WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council. Staff dismissals and wage costs.
21. 11. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 330 E/187 Belgium & Luxembourg Denmark Germany Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Netherlands Austria Portugal Finland Sweden United Kingdom EU-15 weighted Mean Import penetration Direct Indirect 5,8 3,3 1,2 2,4 1,6 1,7 4,4 1,4 5,5 3,4 2,9 3,7 6,2 0,6 1,8 11,6 23,0 3,8 23,7 5,7 9,8 27,9 6,5 10,7 10,2 18,5 24,6 8,4 11,0 8,5 (in %) Total 17,3 26,3 5,0 26,1 7,3 11,5 32,3 7,9 16,2 13,6 21,4 28,3 14,6 11,6 10,3 The indicator does not provide figures with a sufficient degree of reliability to measure bilateral cross border procurement between specific Member States. The estimate at the Community level is more reliable but figures for individual Member States should also be treated with some caution, due to the sample size (2000 companies surveyed). The figures represent all procurement, above and below the directivesí thresholds, within the selected sectors. A larger scale survey is planned in order to improve the accuracy of this indicator and to monitor progress. The Commission is pursuing the possibility of incorporating this survey within the framework of the structural business statistics programme carried out by Eurostat together with the Member Statesí statistical institutes. (1) COM(98) 143 final. (2000/C 330 E/214) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council (2 March 2000) Subject: Staff dismissals and wage costs How many members of the Councilís staff have been dismissed in each of the last five years, and what proportion does this represent of the total staff establishment in each year? What was the total wage bill for the institution, and what was the average amount paid to each employee in each year? Reply (2 May 2000) The Council would inform the Honourable Member that over the last five-year period, out of a total average staff complement of 2 400 officials, one person in the General Secretariat was removed from his post under Article 86(2)(f) of the Staff Regulations and one person was not established at the end of his probationary period pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 34(2) of the Staff Regulations