WRITTEN QUESTION No. 4223/97 by Cristiana MUSCARDINI to the Commission. Vancimuglio
Date: 1998-01-21
Institutions: European Parliament, MUSCARDINI
Subjects: Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers, European treaties, revision of the Treaty (EU), right to strike, social dialogue

9. 10. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 310/17

(98/C 310/18)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4223/97

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(21 January 1998)

Subject: Vancimuglio

The  right  to  strike,  when  not  abused,  is  a  valuable  instrument  for  workers  and  is  recognized  in  the  basic
legislation  of  the  Member  States  and  labour  law.  Farmers  in  Italy  are  currently  holding  demonstrations  to
safeguard  their  legitimate  interests,  but  the  government(cid:146)s  reaction  to  the  protests  has  been  disproportionate,
ordering the forces of law and order to take decisive action to put a stop to them.

Since the police forces are also workers and their duty is to enforce the law, it should be stressed that the freedom
to protest cannot be restricted by the threat of arrest and summary trial. Can the Commission therefore intervene
in the case of the striking Italian farmers by introducing measures to safeguard and protect human and civic
rights?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 1998)

At present, there is no Community legislation on the right to strike. In fact, Article 2 (6) of the Agreement on
social policy which is to be incorporated into the EC Treaty by the Treaty of Amsterdam clearly states that the
provisions  of  the  Article  shall  not  apply  to  the  right  to  strike  or  the  right  to  impose  lock-outs.  Thus  the
Commission has no competence to intervene in a situation such as that described by the Honourable Member.

The Community Charter on Fundamental Social rights clearly contains the right to resort to collective action,
including  the  right  to  strike,  subject  to  the  obligations  arising  under  national  regulations  and  collective
agreements. However, in one previous case of demonstrations where acts of violence and vandalism were used,
the  Court  of  justice  (in  case  C-265/95)  held  that  a  Member  State  had  failed  to  adopt  all  necessary  and
proportionate  measures  in  order  to  prevent  the  free  movement  of  goods  from  being  obstructed  by  private
individuals.

(98/C 310/19)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0009/98

by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission

(29 January 1998)

Subject: Nuclear reprocessing and radioactive waste

Britain(cid:146)s Radioactive Waste Management Advisory Committee (RWMAC) recently published its 17th annual
report.

Among other things, the report recommends that spent nuclear fuel due to be reprocessed should be classified as
radioactive waste if the plutonium and uranium recovered from reprocessing will not be reused.

Britain(cid:146)s plutonium inventory is continuously getting bigger as all British spent fuel is reprocessed at Sellafield.
None of the plutonium is reused in Britain.

Numerous studies have been done on the threat of plutonium being siphoned off to subversive groups, who could
manufacture crude nuclear weapons with rudimentary technology.

Would  the  Commission  agree  that  the  best  way  to  avoid  further  rises  in  Britain(cid:146)s  plutonium  inventory  is  to
encourage  Britain  to  end  is  reprocessing  activities?  Can  the  Commission  give  a  guarantee  that  it  will  do
everything possible to ensure that no EU grants or loans are given to help nuclear reprocessing either in the EU or
in third countries?