# CE2004084EN.01059701.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/597 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/597

---

(2004/C 84 E/0672)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0474/04

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(23 February 2004)

Subject:   Closure of certain language sections of the European Schools

Subject:

It would appear from a Commission document that there are plans to close the Italian, Dutch and German sections of four European schools (Bergen, Culham, Mol and Karlsruhe).

The Commission:

| 1. | Can it confirm the report and explain the reasons for taking this step? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Can it confirm the report and explain the reasons for taking this step?

| 2. | Does it not think that these closures would be prejudicial to the rights of the families of staff working in the centres concerned to educate their children in the culture of their country of origin, through their mother tongue? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does it not think that these closures would be prejudicial to the rights of the families of staff working in the centres concerned to educate their children in the culture of their country of origin, through their mother tongue?

| 3. | Does it not consider that children who are unable to attend a section in their own language and are therefore obliged to attend another language section could become victims of cultural colonialisation in languages which are becoming even more dominant because of arrangements of this kind? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does it not consider that children who are unable to attend a section in their own language and are therefore obliged to attend another language section could become victims of cultural colonialisation in languages which are becoming even more dominant because of arrangements of this kind?

| 4. | Should the cultural and linguistic diversity extolled in official speeches and texts not also be respected in the system of European Schools, which, among other things, sets an inspiring example of how a European dimension can be achieved in education? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Should the cultural and linguistic diversity extolled in official speeches and texts not also be respected in the system of European Schools, which, among other things, sets an inspiring example of how a European dimension can be achieved in education?

| 5. | What action does the Commission intend to propose to Member State governments to ensure that the European schools find organisational and funding solutions that will guarantee respect for the right to cultural diversity? |
| --- | --- |

5.

What action does the Commission intend to propose to Member State governments to ensure that the European schools find organisational and funding solutions that will guarantee respect for the right to cultural diversity?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 2004)

(19 March 2004)

The Commission is a Member of the 16 Member Board of Governors of the European Schools with the other Board Members being appointed by each Member State government. In that capacity the Commission put on the agenda of the January 2004 meeting of the Board a request that the criteria agreed by the Board of Governors in October 2000 in relation to the opening, maintenance and closure of language sections in European Schools (the so-called ‘Gaignage’ report criteria), be applied in relation to certain language sections in the European Schools of Culham, Mol, Bergen and Karlsruhe.

These criteria, unanimously adopted by the Board of Governors representing all Member State governments in 2000, specified that a language section should be closed if, over a two-year period, there are 3 7 or fewer pupils in the entire primary section and 42 or fewer pupils in the entire secondary section, or if the numbers of category I pupils (children of EU staff) are low.

These two criteria can be applied separately, but they both apply in fact to the Italian and Dutch sections in Culham, the Italian section in Mol, the Italian and German sections in Bergen, and the Dutch section in Karlsruhe. In the Italian section in Karlsruhe, although the pupil numbers are slightly higher than the minimum specified by the Gaignage criteria, the pupils are almost exclusively category III pupils (children whose parents have no link to EU institutions). That brings the second Gaignage criteria fully into effect.

Detailed figures on pupil numbers in each school and each language section will readily be provided to the Honourable Member by the Commission. By way of example, in the Italian language section in the Mol European School, there are currently only five primary age pupils and 13 secondary age pupils with only two being children of EU staff, while in the Dutch language section in the Culham European School there are 32 primary age pupils and 33 secondary age pupils — none of the pupils being children of EU staff.

The Commission is committed to the principle that a multi-lingual European education be available for the children of EU staff in all locations where there are EU Institutions and certainly does not subscribe to any form of ‘cultural colonialism’. However, on the issue of language sections the Commission and the remainder of the Board of Governors believe that, in locations with few EU staff, the multi-lingual European education offered by European Schools may be delivered in different ways, and cannot always be in the mother tongue of each child. The situation at Culham, in particular, is further complicated by the fact that there are no longer any EU institutions or EU staff there.

The Commission asks the Honourable Member to note that, under the criteria adopted, the language sections are only gradually to be phased out and will not suddenly be closed. After a decision reflecting the relevant criteria is taken, linguistic sections continue to function at least for a further six academic years until the current cycles of primary, secondary and baccalaureate teaching are finished (in this case, until July 2011).

The Commission sees no valid arguments for preserving artificially, and at great expense to the tax payer and EU budget, very small language sections in small European Schools, particularly in the light of the Bösch Report — adopted by the Parliament in 2002 — concerning the financing of the European Schools and the need for better financial management, taking account of growing spending needs arising from EU enlargement and the necessary creation of new Polish, Hungarian and Czech sections in the Brussels and Luxembourg European Schools.

---