WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1784/98 by Concepció FERRER to the Commission. Situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina
C 386/160 Official Journal of the European Communities EN 11. 12. 98 (98/C 386/220) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1784/98 by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission (11 June 1998) Subject: Situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina The European Parliament previously expressed the view that it was vital to train teachers to help children in Bosnia-Herzegovina overcome the effects of war and considered that the EU should fund peace education programmes designed to foster tolerance among the peoples of the region. At the present time, the education system in Bosnia-Herzegovina is instead placing emphasis on the differences between the various ethnic groups, thereby encouraging a segregationalist mentality which is making it impossible to lay the basic foundations for coexistence based on tolerance and respect. Is the Commission aware of this situation and has it taken any firm measures to promote education for peace in the former Yugoslavia? Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (10 July 1998) The Commission is very mindful of the situation with regard to education in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is making every effort to ensure that there is no place for segregationist attitudes in any of its programmes. For example, the recently implemented Phare VET 97 programme has the main aim of fostering a spirit of tolerance between the population groups in the region. The three components of the project (institution building, curriculum development and specific training measures) are designed to create links between the various bodies of the educational system and build trust between teachers. The Pre Tempus programme for higher education has succeeded in regularly bringing together the chief education officers of the three communities and is regarded as a benchmark by those concerned in Bosnia and Herzegovina. (98/C 386/221) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1790/98 by Viviane Reding (PPE) to the Commission (11 June 1998) Subject: Postponement of the ban on testing on animals Given that Directive 93/35/EEC (1) provides for a ban on testing on animals in the cosmetics industry and lays down that such testing must be replaced by alternative methods of testing as from 1 January 1998, that some EU Member States (the Netherlands and Germany) have introduced such a ban but that most have not done so, that the cosmetics industry already has available thousands of ingredients which have been tested on animals, that alternatives to most, frequently cruel, tests on live animals exist but are not being used and that research into new alternative methods of testing finds very little support, and that the Commission has still not taken any action in respect of the promised directive on a ban on testing on animals for finished cosmetics products, why is the Commission postponing the ban provided for in the Directive which was due to enter into force in 1998? In the Commissionís view, does commercial policy take precedence over animal welfare? On what grounds does the Commission keep postponing decisions on this issue? (1) OJ L 151, 23. 6. 1993, p. 32