WRITTEN QUESTION E-0635/00 by Ieke van den Burg (PSE) to the Commission. Plans for a child care cheque in Carinthia.
21. 11. 2000 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 330 E/195 On 21 January 2000 the committee for veterinary medicinal products (CVMP) having considered the matter in detail reached an opinion in respect of Bayovac IBR marker vivum and Rhinobovin marker, as authorised in Belgium, Germany, Spain, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and United Kingdom. The opinion requires variation of all marketing authorisations for all such products authorised in different Member States to ensure additional quality controls in the manufacturing process to minimise contamination with BVD. In addition, new methods of detecting potential contamination with BVD virus are introduced into the production process, which will also be subject to the aforementioned variations. This opinion was forwarded to the Commission on 11 February 2000 and the Commission is currently preparing a binding decision in accordance with the procedure foreseen in Article 22 of Directive 81/851/ EEC. In accordance with that Article, the Member States and marketing authorisation holders will have to comply with the Commission decision within 30 days following notification, hence lifting the suspensions of the national marketing authorisations with the implementation of the requested variations. National IBR eradication programmes may then be continued. The Commission fully endorses the view expressed by the Honourable Members that a decision on a Community referral should be taken quickly in order to avoid possible economic losses of interested parties. The possibility to adopt such decision quickly is, however, limited by the binding procedures and time limits foreseen in Community pharmaceutical legislation and the need to carry out a proper scientific evaluation. 3. The committee for veterinary medicinal products concluded that the adverse reactions seen in the Netherlands and in Italy resulted from contamination of administered live IBR vaccine. Inactivated IBR vaccines have not been under investigation. Nevertheless the Italian authorities opted for precautionary reasons to suspend also the inactivated vaccine. Obviously, since the inactivated vaccine was not suspended by the Belgian authority, cattle present in Belgium may have been vaccinated with the inactivated vaccine. (1) Council Directive 81/851/EEC of 28 September 1981 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to veterinary medicinal products, OJ L 317, 6. 11. 1981. (2000/C 330 E/225) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0635/00 by Ieke van den Burg (PSE) to the Commission (3 March 2000) Subject: Plans for a áchild care chequeí in Carinthia 1. Is the Commission aware that the Governor of Carinthia, Jörg Haider, is planning to pay Austrian mothers in Carinthia a monthly child allowance for the first six years of a childís life if they stay at home to look after their children? Does the Commission not feel that an arrangement of this kind is inconsistent with European rules it must be seen as 2. concerning the coordination of social security (EEC 1408/71 (1), etc. ) and that discriminating against non-Austrian women and other inhabitants of Carinthia? Does the Commission not feel that denying migrants and non-Austrians (or non-EU citizens) this 3. child allowance is at odds with the European tradition that measures relating to children and child care must apply to all inhabitants? (1) OJ L 149, 5. 7. 1971, p. 2. C 330 E/196 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 21. 11. 2000 Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission (7 April 2000) The Commissionís attention has been drawn to the plan to which the Honourable Member is referring. In the absence of social security harmonisation, each Member State is responsible for determining all the specific characteristics of its social legislation as long as, in doing so, it respects Community law. However, there are Community rules which coordinate the different national social security systems, contained in Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1) and its implementing Regulation No 574/72, and which aim to eliminate obstacles to the free movement of workers and members of their families, by guaranteeing certain fundamental principles such as equal treatment with nationals, exportability of social security benefits within the Community, aggregation of insurance periods and the prevalence of one applicable body of legislation. The above-mentioned rules for coordinating Member Statesí social security systems protect the rights of migrant workers in so far as they are nationals of the European Union or the European Economic Area. Moreover, Tunisian, Moroccan, Algerian and Turkish nationals who are legally residing in a Member State also benefit from equal treatment with respect to social security due to agreements between their country of origin and the Community. Nationals from non-member countries residing in Member States cannot refer to Community law in order to receive equal treatment with nationals. As a result, when the Austrian authorities introduce the conditions for entitlement and the new social security allowance, they will have to respect the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of nationality, which implies that Commun- ity nationals and the nationals of the four above-mentioned countries will benefit from the allowance under the same conditions as Austrian nationals. In addition, in 1997, the Commission already proposed to extend the field of application of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 and Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 to cover nationals of all non-member countries who are insured under a Member Stateís legislation and who are legally residing in the Community. The Council is still reviewing this proposal (2). Furthermore, the Commission also recently adopted a proposal to simplify and reform the rules for coordinating Member Statesí social security systems (3), which covers every person insured by social security legislation in a Member State and which also protects nationals of non-member countries. In accordance with the co-decision principle, Parliament and the Council are currently reviewing this proposal, which can only be adopted by a unanimous decision. (1) Latest consolidated version: Regulation (EC) No 118/97 (OJ L 28, 30. 10. 1997). (2) OJ C 6, 1. 1. 1998. (3) OJ C 38, 12. 2. 1999. (2000/C 330 E/226) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0642/00 by Andre Brie (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (28 February 2000) Subject: Commissionís position regarding the arrest of Kurdish mayors in Turkey At the European Parliament part-session on 1 December 1999, Commissioner Günter Verheugen, on behalf of the Commission, gave a positive assessment of political developments within Turkey with regard to the countryís status as an applicant for accession. In the light of the arrest of the Kurdish mayors of Diyarbakir, Siirt and Bingöl, Feridun Celik, Selim zalp and Feyzullah Kararslan, by the Turkish police and paramilitary special units on 19 February 2000: 1. 2. does the Commission stand by its positive assessment? does the Commission regard the intensified action by the Turkish authorities against democratically elected Kurdish representatives and the Kurdish party Hadep as part of these ápositiveí developments?