WRITTEN QUESTION E-2716/99 by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Human rights violations in Iran.
C 280 E/110 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 3. 10. 2000 (2000/C 280 E/114) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2712/99 by Pernille Frahm (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (18 January 2000) Subject: Working time directive 1. How can the Commission, after confirming in a letter of 10 May 1993 from Commissioner Padraig Flynn to the principal organisations in Denmark, that EU directives could be implemented via the Danish collective bargaining system (the content of this letter forming part of the basis for the decision to adopt the motion for adjournment on 30 November 1993 retaining the Danish collective bargaining model as the basis for implementing EU directives etc. ), now send a letter of formal notice to the Danish Government claiming that Denmarkís implementation of the EU Working Time Directive is not, in the Commissionís view, in compliance with the Union Treaty? 2. Has the Commission altered its view between the time Mr Flynnís letter was sent and the time the Commission sent its letter of formal notice to Denmark on the implementation of the Working Time Directive? If so, what caused the Commission to change its view? Was the Commissionís endorsement of the political validity of Denmarkís implementation of directives via the Danish collective bargaining system of 10 May 1993 influenced by the fact that one week later the Danes were to vote in their second referendum on the Treaty on European Union? 3. Can the Commission confirm that, when it sent its letter of formal notice to Denmark regarding the implementation of the Working Time Directive, there had not been a single case of the parties involved in the implementation of the Working Time Directive in Denmark via collective bargaining ever having been unable to achieve the results prescribed in that Directive (see the Agreement by 11 Member States in the Union Treaty)? Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission (3 March 2000) The letter of the Commissioner who was in charge of Employment and Social Affaires to which the Honourable Member refers to states that one way of implementing directives could be by áduly notified collective agreements at national level and that legislation will be taken into consideration as a last resort and as a safety valveí. This is in line with Article 137(4) (ex Article 118) of the EC Treaty, which clearly states that collective agreements can be used as a means of implementing directives. Furthermore, the Court of justice has laid down certain conditions should collective agreements be used as the only means to implement a directive or certain provisions of a directive (1). In this context, the essential condition is that all workers within the scope of the directive are covered by its provisions. The position of the Commission and the relevant Community law, as interpreted by the Court of 1. justice, have not changed since the time the letter was sent in 1993. 2. The Commission has received two complaints from Danish trade unions on the matter. (1) Case 143/83 Commission v. Denmark [1985] ECR 427. See also e. g. Commission v. Italy [1986] ECR 2291. (2000/C 280 E/115) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2716/99 by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Commission Subject: Human rights violations in Iran (18 January 2000) What is the volume of EU exports to Iran and imports from Iranian companies into the EU economic area? Is the Commission aware of any arms transfers from EU Member States to Iran? 3. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 280 E/111 Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission (2 February 2000) Community exports to Iran amounted to € 4 389 million in 1998. Imports amounted to € 3 980 million. Figures for 1999 are not yet available. The Commission is not aware of any arms deliveries from Member States to Iran. Relevant arms export control regimes are in force. (2000/C 280 E/116) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2717/99 by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Commission Subject: Human rights violations in Iran (18 January 2000) What is the Commissionís general view on the latest human rights violations in the Islamic Republic of Iran? Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission (8 February 2000) The Commission follows with concern the human rights situation in Iran. It has taken an active part in Union action in this area, through demarches and in the Union-Iran comprehensive dialogue. Although widespread human rights violations continue in Iran, there has been progress made in the last few years. One of the latest examples is the recent release of the German businessman, Mr Hofer, which the Commission warmly welcomes. The Commission will continue to follow developments in Iran closely in areas of concern, in particular regarding human rights, issues of non-proliferation and Iranís attitude to the Middle East Peace Process. In the light of these developments, and in the hope that they will be continued, the Commission would wish to see a gradually improving relationship with Iran. It will watch with particular attention the coming Majlis elections and any further policy development thereafter. (2000/C 280 E/117) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2720/99 by Michael Cashman (PSE) to the Commission (18 January 2000) Subject: Money transactions I am deeply concerned that European consumers are being misled in money exchanges across Europe. I have noted that, in the event of money exchange, customers are not being given a net receipt prior to the exchange which shows the exchange rate, commission and other deductions. Can the Commission indicate whether there are any plans to introduce legislation which would protect consumers in these situations?