States to establish an effective immigration policy in a democratic manner; calls for the introduction of democratic and transparent decision-making processes, through the application of Article 251 of the EC Treaty to decisions in this field;

21.   Calls on the Commission to make use of the experience of the Member States who have taken in and integrated waves of immigrants in previous decades;

22.   Calls on the Commission to issue a proposal for the introduction of a combined work and residence permit for immigrants, allowing free movement within the Union while restricting in the short term the right to live and work to a single Member State, for short-term residents;

23.   Endorses the Commission's view that practical tools for recruitment from third countries are needed; stresses that systems developed for this purpose should be non-bureaucratic, uncomplicated and admit successful and quick recruitment; acknowledges the particular needs of SMEs for high-quality, reliable information, training and support; proposes to examine both the development of the EURES network and the development of effective schemes under the aegis of the Commission and involving the social partners;

24.   Calls, therefore, for each Member State to retain the power to lay down, on the basis of its labour market requirements, its demographic trends and its capacities for accommodating migrant workers, the skills profile and the number of migrant workers that it requires; believes that national admission of migrants should be based on indicative targets and a list of requested skills and qualifications identified by the social partners and regional/local authorities on an ongoing basis;

25.   Asks the Council, the Commission and the Member States to take the appropriate measures to ensure application of EU policies for the professional and social integration of migrant workers in particular for women, who face difficulties in entering the labour market;

26.   Expects the Council and Commission to take due account of the forthcoming enlargement and its possible implications for Member States" labour markets when drawing up its immigration policy and, as accompanying measures, to work together with the countries of origin of potential migrants, informing them of genuine employment prospects and requirements in the Member States, and to implement strategies to combat illegal immigration;

27.   Calls on the Commission and Council to support social, statistical, economic, geographical, legal and political research in these areas, inter alia by establishing a European migration network;

28.   Calls on the Commission and Council to promote the foundation and operation of the European Migration Network which will assist in creating a uniform registration system and producing reliable and detailed data on migration;

29.   Stresses the importance of close links between an immigration policy and the Employment Guidelines; calls on the Commission to further discuss and develop how the Employment Strategy will be effected by a Community immigration policy and how migrants will make a contribution in this area;

30.   Hopes that an EU initiative will be launched for the purpose of supporting the efforts made by the countries of origin in order to encourage the return of skilled immigrants working in the EU;

31.   Calls on the Commission to draw up a report on the impact which the forthcoming enlargement is likely to have on the movement of migrants to the enlarged European Union of the future and to include in that report an analysis of the effects which applying the Schengen visa system would have on trade and cross-border cooperation between the applicant countries and their neighbours to the east;

Fine tuning at national level

32.   Calls on the Member States to gear authorisation for entry and residence in their territory to the requirements of their own labour markets, with the long-term objective of migrant workers becoming integrated into local society;

33.   Calls on the Member States to enforce strictly labour inspection rules and legislation outlawing worker exploitation in order to combat illegal employment;

34.   Stresses that the Member States should find solutions for immigrants who are residing illegally; considers that the of Member States should also combat illegal employment and thwart the activity of networks of traffickers;

35.   Expects, therefore, that, with a view to the successful integration of migrant workers, the Member States will take account of the availability of a job, accommodation and educational opportunities for children as a precondition for the issuing of residence permits;

36.   Urges the Member States to take decisions on authorisation of residence irrespective of the gender, race, ethnic origin, religion or philosophy of life, disability, age or sexual orientation of the third-country national concerned;

37.   Urges the Member States, further, to fill job vacancies initially with third-country nationals already resident in the Member States and to recruit further migrant workers only as a fallback;

38.   Urges the Member States to devise information campaigns to heighten public awareness of the phenomenon of immigration and the objectives of national and European policies, and to provide their civil servants with information and training in legislation and European programmes in order to establish more rational and efficient methods for the reception and integration of immigrants;

39.   Urges each Member State, finally, to monitor immigration into its territory with the aid of a uniform statistical system and to forward that data to the Commission annually so that it may monitor immigration flows and assess the overall impact and put forward targets with a view to future approximation of immigration laws;

40.   Stresses in this connection that databases on third-country nationals have been set up in a number of Member States without any particular data protection being provided for; calls therefore for the data protection provisions that apply to Member State nationals to be applied to third-country nationals as well;

o
o   o

41.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission and to the parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 121, 24.4.2001, p. 396.
(2) OJ C 337, 7.11.1997, p. 9.
(3) OJ C 80, 18.3.1996, p. 2.
(4) OJ C 274, 19.9.1996, p. 3.
(5) OJ C 274, 19.9.1996, p. 7.
(6) OJ C 328, 26.10.1998, p. 184.
(7) OJ C 304, 14.10.1996, p. 1.
(8) OJ C 62 E, 27.2.2001, p. 99.
(9) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22.
(10) OJ C 62 E, 27.2.2001, p. 152.
(11) OJ C 240 E, 28.8.2001, p. 79.
(12) OJ C 180 E, 26.6.2001, p. 304.


