AnswergivenbyMrsRedingonbehalfoftheCommission
(10October2003)
While Member States remain fully responsible for the content of teaching and the organisation of
education systems, the Commissioncurrently fulfils its role of encouraging and supporting Europeancooperationonschooleducationbymeansoftwomaintools.
ThefirstoftheseistheSocratesProgramme,andspecificallytheComeniusactionsforcooperationinthe
fieldofschooleducation.Theseactionstargetallactorsintheschooleducationcommunity,includingnotonly pupils and teachers, but also education authorities, inspectors, parents’ groups, communityassociations,andteachertraininginstitutions,amongstothers.TheoverallobjectivesofComeniusaretoenhance the quality and reinforce the European dimension of school education, and to promote thelearningoflanguagesandinterculturalawareness.FurtherinformationontheComeniusactions,includingdetailsofthetypeofmobilityactivitiessupported,canbefoundonthefollowingCommissionwebsite:(http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/programmes/socrates/comenius/index_en.html).
TheotherprincipalframeworkinwhichcooperationonschooleducationistakingplaceatEuropeanlevel
isthroughthe‘objectivesprocess’ontheconcretefutureobjectivesofeducationandtrainingsystems(
1),in
whichtheCommissionplaysacoordinatingrole.TheseobjectivesprovideabasisforMemberStatestoworktogetheratEuropeanleveltocontributetothegoaldefinedattheLisbonEuropeanCouncilmeetingof March 2000, namely that of making Europe the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-basedeconomyintheworld.TheHonourableMemberwillbeinterestedtonotethatthegoalsofincreasingmobilityandexchangeandstrengtheningEuropeancooperationareamongstthosebeingaddressedinthis
process.
ThroughtheCommunityInitiativeInterregIIIfundingcanbeprovided,intermsofprojectsanddepending
ontheassessmentoftheregionsconcernedoftheneeds,toco-operationofthepublicauthoritiesinthefieldofeducation aswellastocross-borderlearning ofe.g. languages. Though targeted projects canprovideonlyshort-termfunding,theoutcomesofsuchprojectsmayhavealong-termimpactprovidingsolutionstoproblemsencountered.
(1) Seethe‘Detailedworkprogrammeonthefollow-upoftheobjectivesofeducationandtrainingsystemsinEurope’
adoptedbytheCouncilon20February2002,document6365/02EDUC27.
(2004/C58E/218) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2747/03
byPaulRübig(PPE-DE)totheCommission
(15September2003)
Subject:Discrimination against Austrian building contractors in the provision of services on German
buildingsites
Austrianfirmsandorganisationsrepresentingtheconstructionindustrycomplainincreasinglythat,onthe
basisoftheGermanlawonthepostingofworkers,theGermanauthoritiesarerestrictingcompetitionandhindering the posting of workers for the provision of services on building sites in Germany by notrecognisingallowances,bonusesandextrapaymentsforpostedworkersfromotherMemberStatesaspartoftheminimumwage,astheydointhecaseofemployeesofGermanfirms.
The situation will worsen after 1September 2003, when a further and considerable increase in the
minimumwagetookeffectundertheaboveGermanlaw,bringingitfarabovetheAustriancollectivelyagreedminimumwage(nottakingintoaccountadditionalallowances,bonusesandextrapaymentsthatarerequiredbylaworundercontracts).C58E/202 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
Will the Commission act to ensure that Germany puts an end to this even greater restriction of
competition applying to building contractors from other Member States, in particular Austria, from1September2003?
IstheCommissionaimingforarapidconclusionofCaseC-341/02,whichisofsignificanceinestablishing
caselaw?
WilltheCommissionseektoensurethat,whencalculatingtheminimumwage,Germanyalsorecognises
thosepaymentsthat,owingtotheprovisionsofthelaworcollectiveagreementsintheMemberStateoforigin,arenotissuedonthescheduleddateofpaymentoftheminimumwageinquestion,butonlyinDecember,forexample(Christmasbonus)?
AnswergivenbyMsDiamantopoulouonbehalfoftheCommission
(14October2003)
ThefailurebytheGermanauthoritiestorecognisebonusesandsupplementspaidbyemployersbasedin
anotherMemberStatetotheiremployeesinthebuildingsectorpostedtoGermany(e.g.theChristmas
bonusoradditionalholidayallowanceinAustria)whencalculatingsuchworkers’payiscurrentlythesubjectofinfringementproceedingsbroughtbytheCommissionagainstGermany.TheCommissionhasreferredthemattertotheCourtofJustice(CaseNoC-341/02)onthegroundsthatitcontravenesArticle3ofDirective96/71/EC(
1)andArticle49oftheECTreaty.
AsthispointiscrucialtointerpretingDirective96/71/EC,theCommissionhopestoseeanearlyrulingby
theCourtincaseC-341/02.However,itistheCourtofJusticeitselfandnottheCommissionthatsetsthedateforopeningtheoralprocedure.
(1) Directive96/71/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof16December1996concerningthepostingof
workersintheframeworkoftheprovisionofservices,OJL18,21.1.1997.
(2004/C58E/219) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2787/03
byChrisDavies(ELDR)totheCommission
(19September2003)
Subject:Footandmouthdisease
Inanattempttocurbthespreadoffootandmouthdiseasein2001,theUnitedKingdomgovernment
orderedthecullingoftenmillionanimals,90%ofwhicharethoughtnottohavebeeninfected.
Manyofthekillingstookplacewithoutregardtowelfareconsiderationsorlegislation,withreportsof
manymaimedanimalssubsequentlybeingburiedorincineratedalive.
The widespread closure of footpaths and open countryside had a devastating effect upon the tourist
industryinmanypartsoftheUK.
TheresponseofEUgovernmentstothe2001epidemichassincebeenthesubjectofmuchdiscussion.HastheUKgovernmentprovidedtheCommissionwithanyinformationtoindicatethatitwilladopta
radicallydifferentapproachintheeventofanotheroutbreak,and,inparticular,thatitwillendorsetheuseofring-fencevaccinationtocurbthespreadofthediseaseandpermitanimalwelfareconsiderationstoberespected?6.3.2004EN C58E/203 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion