WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1852/97 by Richard HOWITT to the Commission. Equalization of pensions between men and women, Mr Farmer, Stanford-le-Hope, UK
C 45/110 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 10. 2. 98 (98/C 45/138) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1833/97 by Fernando Ferna·ndez Mart ·n (PPE) to the Commission (21 May 1997) Subject: Basis for the Commissionís appeal against the WTOís final report From the very start the COM in bananas contained in Regulation 404/93 (1) has been constantly opposed in all areas and by means of every conceivable stratagem. The sector is once again under threat on account of a complaint made to the WTO by the USA, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras and Mexico. The WTOís final report was issued on 30 April 1997. What basis will the Commission select for its appeal against that report? (1) OJ L 47, 25. 2. 1993, p. 1. Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission (17 June 1997) The report of the panel of the World trade organization (WTO) on the Communityís banana regime was circulated to WTO members on 22 May 1997. It is likely to come up for adoption at the WTO dispute settlement body in June. On that occasion, the Community will notify its intention to appeal the panel report to the WTO appellate body. The Commission is examining the panel report very closely. It would be premature at this stage to indicate the basis for the Communityís appeal. All that can be said at present is that the Commission is deeply dissatisfied with the panelís conclusions, both as regards the more specific findings on the banana regime, and as regards the broader implications of the panelís interpretation of the General agreement on tariffs and trade and WTO provisions, and will take all appropriate steps to ensure that such issues are considered by the WTO appellate body. (98/C 45/139) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1852/97 by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission (30 May 1997) Subject: Equalization of pensions between men and women, Mr Farmer, Stanford-le-Hope, UK In response to a complaint from my constituent, Mr Farmer of Stanford-le-Hope, who was forced to retire by P & O Distribution, Barking and Tilbury Depot when their pension scheme was equalized to take effect at 63 years for men and women, was it the Commissionís intention and is it in compliance with the directive, that employees can be forced to retire earlier than previously applied? What remedies are available to Mr Farmer in this respect? Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (2 July 1997) The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that Council Directive 96/97/EC (1), adopted on 20 December 1996, amended Directive 86/378/EEC (2) to bring it into line with Article 119 of the EC Treaty, as interpreted by the Court of Justice in its judgment in the Barber case and in subsequent related judgments. The Member States were required to take the necessary steps to comply with this Directive by 1 July 1997 at the latest. The Commission will ask all the Member States to supply information on the measures taken to implement this Directive and will not hesitate to initiate the proceedings provided for in Article 169 of the EC Treaty, if necessary