Arms exports
European Parliament resolution on the Council's Second Annual Report according to Operative Provision 8 of the European Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports (13177/1/2000 - C5-0111/2001 - 2001/2050(COS) )
A5-0309/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Council's Second Annual Report according to Operative Provision 8 of the European Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports (13177/1/2000 - C5-0111/2001 )(1) ,

-   having regard to Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union, on consistency in the Union's external activities, and to Article 11, on the objectives of the Common Foreign and Security Policy,

-   having regard to the EU's Development Declaration of May 2000 with its commitment to policy coherence, including coherence between the EU's policy on arms exports and the EU's development objectives,

-   having regard to the Guidelines on EU Policy towards third countries on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment as adopted by the General Affairs Council on 9 April 2001,

-   having regard to Article 17 of the Treaty on European Union, on cooperation in the field of armaments, and to Article 296 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on protection of national security interests,

-   having regard to the Joint Action(2) adopted by the Council on the European Union's contribution to combating the destabilising accumulation and spread of small arms and light weapons(3) ,

-   having regard to the EU Programme(4) for preventing and combating illicit trafficking in conventional arms(5) ,

-   having regard to its resolution of 5 October 2000 on the Council's 1999 Annual Report on the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports (11384/1999 - C5-0021/2000 - 2000/2012(COS) )(6) and to its previous resolutions on this subject,

-   having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (A5-0309/2001 ),

A.   whereas the external action of the EU is guided by values of democracy and the protection of human rights,

B.   whereas it follows from the Treaty that the Common Commercial Policy must be consistent with the Common Foreign and Security Policy,

C.   whereas the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports was a step forward in ensuring the consistency and coherence of Member States policies towards arms exports,

D.   whereas the EU should take greater responsibility for peace and security in Europe and worldwide by taking further initiatives to promote arms limitation and disarmament,

E.   whereas the General Affairs Council on 9 April 2001 adopted Guidelines on EU policy towards third countries on torture, and the UN Commission on Human Rights recently called on all governments to "take appropriate effective legislative, administrative, judicial and other measures to prevent and prohibit the production, trade, export and use of equipment which is specifically designed to inflict torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment”,

F.   whereas the Code of Conduct should be strengthened so that exports of military, paramilitary and security equipment shall be denied in circumstances where they might contribute to gross human rights abuses; and to ensure that this is effectively implemented, multilateral dialogue and information sharing between the EU Member States should be improved,

G.   whereas the first Annual Report on the Code of Conduct revealed that the associated countries of central and eastern Europe and Cyprus, as well as Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Canada had agreed to align themselves with the principle of the EU Code of Conduct,

H.   whereas Member States agreed to a Common List of Military Equipment covered by the EU Code of Conduct as adopted on 13 June 2000,

I.   whereas the effective monitoring of end-use is crucial and whereas the lack of provision for verifying the end use of export weapons in the Code of Conduct is a major weakness,

J.   whereas the control of arms brokers is absolutely essential to stem the proliferation of arms in crisis regions,

K.   whereas controls on the licenced production of military equipment abroad by EU companies are fundamental for preventing the circumvention of arms export control measures,

L.   whereas transparency in this field is vital in order to ensure democratic accountability,

M.   whereas some Member States still do not produce annual reports on their arms export control policies and there is no consistency in the reports produced by other Member States,

N.   whereas there was a UN Conference in July 2001 on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects,

1.   Reiterates its belief that EU policy in arms export must:

   (a)
ensure the consistency and efficiency of the EU's external action, in particular the Union's goals in combating terrorism, conflict prevention, combating poverty and its promotion of human rights;
   (b)
reinforce the EU's development cooperation objectives, and international development goals;
   (c)
satisfy the security policy imperatives and needs of the EU;
   (d)
meet the needs and challenges of the European defence industry;
   (e)
contribute to the development of a common defence policy;

2.   Welcomes the publication of the Council's second annual report and the clear signs contained within it that considerable progress has been made towards greater convergence of Member States' policies towards arms export controls;

3.   Recommends that the coming third annual report should make available as full an evaluation as possible of how far the goals as stated in paragraph 1 have been reached;

4.   Underlines that the candidate countries should in their negotiations with the Union give guarantees that they will implement the Code of Conduct in full;

5.   Welcomes the decisions by Turkey and Malta to subscribe to the Code's principles;

6.   Regrets that so far the USA has not adopted its own code of conduct on arms exports; recommends that this issue should be made a permanent component of the transatlantic dialogue;

7.   Calls on the Member States, the Council and the Commission to work towards an international code of conduct on arms transactions and to inform Parliament of their activities in this respect in the annual report on the application of the Code of Conduct on arms exports;

8.   Regrets that so far the UN has not been able to establish a global arms exports control regime and that some of the Permanent Members of the Security Council, in particular Russia and China, continue to export arms without any restraints; asks the Council to take action at EU level for establishing a global arms exports control regime on UN-basis;

9.   Calls on the Council to encourage the Member States to deny arms deliveries to countries which do not submit information to the UN's Register of Conventional Arms;

10.   Supports the Member States' intention to update regularly the Common List of Military Equipment and their willingness to put forward the list for consideration within the Wassenaar Arrangement;

11.   Urges Member States to reach early agreement on what constitutes an "essentially identical transaction”;

12.   Welcomes the fact that there has been agreement in Council on a common list of non-military security and police equipment; urges the Commission to:

   -
act swiftly to bring forward an appropriate Community mechanism to control such exports;
   -
ensure that this Community instrument includes a ban on the promotion, trade and export of police and security equipment whose use is inherently cruel, inhuman or degrading, including leg-irons, electroshock stun-belts and inherently painful devices such as serrated thumb cuffs;
   -
ensure that this Community instrument will suspend the transfer of equipment whose medical effects are not fully known, such as high-voltage electroshock weapons, pending the outcome of a rigorous and independent inquiry into its effects; as well as suspend the transfer of equipment where its use in practice has revealed a substantial risk of abuse or unwarranted injury, such as leg-cuffs, shackle boards, restraint chairs and pepper gas weapons;
   -
commit itself to an EC-wide ban on the manufacture and use or, where applicable, the suspension of such equipment.

