WRITTEN QUESTION P-0617/00 by William Newton Dunn (PPE-DE) to the Council. EU rapid deployment force: Helsinki conclusions.
C 303 E/206 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 24. 10. 2000 (2000/C 303 E/236) WRITTEN QUESTION P-0617/00 by William Newton Dunn (PPE-DE) to the Council Subject: EU rapid deployment force: Helsinki conclusions (24 February 2000) In Annex I to Annex IV of the Helsinki Summit Presidency Conclusions, the EU Rapid Deployment Force is described as follows: áthey (Member States) will be able to deploy rapidly and then sustain forces in operations up to corps level (up to 15 brigades or 50-60 000 persons) They must be able to sustain such a deployment for at least one year. This will require an additional pool of deployment units (and supporting elements) at lower readiness to provide replacements for the initial forces. í However, in the first indent of paragraph 28 of the Presidency Conclusions, the text refers purely to Member States having áto deploy within 60 days and sustain for at least 1 year military forces of up to 50 000 ü 60 000 persons. í Could the Council state whether the decision taken at Helsinki was for a maximum deployment of 5 brigades sustainable for 1 year or of the 15 brigades referred to in the Annex? Reply (13 April 2000) The decision taken at Helsinki was that Member States should be able to deploy rapidly and sustain forces capable of the full range of Petersberg tasks, including the most demanding, in operations up to Corps level (up to 15 brigades or 50 000 ü 60 000 persons). (2000/C 303 E/237) WRITTEN QUESTION E-0674/00 by Marit Paulsen (ELDR) to the Commission (9 March 2000) Subject: Free movement of workers I Sweden, repayment of State study loans is governed by the Study Finance Act (1973:349) and the Study Finance Decree (1973:418). People residing in Sweden are required to repay study loans at an annual rate of 4 % of their combined income from service, employment and capital. However, people residing abroad, including therefore in other EU Member States, are required to repay them at an annual rate of 1/20 of the debt. Admittedly, these rules apply to all, irrespective of nationality, but in reality they make it unaffordable for those on low or middle incomes, or part-time workers, who have studied for a medium length of time (four to five years) to live and work in another Member State, as they are required to repay a considerably larger amount per annum than they would if they remained in Sweden (for those on high incomes, the situation may of course be reversed). Person A has a debt of about SEK 300 000 from a study loan (a normal amount for a person who has studied for four or five years) and an annual income of SEK 168 000 (SEK 14 000 per month). If this person lives and works in Sweden, he/she will have to repay SEK 6 720 per annum. However, if the same person happens to live and work in France, the annual repayment will be more than twice as much: SEK 15 000. Thus Swedenís repayment rules favour those in high income groups, while those on low or middle incomes or who work part-time cannot afford to take advantage of the fundamental freedom to live and work in another Member State (cf. ECJ judgment in the case of Kraus, C-19/92). Do these repayment rules violate the fundamental freedom to seek employment and to live and work in another Member State (Article 39 of the EC Treaty)?