WRITTEN QUESTION E-1137/97 by Carlos Pimenta (PPE), Willy De Clercq (ELDR), Franco Malerba (UPE), Carole Tongue (PSE) and Giorgos Dimitrakopoulos (PPE) to the Commission (24 March 1997)

Subject: Situation of the Brussels I European School (Uccle)

The European Communities (along with the Member States) are the Contracting Parties to the Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools (see Decision 94/557/EC, Euratom ((OJ L 212, 17.8.1994, p. 1.)) and 94/558/ECSC ((OJ L 212, 17.8.1994, p. 15.)) of 17 June 1994). Moreover, the European Communities in article A-327 of the 1997 general budget, have set aside ECU 98 302 000 for the Schools, of which ECU 6 255 298 is earmarked for operating expenditure with regard to buildings, and ECU 5 896 683 for operating expenditure and equipment.

In these circumstances, what steps does the Commission intend to take in order to tackle the disturbing situation which has arisen at the Brussels I European School (Uccle), bearing in mind the following:

- The Belgian Minister for the Civil Service, along with the public works department, plans to build an annex to the Brussels I European School. This is intended to house some primary school children and will be situated at Rue Berkendael, next to the future 'Federal Centre for Clinical Observation of Sex Offenders', whose establishment is provided for in legislation on the sexual abuse of minors (Decision of the Belgian Council of Ministers of 30 August 1996) planned site of the annex.

- The parents of pupils at the European School (resolution of the General Assembly of the Parents' Association of 30 January 1997) completely refute this plan. They are annoyed that the Belgian authorities could make such a proposal and are amazed that it has been endorsed by the School's head teacher.

- The public works department is carrying out studies and other preparatory measures whilst the School's Board of Governors has still not given its opinion on the choice of the site.

- The European Institutions, in line with established precedents of the Court of Justice, are bound by a general duty to assist their staff and cannot therefore ignore the opinion shared by all parents involved, who are, for the most part, officers of the European Union.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission (16 May 1997)

The Board of Governors, the intergovernmental body responsible for the European Schools, was informed at its meeting of 28 and 29 January 1997 that the Belgian judicial authorities were planning to build a high security

centre for offenders in the immediate vicinity of the Athénée de Berkendael, the building offered by the Belgian authorities as temporary accommodation for pupils of the Brussels I European School (Uccle) while renovation work is carried out there.

On 31 January 1997, the Board of Governors, through its representative, asked the competent Belgian authorities for information on the precise nature of the establishment to be built near the Berkendael school and on the measures the authorities planned to take to guarantee the absolute safety of the children who would have to attend it.

The Board of Governors considered this matter at its meeting of 22 and 23 April 1997 and joined the parents' association in rejecting the Berkendael school as unsuitable. It also stressed the need to speed up work on the third school, which is the best way of solving once and for all the problems of overcrowding and safety not only at the Brussels I European School but also at Brussels II (Woluwé).

The Commission places great importance on the proper operation of the European Schools; it will follow developments on this question closely and will ensure that the most appropriate solution is adopted.