13.   Welcomes the work being done to achieve greater convergence of Member States policy regarding exports to countries and regions not subject to embargoes but which merit special vigilance;

14.   Is disappointed that little progress seems to have been made towards controlling arms brokerage; calls for Member States to increase their efforts towards controlling arms brokerage, and also to work towards the development of an international legally binding agreement on brokering;

15.   Regrets deeply that no progress appears to have been made towards agreeing a common system of end-use monitoring;

16.   Regrets deeply that no action has been taken to place controls in the licensed production abroad of military equipment by EU companies; calls on the governments of the Member States to require their explicit consent for the transfer of military items produced abroad under a licensing agreement, in order to reduce the risk that equipment is transferred on to dubious and proscribed end-users;

17.   Reiterates its position that as soon as possible the Code should be made legally binding for all current and applicant EU Member States;

18.   Calls on the Council to ensure that the Member States move forward in a spirit of partnership, cooperation and mutual confidence-building with the applicant countries to develop and implement the provisions of the Code of Conduct together, attaching particular significance to effective respect for international embargoes, which should be legally enforceable through national legislation;

19.   Calls on the Council and the Commission to provide assistance to the applicant states for a responsible disposal of surplus weapons in cooperation with NATO and the OSCE;

As regards transparency

20.   Welcomes the agreement by Member States to give a fuller description of the reasons for the denial of licences; expects this information to be included in future annual reports;

21.   Calls on the Member States to extend the multilateral consultation mechanism agreed for dual-use items in the dual-use regulation of 22 June 2000, meaning that they would circulate a notification to all Member States if they grant an export licence for an item for which another Member State previously denied a licence;

22.   Welcomes the increase in the number of countries producing annual reports on their arms export control policies; calls on those Member States who do not yet publish annual reports to do so;

23.   Underlines that the consolidated Council report in its current shape does not allow effective evaluation of Member States' export control policy; welcomes the commitment by Member States to harmonise their national annual reports and urges them to ensure that common minimum standards are set at the most comprehensive level possible; calls on the Commission to draft a proposal for uniform criteria to be used by the Member States in drawing up their reports on arms exports and, in this regard, to follow the example of the most informative and transparent report by a Member State;

24.   Urges the Member States to ensure that their harmonised national annual reports will include:

   -
information on licensing policy, including policy developments, treaty commitments, international obligations (e.g. embargoes), changes to legislation, and the way in which the state has implemented the EU Code,
   -
for each licence granted or denied a description of the equipment, details on the quantity, destination, end-user and (at least approximate) value,
   -
information on the type of licence and the dates of any decisions taken, and where applicable, the reasons for denial, including the substance and outcome of bilateral consultations on denials,
   -
separately listed actual transfers, again including data on the nature of the goods, type of licence, quantities, values, destinations and end-users,
   -
the same level of disclosure on all transfers of controlled goods which escape the licensing process, e.g. government-to-government transactions;

25.   Believes that all Member States should make provisions for parliamentary scrutiny of their arms export control policies and their export licensing decisions;

26.   Reiterates the view that greater effort is needed to establish common rules for EU control of the legal trade in small arms and light weapons, and effective EU controls to combat and eradicate trafficking and smuggling in such arms; calls on Member States to actively follow up its contribution to the 2001 UN Conference on the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects; calls on Member States to promote the adoption of strict legally binding international criteria, based on States' obligations under international human rights standards and international humanitarian law, on arms transfers, in the form of a Framework Convention on International Arms Transfers;

27.   Demands that arms exports are progressively integrated into the common commercial policy and that Article 296 of the EC Treaty is adapted accordingly; believes that Member States should invoke Article 296 of the EC Treaty only in exceptional circumstances, when they consider their essential interests are at risk;

o
o   o

28.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the parliaments and governments of the Member States and of the third countries who have agreed to align themselves with the principles of the EU Code of Conduct.

(1) OJ C 379, 29.12.2000, p. 1
(2) OJ L 9, 15.1.1999, p. 1
(3) The term 'small arms and light weapons' also covers very lethal and powerful weapons, such as portable anti-tank and surface to air missiles. International organisations have adopted different more precise definitions of this term.
(4) Adopted by the General Affairs Council of 26 June 1997.
(5) The term 'conventional arms' refers to arms that are not atomic, biological or chemical. Since there is no generally accepted definition of what constitutes arms, there is neither any such definition of this term.
(6) OJ C 178, 22.6.2001, p. 273.


