WRITTEN QUESTION E-2461/99 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. The Council's attitude towards the European Museum project.
C 303 E/66 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 24. 10. 2000 The Commission can therefore confirm that it will ensure that the right of WTO members to regulate, and to introduce new regulations, on the supply of services within their territories in order to meet national policy objectives, as recognised in the preamble to the GATS, is safeguarded in any WTO discussions on the matter. This is a pre-condition for successful services negotiations based on reciprocal trust among all WTO members. It is up to WTO members to decide their national policy objectives. The GATS offers a number of instruments to reduce progressively the obstacles which might flow from regulatory diversity or inadequate regulation, which fully respect the national regulatory sovereignty of WTO members. Members are offered the possibility to develop disciplines on domestic regulation aimed at ensuring that national regulations do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade in services. They also have the possibility to negotiate or grant recognition of other membersí regulations. The Commission can confirm that the flexibility to undertake specific commitments on market access and national treatment, that is a basic feature of the GATS, will also be safeguarded. Based on their national regulations, members undertake specific commitments which they have to respect and which should not be undermined by new or different regulations. Nonetheless, they have the possibility to negotiate modifications in their commitments as they deem appropriate. Finally, the general exceptions contained in Article XIV allow them to adopt any measure necessary to protect public morals or the fundamental interests of society, or human, animal or plant life or health. (2000/C 303 E/058) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2461/99 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council (16 December 1999) Subject: The Councilís attitude towards the European Museumí project At the Museum for Europeí symposium on 21 and 22 October, which was attended by Commission President Romano Prodi, a number of politicians promised their support for a museum in the European Parliament. The cost price is estimated at BEF 1 billion, of which Parliament, the Belgian Federation and the private sector would each pay one third. The historical starting point of the permanent exhibition is Charlemagneís empire 1. Is the Council aware of the initiative by vzw Museum van Europa (non-profit making organisation Museum of Europeí) to house a museum on the premises of the European Parliament, which is what may be concluded from the Commission Presidentís presence at the symposium? If so, when was the Council informed of this project, by whom and how? 2. (a) What objectives has vzw Museum van Europa made known to the Council concerning the construction of the museum and what is on display in it? (b) Who, in the opinion of vzw Museum van Europa, is responsible for the way in which the museum is managed and organised? Has the Council promised any financial or material support to vzw Museum van Europa for 3. accommodating a museum on Parliamentís premises? If so, what specific commitments have been made (subsidies, premises etc. ) and what are the Councilís reasons for granting this support? If not, why is the Council not providing such support to vzw Museum van Europa? 4. Does the Council support the decision to take Charlemagne as the historical starting point of the permanent exhibition in the museum? If so, does this not detract from the major contributions that the Greco-Roman civilisations and Byzantium have made to European ideas, as the Greek Minister of Culture has pointed out? If not, what does the Council feel is the appropriate way of realising the European museum concept in full? 24. 10. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 303 E/67 5. Will the Council request vzw Museum van Europa to apply in the museum, correctly and in its entirety, the language legislation of the Belgian Federation, since such legislation can be regarded as a form of mutual respect for languages and cultures? If not, why not, given that failure to apply such legislation would detract from mutual respect for languages and cultures in the Belgian Federation? Reply (10/11 April 2000) At its meeting on 23 November 1999, the Council was informed by the Greek delegation of the project for the creation of a European Museum. On that occasion, it noted the concerns expressed by that delegation regarding the objectives and priorities for the project, as conceived by the Belgian association under private law which is organising it. The Council has never had any direct contact with the non-profitmaking organisation in question. The Council would remind the Honourable Member that, under the Treaty, the Community is to contribute to the flowering of the cultures of the Member States while respecting their national and regional diversities and bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore. In the context of its competence in this respect, and if the matter is directly referred to it, the Council will adopt an appropriate position. (2000/C 303 E/059) WRITTEN QUESTION E-2479/99 by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) and Fiorella Ghilardotti (PSE) to the Commission (16 December 1999) Subject: Directive 96/67/EC 1. By letter of 7 September 1999, the Director-General of the Commissionís Directorate-General VIII (Transport), Mr Robert Coleman, informed the Italian Government that he had some misgivings as to the compatibility with Community law of certain provisions of Decree Law No. 18 of 13 January 1999. In his opinion, Articles 13, 14 and 20 of the Decree Law, which concern not only the qualifications required of those providing ground-handling services but also social protection, formed an obstacle to the opening-up of the market sought by Council Directive 96/67/EC. 2. Recital 6 of the Council directive, however, confirms the right of the Member States, in the light of the principle of subsidiarity, to take into consideration the specific, in other words national, nature of the sector, recital 10 the right of the Member States to introduce this directive gradually, recital 8 the need to take account of employment conditions, in other words established employment conditions, at airports, recital 24 the right of the Member States to ensure an adequate level of social protection for the staff of undertakings providing ground-handling services, and Article 18, finally, the right of the Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure protection of the rights of workers. 3. It is well-known that, given the existence of high unemployment, protection of employment levels and of the employment conditions of employed workers is a matter of major concern and action on the part of the main Institutions of the European Union ü the Council, the Commission and Parliament. In view of these facts, and given that Mr Colemanís letter of 7 September 1999 to the Italian Government is clearly unjustified, can the Commission say whether it intends to take action to remedy this situation so as to comply rigorously with the letter and fundamental principles of Community law and, in addition, what action it intends to take with regard to officials, such as Mr Coleman, whose actions on behalf of the Commission far exceed their authority?