WRITTEN QUESTION E-1313/00 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Suitability of tender documents for a contract concerning the supply of work clothes for the Italian postal workers.
C 26 E/162 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 26. 1. 2001 A few months earlier, she had appeared before the Washington Human Rights sub-committee to denounce the death threats and verbal and physical abuse of which she was the victim. Officers of the Northern Ireland police force, the RUC, were named as being responsible for the abuse and the reason for it was her reputation as áthe IRAís lawyerí. A report published by British-Irish Rights Watch claims that the British Government was aware of the threats to Rosemary Nelson. Does the Council believe that the British Government was wrong not to include Rosemary Nelson in 1. its protection programme? Does the Council not think that there should be the greatest possible transparency in the inquiry into 2. the murder, for which the RUC itself is apparently responsible? Does the Council think it should ask the British Government to open its own inquiry into the 3. murder? Reply (26 June 2000) The Honourable Memberís questions relate to matters which are not within the Councilís competence. (2001/C 26 E/201) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1313/00 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission (27 April 2000) Subject: Suitability of tender documents for a contract concerning the supply of work clothes for the Italian postal workers The CESAR research centre (centre for aeronautical and environmental studies) acts as a consultant to several government departments (including the department for civil protection of the Prime Ministerís Office) on matters of environmental protection and the protection of the health and safety of workers. In this capacity it was therefore asked for its opinion on the invitation to tender and the related specifications issued by the Poste Italiane SpA (Italian postal service) concerning a contract for the supply of items of clothing, including 100 000 items of personal protective equipment (PPE). CESAR found that the tender the said tender documents were unsuitable for two reasons: specifications were such that it was highly likely that the PPEs offered by companies would be entirely useless as a means of protecting workers (owing to their poor quality) and, secondly, that they would actually be unusable (if the invitation to tender for the supply of PPEs is not accompanied by an invitation to tender for the laundering, replacement and repair of the said items, the clothes will be unusable). firstly, So far, these findings have been completely ignored. Can the Commission check whether the Community laws on tenders and on safety in the workplace have been complied with and, if not, urge the Italian postal service to suspend and/or cancel the contract in question? Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (5 June 2000) On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not in a position to determine whether the invitation to tender in question is in conformity with Community procurement rules and, in particular, with the provisions of Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts (1). 26. 1. 2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 26 E/163 The information provided indicates rather that the provisions contained in the procedural documents supposedly cannot lead to a satisfactory result. In order to be able to answer the question fully, the Commission would be particularly grateful to the Honourable Member if he could forward the additional information he has on the subject of the breaches of Community procurement law alleged to have occurred in the contract award procedure initiated by Poste Italiane. When it has examined this information, the Commission will assess the possibility of initiating infringe- ment proceedings under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty, should it be of the opinion that an infringement of Community law has taken place. (1) OJ L 199, 9. 8. 1993. (2001/C 26 E/202) WRITTEN QUESTION P-1344/00 by Jean-Louis BerniØ (EDD) to the Commission (18 April 2000) Subject: The Commissionís challenging of the principle of áassumption of employmentí for performing artists laid down in Article L 762-1 of the French Labour Code France is threatened with legal proceeedings before the European Court of Justice for its refusal to waive the áassumption of employmentí for foreign artists referred to in Article L762-1 of the French Labour Code. Is this measure not excessive, given that to apply this article exclusively to French artists in effect puts them at a disadvantage in their own country? In fact, it means that those who employ foreign artists would no longer have to pay social costs but would have to do so when employing French artists. This downwards harmonisation will prejudice French performing artists. Is this not tantamount to a sentence of death for this specifically French provision which offers performing artists one of the highest standards of social protection in Europe? Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (26 May 2000) Firstly, the Commission would like to stress that it has not yet decided to refer the matter of áassumption of employmentí for foreign artists to the Court of Justice. However, it has delivered a reasoned opinion. As yet the French Government has not replied. In this reasoned opinion, the Commission called on France to take the necessary measures to ensure that áassumption of employmentí, as provided by Article L 762-1 of the French Labour Code, is compatible with the free movement of services, as referred to in Articles 49 and 50 (ex Articles 59 and 60) of the EC Treaty. Freedom to provide services is one of the fundamental freedoms of the EC Treaty. The concept of service provider, as per Articles 49 and 50 of the EC Treaty, has Community implications and cannot be defined simply by referring to the legislation of a Member State. Otherwise, the effectiveness of the free movement of services could be compromised, as the meaning of this term could be laid down and modified unilaterally by national legislation which could at will exclude certain categories of persons from the benefits gained under the Treaty. The Commission would therefore point out that it does not wish to harmonise the conditions of access to and pursuit of artistsí activities at Community level, or to discriminate against French artists in relation to foreign artists, nor does it want the employers of foreign artists to pay greater social costs. On the other hand, it calls for recognition of the status of self-employed service providers who are established as such in another Member State where they legally and regularly provide services similar to those they wish to offer occasionally in France. It seems that áassumption of employmentí in France does