GALILEO
European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication to the European Parliament and the Council on GALILEO (COM(2000) 750 - C5-0110/2001 - 2001/2059(COS) )
A5-0288/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Commission communication (COM(2000) 750 - C5-0110/2001 ),

-   having regard to the Council resolution (Transport) of 5 April 2001 on GALILEO,

-   having regard to the conclusions of the Stockholm European Council of 24 March 2001,

-   having regard to the Commission communication "Galileo - Involving Europe in a New Generation of Satellite Navigation Services" (COM(1999) 54 ),

-   having regard to the Commission Staff Working Paper "Cost-Benefit Analysis Results for GALILEO" of 22 November 2000,

-   having regard to its resolution of 13 January 1999, on the Commission communication "Towards a Trans-European Positioning and Navigation Network: including a European Strategy for Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)"(1) ,

-   having regard to the Council resolution of 19 December 1994 on the European contribution to the development of a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)(2) ,

-   having regard to Article 154 of the EC Treaty,

-   having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets and the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (A5-0288/2001 ),

A.   having regard to the common interest of the European Union in a coherent strategy for GALILEO,

B.   whereas the independence and reliability of GALILEO can make an important contribution towards achieving the Community objective of sustainable mobility for the environment and industry on the territory of the European Union, in particular by substantially improving railway interoperability and, more generally, management of traffic and travel on European territory,

C.   whereas the development of GALILEO furthers the technological potential of Europe as a business location,

D.   whereas GALILEO opens up qualified access to high technology for Europe, so that future-oriented employment possibilities can be created,

E.   having particular regard to the fact that the European Union cannot allow itself to lag behind in the future development of technological capacities and the management of related technologies in the area of space technologies, and that for strategic reasons it must be involved in the monitoring of a satellite navigation system,

F.   reaffirming its view that further progress in this area should take place on the basis of a clear political signal from the Council,

G.   whereas the European Space Agency has already taken steps to continue with the programme on the basis of the favourable statements on its development by the Council and the Parliament,

H.   whereas any further delay in programming further steps in this development will have serious consequences as regards the planning of the other phases that follow,

I.   whereas further delay in developing GALILEO would have serious consequences for the notified time window of 2008, which is linked to the plans to update the GPS (Global Positioning System)(GPS II), and for the industry,

J.   whereas according to economic analyses a strong economic upswing can be expected in the area of satellite navigation and related services,

K.   whereas GALILEO makes possible effective measurement and control processes in the area of commercial, scientific and security task-setting,

1.   Notes the Commission communication and the conclusions of the Stockholm European Council of 24 March 2001 and the Council resolution (Transport) of 5 April 2001 on GALILEO, and concludes from these that there is a need for further clarification if an informed decision is to be reached;

2.   Expresses its concern regarding the financial viability of the GALILEO project if the projections of investments from the private sector are not realised; emphasises that the financial consequences of a lack of participation by the private sector should not be passed on to the Community or national budgets; urges the Commission therefore to ensure sufficient private sector participation during each step of the project;

3.   Calls on the Commission to present, as soon as possible, a proposal for the establishment of a management structure for GALILEO;

4.   Calls on the Commission to present, by 15 November 2001, a proposal for a general financial structure for GALILEO in the context of the establishment of its management structure;

5.   Calls on the Commission to provide further information on the organisation, administration, staff and funding of the entity, which will be in charge of the management of the project;

6.   Calls on the Commission to develop the proposal to build up a management and finance structure in such a way that European industry, over and above those sections of it that have already agreed, is motivated to take part in the development and subsequent phases;

7.   Stresses, furthermore, the technical and industrial importance of the GALILEO programme in maintaining the European space and telecommunication industries' high standards in terms both of skills and competitiveness;

8.   Calls on the Commission to carry out a detailed analysis of possible revenue flows and to quantify the legal structural framework conditions needed for these;

9.   Requests that as well as the overall financial strategy for the GALILEO project, due account is taken both of its economic impact in terms of work generated directly and indirectly and its impact in terms of direct and indirect employment for European industries;

10.   Calls on the Commission first to carry out a more comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of GALILEO, including a comparison with alternative communications systems for air, rail and maritime traffic, as well as for traffic management and control;

11.   Calls on the Commission, in the interests of increased efficiency, technological added value and GALILEO's client-orientation, to examine alternative wavelengths as well as the need for compatibility with existing satellite navigation systems;

12.   Stresses, however, the usefulness of the GALILEO programme in ensuring the civil independence of the European Union with regard to satellite navigation and its applications, particularly as regards the system's safety and reliability;

13.   Urges the Commission to present a financial statement which is based on realistic funding estimates; points out that the budgetary authority should have a clear picture of how the project will be financed before it can take a decision on the expenditure that will be covered from the general budget;

14.   Considers that it should demand prior consultation of the budgetary authority in case the expenditure to be financed from the general budget was to be revised, thereby ensuring that no restrictions are placed on other activities financed under heading 3;

15.   Stresses the need to intensify contacts and cooperation at international level and to ensure that the European Union's interests in this area are protected and the next steps in the realisation of the programme carried out in close cooperation with the European Space Agency (ESA);

16.   Underlines the European dimension of GALILEO, whereby candidate countries should be allowed to participate in all phases of the project; stresses the importance of close cooperation with the United States and Russia so as to ensure the interoperability and compatibility of GALILEO, GPS and GLONASS;

