WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3959/98 by Raimo ILASKIVI , Marjo MATIKAINEN-KALLSTRÖM , Jyrki OTILA Equality of treatment with regard to various services (continued)
Date: 1999-01-04
Institutions: European Parliament, ILASKIVI, MATIKAINEN-KALLSTROEM, OTILA
Subjects: Finland, exchange of information, parliamentary question, postal service, tourism













EUR-Lex - 91998E3959 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E3959

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3959/98 by Raimo ILASKIVI , Marjo MATIKAINEN-KALLSTRÖM , Jyrki OTILA Equality of treatment with regard to various services (continued)  


Official Journal C 348 , 03/12/1999 P. 0006 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3959/98by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) , Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) and Jyrki Otila (PPE) to the Commission(4 January 1999)Subject: Equality of treatment with regard to various services (continued)Martin Bangemann, Member of the Commission, signed a reply to Written Question No E-2554/98(1) by the undersigned Members of the European Parliament. The reply, which one hopes the Commissioner had at least read, was inadequate both in style and in substance. It merely called on those who had tabled the question to read the reply to Question No E-3942/97(2) by Raimo Ilaskivi, MEP. However, that reply does not even mention the issue of highly unequal treatment of summer residents and permanent residents, for example with regard to waste disposal rates and real estate tax, which was raised in the new question.Without repeating the unanswered question, we would like to know:- whether, before signing the reply, the Member of the Commission genuinely studied the text of the above-mentioned new question in its entirety, and if so,- whether in his opinion the reply which one of his officials presented to him for signature was conducive to the development of an atmosphere of trust between the Commission and Parliament, and- whether the Member of the Commission considers that, if a Member of the European Parliament tables supplementary questions to clarify the reply he has received, there is no longer any need to answer them, it being sufficient to refer the questioner arrogantly to a previous reply?To be on the safe side, we are sending an unofficial English translation of this question directly and personally to Commissioner Bangemann, in order to avoid any possible breakdown in communications.Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission(6 April 1999)The Commission would take this opportunity of reassuring the Honourable Members that it takes very seriously its duty to reply to parliamentary questions under Article 140 EC Treaty, and that it would regret any perceived failure to reply to a question.Every question that the Commission receives is circulated to all commissioners, their cabinets and services. Every reply is approved by the competent commissioner, before being adopted by the Commission as a whole. The procedures established by the Commission aim to ensure proper replies to all questions.Unfortunately in the case of some questions the Commission can add nothing to what it said in reply to a previous question. In referring to a previous reply the Commission does not intend to be arrogant, and would regret if it appeared so.Turning to the matters raised in Written Question E-2554/98 by Mr Ilaskivi, it is only possible to say that, unless discrimination on grounds of nationality can be shown, there is no basis for Commission intervention.(1) OJ C 31, 5.2.1999, p. 149.(2) OJ C 223, 17.7.1998, p. 35.