WRITTEN QUESTION P-2192/99 by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Council. Special working party to be proposed at the WTO negotiations to deal with the relationship between the liberalisation of trade and non-commercial policy objectives.
C 219 E/114 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 1. 8. 2000 Can the Commission answer the following questions: 1. What is the Commissionís assessment of the French legislation regarding the registration of coaches and buses already registered in other Member States? 2. What action will the Commission take to ensure the free movement of old and used motor vehicles to France? (1) OJ L 178, 17. 7. 1996, p. 15. (2) OJ L 186, 25. 7. 1996, p. 28. Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission (6 December 1999) The Honourable Member has drawn the Commissionís attention to the conditions regarding the type- approval and consequent registration in France of coaches and buses previously registered in another Member State. After contacting the French authorities, the Commission was informed that all motor vehicles (including coaches) were subject to the provisions of an amended ministerial order of 5 December 1996 which laid down certain rules regarding the anchorage of safety belts, the strength of seats and of their anchorages, and the safety belts and restraint systems for such vehicles. The initial version of this text (Article 8) required vehicles which had previously been registered in another Member State to conform with the requirements applicable to vehicles which enter into service on the date they are individually approved (i. e. when the request for registration is made). The French authorities became aware of the difficulties this provision was causing and amended the text in question. A ministerial order was adopted on 7 September 1999. The requirements applicable to vehicles previously registered in another Member States are now those in force on the date when they first entered into service (and not the date of the type approval). This amendment should remove the obstacles to the free movement of goods to which the Honourable Member referred. (2000/C 219 E/145) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2192/99 by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Council (23 November 1999) Subject: Special working party to be proposed at the WTO negotiations to deal with the relationship between the liberalisation of trade and non-commercial policy objectives Many national organisations feel that they do not have any real opportunities to influence the decision- making agenda or the formation of decisions on social issues. As the importance of national society grows, political decision-makers must think harder about the legitimacy of their decisions. In particular the round of World Trade Organisation (WTO) negotiations which is just beginning has given rise to concern in national organisations, which fear that these negotiations are prepared to sideline principles which are still more important than free trade. There has not been enough discussion yet on how to reconcile commercial objectives with those, for example, of the environment, health and human rights in the non- political field. Does the Council consider it possible, and in accordance with the interests of the EU, to make it an objective of the EU negotiators to propose the creation at an early stage in the negotiations of a WTO working party: 1. 2. to deal with the relationship between trade liberalisation and non-commercial political aims and possible instruments to achieve those aims, and to investigate the positive environmental effects of trade and the policies needed to make these more effective? 1. 8. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 219 E/115 Reply (31 January 2000) The Honourable Member is certainly aware of the comprehensive character of the Council Conclu- 1. sions adopted by the Council on 26 October 1999 on the preparation of the WTO Third Ministerial Conference in Seattle. In its conclusions, the Council emphasised the need to ensure that an appropriate balance between the further liberalisation of trade and the strengthening of multilateral rules contributes toward sustainable development, environmental protection, social progress, reduction in poverty and consumer health. 2. The Honourable Member will also be aware that environment and core labour standards featured very high on the EUís agenda for Seattle. As to the former, the Council reasserted during the Ministerial Conference that environmental considerations should be taken into account throughout the negotiations with a view to achieving by the end of the round an overall outcome whose environmentally-friendly consequences could be identified in the relevant parts of the final package. The Council thereby adhered to its chosen course of action as set out in paragraph 11(g) of the conclusions it adopted at its meeting on 26 October 1999 in preparation for the WTO Third Ministerial Conference. The Council would invite the Honourable Member to refer to those conclusions. Regarding core labour standards, the Council strongly supports their protection and throughout the Ministerial Conference advocated their inclusion in the Ministerial Declaration. To ensure progress on the issue of trade and workersí rights, the EU proposed the establishment of a Joint ILO/WTO Standing Working Forum on trade, globalisation and labour issues, to promote a better understanding of the issues involved through a substantive dialogue between all interested parties (including Governments, employers, trade unions and other relevant international organisations). That dialogue should include an examination of the relationship between trade policy, trade liberalisation, development and the fundamental rights of workers. Such a Forum would also prepare for a ministerial-level meeting which should take place no later than 2001. The EU offered to host such a meeting. In its conclusions of 26 October 1999 the Council further underlined the need to involve civil 3. society fully in that process, and to that end to continue the dialogue with it in order to take into account its legitimate interests and concerns. The Council also stressed the importance of close contacts with the European Parliament and national parliaments and encouraged dialogue with the organisations of civil society at both national and European level. 4. As to the Honourable Memberís last question, attention is drawn to the fact that no consensus was reached at the Ministerial Conference in Seattle on a Ministerial Declaration which would have set the agenda for a new Round and the arrangements for the negotiations. Consultations on the scope and framework of a new Round will continue in Geneva in due course and the issues to be covered are therefore under discussion. It should be noted that Ministers in Seattle widely acknowledged the importance of the social dimension of trade and sustainable development as argued by the EU. Throughout the process which is to follow, the European Unionís action will be fully guided by the objectives set out in the Council Conclusions, without prejudice to the instruments considered appropriate to achieve those goals. (2000/C 219 E/146) WRITTEN QUESTION P-2193/99 by Herman Schmid (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (19 November 1999) Subject: Trichloroethylene Trichloroethylene is a highly volatile solvent which damages the nervous system and is considered to be carcinogenic. The Commission has traditionally taken a lenient attitude towards this solvent. In Sweden, however, like certain other chlorinated solvents, has been prohibited in consumer products since 1993 and in industry since 1996. trichloroethylene,