17.   Calls on the Commission to continue to engage in intensive negotiations with potential international partners with a view to joint development and funding of GALILEO and, later, paid use of it;

18.   Requests that the programme be implemented throughout in a transparent manner, particularly as regards decision-making;

19.   Stresses the need to make the projects" eligibility for funding under the Sixth Research Framework Programme dependent on compatibility with GALILEO, thus encouraging the development of applications of GALILEO;

20.   Calls on the Commission and the Member States to undertake a wide-ranging analysis of the contribution the GALILEO programme could make to progress in the field of European research when drawing up the future Sixth Framework Programme of Research and Technological Development;

21.   Stresses the need to gear the transport policies of applicant countries at an early stage to the telematic innovations which GALILEO will make possible;

22.   Calls on the Commission to work in the development phase towards a system architecture for GALILEO which uses effective coding procedures that will prevent centralisation of client data, allow public and private players data access only in forms that are compatible with the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, and place general data protection and protection of individual privacy at the centre of the system;

23.   Stresses that the European Union has a vital interest in implementing GALILEO as a civilian infrastructure in such a way that unauthorised European and/or non-European signal reconnaissance services cannot gain access to user data;

24.   Welcomes the participation of the EFTA (European Free Trade Association) countries in GALILEO;

25.   Calls on the Commission to keep not only the Council, but also the Parliament, informed of the bilateral talks and their outcome, and to proceed in a transparent way in future;

26.   Calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up their preparations for the next World Radio Conference, in 2003, thus definitively securing GALILEO's frequency needs;

27.   Calls on the Commission to move forward research in the components, operation and application areas;

28.   Points out that it is vital to develop the use of space for purposes related to the general interest and public service;

29.   Considers that the GALILEO project should be developed taking into account the need to protect and safeguard the environment, so as to protect the lives of citizens and natural resources, and ensure early detection and even prevention of natural or man-made disasters;

30.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, the parliaments of the Member States and the ESA.

(1) OJ C 104, 14.04.1999, p. 73.
(2) OJ C 379, 31.12.1994, p. 2.


Innovation in a knowledge-driven economy
European Parliament resolution on the communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Innovation in a knowledge-driven economy (COM (2000) 567 - C5-0740/2000 - 2000/2336(COS) )
A5-0234/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Commission communication (COM(2000) 567 - C5-0740/2000 ),

-   having regard to the motion for a resolution by Salvador Garriga Polledo on joint ventures between the European Union and private enterprise (B5-0024/2001 ),

-   having regard to its resolution of 6 June 1996 on the Green paper on innovation (COM(1995) 688 - C4-0609/1995 )(1) ,

-   having regard to its resolution of 17 September 1997 on the Commission communication on the “First Action Plan for Innovation in Europe - Innovation for growth and employment” (COM(1996) 589 - C4-0624/1996 )(2) ,

-   having regard to Decision No 182/1999/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 December 1998 concerning the Fifth Framework Programme of the European Community for research, technological development and demonstration activities (1998 to 2002)(3) ,

-   having regard to its opinion of 15 December 1998 on the proposal for a Council decision adopting a specific programme for research, technological development and demonstration on “Promotion of innovation and encouragement of participation of SMEs (1998 to 2002) (COM(1998) 305 - C4-0438/1998 - 1998/0182(CNS) )(4) ,

-   having regard to its resolution of 16 March 2000 on eEurope - An information society for all: a Commission Initiative for the Special European Council of Lisbon, 23/24 March 2000 (COM(1999) 687 - C5-0063/2000 - 2000/2034(COS) )(5) ,

-   having regard to the conclusions of the Lisbon European Council meeting of 23 and 24 March 2000,

-   having regard to the conclusions of the Feira European Council meeting of 19 and 20 June 2000,

-   having regard to its position of 26 October 2000 on the proposal for a Council decision on a multiannual programme for enterprise and entrepreneurship (2001-2005) (COM(2000) 256 - C5-0274/2000 - 2000/0107(CNS) )(6) ,

-   having regard to its resolutions of 18 May 2000 on the communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions “Towards a European Research Area (COM(2000) 6 - C5-0115/2000 - 2000/2075(COS) )(7) , and of 15 February 2001 on the Commission communication to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Making a reality of the European Research Area: Guidelines for EU research activities (2002 - 2006) (COM(2000) 612 - C5-0738/2000 - 2000/2334(COS) ),(8)

-   having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the report of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy and the opinion of the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (A5-0234/2001 ),

A.   whereas innovation is a key field in order to reach the strategic goal defined by the Lisbon Summit to make Europe "the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world”;

B.   whereas the European Charter for Small Enterprises adopted at the Feira Summit on 20 June 2000 meets the needs of small businesses particularly in relation to innovation and the knowledge-driven economy;

C.   whereas there is a close link between the promotion of innovation and progress in research;

D.   whereas a global innovation policy has to take into account different aspects, such as legislative and administrative simplification, access to financing, education of students and training of workers, cooperation amongst enterprises and the integration of research into the enterprise structure;

E.   whereas differences exist amongst the various Member States and the various regions of the EU in the field of innovation promotion and results;

F.   Whereas the USA and Japan are ahead of the EU in the promotion and development of innovation;

G.   Whereas a global approach to innovation has to take into consideration society as a whole, involving the fields of education, research and enterprise, and has to improve integration amongst these three areas;

H.   whereas all businesses, whatever their size and sector of activity, must be able to join the knowledge-driven society and to access innovation and research;

I.   whereas it is necessary to launch a programme to define the guidelines and implement the measures necessary to promote innovation in Europe;

1.   Welcomes the Commission communication on Innovation in a knowledge-driven economy;

2.   Supports the Commission initiatives in the field of research linked with the innovation issue, such as the European Research Area and the proposal for a Sixth Framework programme for Research and Technological Development, and calls on the Commission and the Council to take this resolution into consideration when defining innovation actions to be included within this programme;

3.   Stresses that these initiatives represent a very important step toward an "innovation offensive” at the European level and that they should all aim to eliminate the weakness of EU enterprises in the field of innovation and to make them more competitive;

4.   Recalls the need to support the promotion of innovation in Europe, as already recognised by the Lisbon and Nice Summits, and to achieve a European approach to a knowledge-driven society and economy in order to take up the challenge of future developments of the EU; considers that, despite the progress achieved, there is still a lack of innovation in Europe at the present time, five years after the adoption of the Green Paper on innovation;

5.   Calls on the Commission to implement the European Charter for Small Enterprises with particular reference to innovation and access to the knowledge-driven society;

6.   Welcomes the Commission's global approach to innovation policy in Europe, and stresses the need for financial support, and for modernisation and improvement of structures;

7.   Calls for European and national actions to promote the benchmarking of performances and best practices;

8.   Calls for European, national and regional initiatives to eliminate the weakness in the diffusion and promotion of innovation in Europe in comparison with the USA and Japan;

9.   Recalls the importance of an infrastructure, an educational system and training that accommodate both male and female aptitudes and encourage both sexes to join the research sector with a view to promoting innovation;

10.   Stresses that education and training are significant instruments of research, mainly at the university level, and that a synergy between businesses and universities should be encouraged so that enterprises can benefit from research;

11.   Calls for both women and men, adults and young people, to be encouraged and enabled to study with a view ultimately to creating innovation; calls also for greater recognition of work experience in the educational system, which will mean tailoring educational systems to the aptitudes of the different sexes;

12.   Calls for innovation-oriented entrepreneurship to be promoted amongst young people in the educational world and for the creation of stronger involvement of students in the enterprise sector and therefore asks the Member States to create the conditions for their educational systems to introduce "junior enterprises” of a business undertaking type, to be carried out in schools; considers that the development of human capital is an important factor in innovation and that the teaching of the sciences can play a crucial role in this respect both in primary and secondary education, in combination with e-learning;

13.   Calls for actions by the Member States and the Commission with a view to promoting the mobility of teachers, professors and researchers toward the enterprises sector to set up favourable conditions to discourage a strong migration of researchers to other countries such as the USA;

14.   Calls on the Member States and the Commission to support enterprises in promoting continuous training and to foresee training allowances with this aim;

15.   Asks the Commission to encourage access to innovation and research in a knowledge-driven economy for all enterprises, including craft businesses, whatever their size and sector of activity, as highlighted in its position of 26 October 2000;

16.   Asks the Commission to conceive and implement a strategic programme for the European Union in the field of innovation in the context of the Sixth Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development;

17.   Calls on the Member States and the Commission to take steps to improve the protection of intellectual property, and to make progress in implementing European patent law and laws on trademarks and utility models;

18.   Stresses that this future programme should promote the first phases of innovative enterprises, encouraging their access to seed capital and to venture capital and promote the development of European risk capital; considers that specific encouragement measures should be foreseen in favour of young people who would like to start a business or to take on existing businesses;

19.   Calls for this programme to encourage the mobilisation of private financing devoted to innovation and research and to promote respect for the independence of the results and of the institution that produces them;

20.   Calls for better coordination of national and EU instruments in favour of innovative enterprises and for the decentralisation of EU support to SMEs in the field of innovation;

21.   Stresses the need for administrative simplification to make it easier for SMEs to create innovative products and adopt innovating production methods;

22.   Reiterates the need for global coherent cooperation amongst society, taking into account the need for training to promote entrepreneurship, the identification of new qualifications and capacities in training systems, the development of information instruments and services for a better social integration;

23.   Calls for a network aiming to integrate the fields of research, technology and innovation;

24.   Stresses the importance of innovation for the development of the new economy and the transition from the knowledge-driven economy to the knowledge-driven society in the context of modernising the European social and cultural model;

25.   Considers that young people in general, whether in or outside the education system, should be not only the recipients of, but also the vehicles for, innovation; considers that we should therefore provide them with the necessary tools for developing new and innovative ideas so that they can shape their experience without preconceptions in original and novel ways;

26.   Considers that if secondary and higher education are to meet the above needs, it is essential to modernise schools, universities and vocational training centres, and to link up research institutes, universities and academic libraries via the Internet;

27.   Considers that work undertaken in universities in other countries and as a member of research teams should be recognised as beneficial for the purposes of research work and that research entails a capacity to innovate; considers therefore that measures should be taken to encourage exchanges of researchers and scholars who are developing new projects, and the inclusion in research teams of trained persons of other nationalities;

28.   Stresses the need to consolidate the link between the public at large and the use and application of innovation with a view to finding balanced solutions which are of use to the general public in order to strengthen economic and democratic stability in European societies; considers that those societies exhibit pronounced tendencies which are conducive to wide disparities in terms of access to and use of new technologies and innovations - high rates of technological illiteracy, multiculturalism, rising numbers of elderly people, deprived social groups; stresses that the goal should be for each and every citizen to be capable of living and working in the information society, able to use even the most advanced innovations;

29.   Considers that the existing problems should be resolved and that the introduction of a Community patent should be stepped up; stresses, at the same time, the importance of respecting and protecting intellectual property;

30.   Considers that, in assessing curricula vitae and in the criteria for career advancement, account should be taken of mobility with recognition of the merits of those who have acquired training and experience abroad, as well as knowledge of languages;

31.   Proposes that the Member States" and the EU's actions should include measures to encourage innovation at all levels of education;

32.   Proposes that indicators for e-learning and the relationship between education and innovation should be added to the list of innovation indicators;

33.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 181, 24.6.1996, p. 35.
(2) OJ C 304, 6.10.1997, p. 80.
(3) OJ L 26, 1.2.1999, p. 1.
(4) OJ C 98, 9.4.1999, p. 105.
(5) OJ C 377, 29.12.2000, p. 380.
(6) OJ C 197, 12.7.2001, p. 413.
(7) OJ C 59, 23.2.2001, p. 250.
(8) Texts Adopted, Item 12.


Exhaustion of trade mark rights
European Parliament resolution on the Commission staff working paper on the problem of the exhaustion of trade mark rights (SEC(1999)2033 - C5-0354/2000 - 2000/2187(COS) )
A5-0311/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to the Commission staff working paper (SEC(1999)2033 - C5-0354/2000 ),

-   having regard to Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks(1) and Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 of 20 December 1993 on the Community trade mark(2) , and in particular Articles 7 and 13 thereof(3) ,

-   having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee of 24 January 2001 on the “Exhaustion of registered trademark rights”(4) ,

-   having regard to the Commission's decision of 24 May 2000 not to submit any proposals to alter the current system of Community-wide exhaustion,

-   having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure,

-   having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (A5-0311/2001 ),

A.   whereas the principle of national exhaustion originally applied in several Member States of the European Community,

B.   whereas in 1974 the European Court of Justice in respect of these countries extended national exhaustion to Community-wide exhaustion, giving the following reasons:

“In fact, if a trade mark owner could prevent the import of protected products marketed by him or with his consent in another Member State, he would be able to partition off national markets and thereby restrict trade between Member States, in a situation where no such restriction was necessary to guarantee the essence of the exclusive right flowing from the trade mark”(5) ,

C.   whereas the transition from national to Community-wide exhaustion led to greater competition,

D.   whereas in several Member States the principle of international exhaustion applied before Directive 89/104/EEC came into force,

1.   On the grounds of the above considerations and findings, calls on the Commission:

   -
to produce a detailed study of the implications of a possible transition to the principle of international exhaustion for European manufacturers and consumers as well as for jobs;
   -
to present a report on any cases of abuse of trade mark rights notified to the Commission, to explain how such cases of abuse have been addressed, including with regard to competition rules, and to identify possible deficiencies that may exist in current legal provision;
   -
to examine the legal situation with regard to the exhaustion of trade mark rights in the most important trading nations;
   -
to ascertain the prospects for the conclusion of an international agreement on harmonised rules on exhaustion of trade mark rights under the WTO or WIPO;
   -
in the light of the most recent rulings by the Court of Justice, to examine the need for clarification of Directive 89/104/EEC , and in particular Article 7 thereof, in order to achieve a higher degree of legal certainty and legal clarity regarding the restrictions applying under competition law in respect of trade mark law, which is necessary above all for SMEs and consumers;
   -
to examine whether clarification of trade mark law in respect of non-commercial imports of goods purchased by consumers via the Internet is needed;
   -
to submit to Parliament, by 31 December 2002, a report on these points containing detailed proposals;

2.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the governments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 40, 11.2.1989, p. 1, last amended by Council Decision 92/10/EEC of 19 December 1991, OJ L 6, 11.1.1992, p. 35.
(2) OJ L 11, 14.1.1994, p. 1, last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 3288/94 of 22 December 1994, OJ L 349, 31.12.1994, p. 83.
(3) "Exhaustion of the rights conferred by a Community trade mark1. A Community trade mark shall not entitle the proprietor to prohibit its use in relation to goods which have been put on the market in the Community under that trade mark by the proprietor or with his consent.2.Paragraph 1 shall not apply where there exist legitimate reasons for the proprietor to oppose further commercialisation of the goods, especially where the condition of the goods is changed or impaired after they have been put on the market”
(4) OJ C 123, 25.4.2001, p. 28.
(5) Paragraph 11 of the Judgment of 31 October 1974 in Case 16/74, Centrafarm v. Winthrop [1974[ ECR 1183.


Conclusions of the UN Conference on racism ***I
European Parliament resolution on the World Conference against Racism in Durban
B5-0605 , 0606 , 0607 , 0609 and 0610/2001

The European Parliament,

-   having regard to Articles 6, 7 and 29 of the Treaty on European Union and Article 13 of the EC Treaty, which commit the European Union and its Member States to observe high standards of human rights and non-discrimination, and to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,

-   having regard to the 1965 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, the 1995 Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities and the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,

-   having regard to Council Directive 2000/43/EC of 29 June 2000 implementing equal treatment between persons irrespective of racial or ethnic origin(1) ,

-   having regard to the EU's preparations for the World Conference, in particular the European Parliament resolution of 5 July 2001 on human rights in the world(2) containing its recommendation on the European Union's position at the World Conference,

-   having regard to the declaration adopted by the European Preparatory Conference "All Different-All Equal" in Strasbourg on 13 October 2000,

-   having regard to the framework agreement of 5 July 2000 on relations between the European Parliament and the Commission(3) ,

-   having regard to the Commission's Communication on the European Union's role in promoting human rights and democratisation in third countries (COM(2001) 252 ) and to the Conclusions of the Council of 16 June 2001 on the same Communication,

A.   whereas the European Union, in developing an area of freedom, security and justice, not only has a major role alongside Member States in efforts to root out racism and racial discrimination within the EU but also has the opportunity to play a constructive role on the international scene, as racism and discrimination based on race and ethnic origin are fundamentally against the objectives of the EU externally as well as internally,

B.   whereas in reaching political agreement on a final declaration and on an Action Programme on 8 September 2001, the Conference sent a message to the world and represented a step forward towards the elimination of all forms of contemporary racism and xenophobia, even if it did not succeed in meeting all expectations,

C.   whereas those negotiations were particularly difficult because the questions of reparation for victims of slavery and the Middle East conflict dominated and overshadowed the planned proceedings,

D.   recognising the long-term suffering caused by Europe's historical experiences, and welcoming the recognition that Zionism is not racism and that the Holocaust was a unique event in world history,

E.   whereas the European Union through the Presidency, represented by Louis Michel, President-in-Office of the Council, played a pivotal role in securing the final agreement,

F.   whereas the role which the European Parliament delegation in particular but also the Commission was able to play in the Conference failed to properly or fully reflect the growing EU responsibilities in this field; regretting moreover that the Commission was only represented at the level of officials and that not all Member States were represented at the level of senior ministers,

G.   whereas a large amount of EU funds (EUR 3.7 million) was allocated to support the participation of NGOs and low income countries in four regional preparatory conferences and the World Conference itself,

1.   Welcomes the fact that the Conference managed to reach agreement on a final declaration, which will serve as a basis for the worldwide fight against racism and discrimination based on race and ethnic origin;

2.   Congratulates the European Union on managing to steer the Conference to a compromise on the final declaration, in particular through the efforts of the President-in-Office of the Council, thus preventing a complete collapse and securing an acceptable outcome, but urges the European Union to continue to develop its international capacity and its preparedness for the expectations held of it;

3.   Regrets the fact that the NGO Forum prior to the World Conference produced a "shadow" declaration which was on some points so extreme in its language and demands that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights was unable to recommend it to the World Conference, and some NGOs disassociated themselves from the decision, thus weakening the reputation and influence of civil society;

4.   Considers that in the light of the scope of the Durban Conference on Racism and in view of the very public and regrettable difficulties that arose at different levels during the lengthy negotiating process it would have been preferable if more preparatory work had been carried out to secure unanimous agreement on the final conclusions and calls upon the UN to look at the organisation of future forums, to provide for a new Conference in ten years" time and to look at how future NGO Forums will be organised so as to prevent single-interest groups from hijacking the events;

5.   Takes note that the European Union agreed to wordings in the final declaration on slavery, the slave trade and colonialism that went further than initially foreseen in the EU common position, while avoiding the question of reparation for victims of these practices;

6.   Welcomes the recognition of the evil of slavery and slave-trade practices, which would, if committed today, be considered crimes against humanity; especially welcomes the fact that discrimination against Roma and Sinti people has been recognised for the first time at international level, but regrets that the final declaration failed to mention the discrimination against the Dahlit people;

7.   Welcomes the support in the declaration for the "New Africa Initiative" and calls for the further assistance promised for promoting democracy and political governance in Africa;

8.   Underlines the need to focus on the concrete measures agreed upon in Durban to fight racism, xenophobia and discrimination, and for the European Union to support and facilitate the implementation of the measures through National Action Plans in the European Union and to take a leading international role in strengthening other countries" ability to fight racism, xenophobia and discrimination;

9.   Calls for further examination of the way in which the EU can deploy the full weight of its potential influence on international human rights and anti-discrimination work, including levels of political representation and a revision of the interinstitutional framework agreement of 5 July 2000, which should better respond to the increasing responsibilities of the European Union and its institutions in international forums, notably the United Nations;

10.   Urges the EU to encourage actions to combat intolerance, including Islamophobia and anti-Semitism;

11.   Calls on the Commission to examine how the EU funds for the Conference were allocated and spent;

12.   Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission and to the governments and parliaments of the Member States.

(1) OJ L 180, 19.7.2000, p. 22.
(2) Texts Adopted, Item 13.
(3) OJ C 121, 24.4.2001, p. 122.

Last updated: 14 April 2004Legal notice