WRITTEN QUESTION E-2443/99 by Rolf Linkohr (PSE) to the Commission. Europe Agreements with Eastern European countries.
Date: 1999-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Central and Eastern European countries, EU national, European Association Agreement, associated country, equal treatment, foreign national, right of establishment, self-employed person

3.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 280 E/45

is for the Union to have an autonomous capacity to take decisions,
The objective agreed at Helsinki
to launch and then to conduct Union-led military operations where the Atlantic Alliance as a whole is not
engaged. The headline goal adopted at Helsinki is for the Union to be able to deploy up to 50 000-60 000
troops (cid:129) capable of the full range of Petersberg tasks (cid:129) within 60 days.

Interim institutions for decision-making on crisis management, and for operational control of both military
and non-military actions which may be launched in crisis situations are to be introduced.

A report identifying non-military (civilian) aspects of crisis management and crisis response tools both at
Union and national level was also noted at Helsinki. The intention is to bring together capabilities at
national and European level
(for instance police, monitors, human rights experts), and to establish a
mechanism for rapid co-ordination and deployment.

As a first step new decision-making and advisory bodies will be set up in Brussels on an interim basis. The
structures to be set up are a political and security committee staffed by representatives at senior level.
There will also be a military committee, staffed,
in the interim phase, by military representatives of
Member States.
It will give military advice to the Council as needed. A civilian crisis management
coordinating mechanism is also to be established within the Council.

All decisions in the area of European security and defence policy will be taken (cid:145)within the single
institutional framework(cid:146), thus ensuring inter-pillar coherence. The Commission looks forward to these
new forms of cooperation and will contribute actively where it has responsibility and experience, namely
in the area of non-military crisis management and conflict prevention.

(2000/C 280 E/044)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2443/99

by Rolf Linkohr (PSE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Europe Agreements with Eastern European countries

Each of the (cid:145)Europe Agreements(cid:146) which the EU has concluded with Eastern European countries includes an
(cid:145)equal treatment requirement(cid:146) relating to the establishment of companies and nationals of the contracting
countries (subject to certain provisos for special occupations).

Does the Commission consider that this equal treatment requirement includes a prohibition of

1.
discrimination?

2.
Does the Commission consider that an EU Member State is barred from submitting nationals of the
contracting countries to (cid:145)needs tests(cid:146) if their own self-employed nationals are not required to undergo such
tests?

3.
Does the Commission agree that, where a Member State does not require its own self-employed
nationals to produce evidence of prior knowledge, etc., such evidence may not be required of the nationals
of the contracting partner countries?

4.
Does the Commission agree that, where a Member State does not require its self-employed nationals
to produce evidence of capital, this may not be required of the nationals of the contracting partner
countries?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2000)

1.
The Commission shares the opinion of the Honourable Member that the principle of equal treatment
contains the prohibition of discrimination between nationals of the associated countries and nationals of
the Member States.

C 280 E/46

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.10.2000

The Member States may apply their laws and regulations regarding entry and stay, work, labour
2.
conditions, and establishment of natural persons, provided that, in doing so, they do not apply them in a
such manner as to nullify or impair the benefits accruing to any party under the terms of a specific
provision of the Europe agreements (see for instance Article 58 of the agreement with Poland).

3.
It is the opinion of the Commission that the Europe agreements permit the Member States to verify
that nationals of the associated countries have the required qualifications to establish themselves on their
territory.

4. Member States may require that nationals of the associated countries have the financial means to
establish themselves on their territory and to ascertain that self-employment and business undertakings by
nationals shall not extend to seeking or taking employment in the labour market or confer a right of
access to the labour market of another party to the Europe agreement (see for instance Article 44
paragraph 4 of the agreement with Poland).

In addition to the answers given under 3 and 4, it is noted that the scope of the relevant provisions of
Europe agreements is subject to the scrutiny of the Court of justice. There are currently four cases, in
which national courts have requested a preliminary ruling by the Court of justice on the application of the
relevant provisions in the Europe agreements (Gloszczuk/C-63/99, Kondova/C-235/99, Barkoci & Malik/
C-257/99 and Jany etc./C-268/99). The Commission has submitted observations in all cases. The rulings by
the Court of justice cannot be expected before summer 2000.

(2000/C 280 E/045)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2452/99

by Mathieu Grosch (PPE-DE) to the Council

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Community action programme for youth

On 28 August 1998 the Commission submitted a proposal for a European Parliament and Council
decision establishing a Community action programme for youth (COM(98) 331) (1). After the European
Parliament(cid:146)s second reading on 28 October 1999 the decision was submitted to the Council for its second
reading.

1. Why will the Council meeting and thus the discussion on the action programme for youth be held
not, as planned, on 23 November 1999 but in early January?

2.
How does the Council imagine the various youth programmes forming part of the action programme
for youth can be implemented effectively in accordance with its objectives with only EUR 350 million
(rather than the EUR 765 million proposed by the Commission and the EUR 980 million proposed by
Parliament) for the period 2000-2004?

(1) OJ C 311, 10.10.1998, p. 6.

Reply

(13 March 2000)

At the Youth Council on 23 November, no decision was taken to initiate the conciliation procedure for the
proposed (cid:145)Youth(cid:146) programme. In view of the need to make the most effective use of the time available
(six weeks with a possible extension of two weeks from the date of the first meeting of the Conciliation
Committee as provided for in Article 251 of the Treaty), the Council subsequently proposed to the
Parliament that conciliation should begin at a mutually convenient date in January. The first conciliation
meeting was held on 27 January 2000.

As far as the Common Position figure of EUR 350 million for five years is concerned, this was agreed
the Council(cid:146)s reasons(cid:146)
unanimously by the Youth Council on 27 May 1999.

In the (cid:145)Statement of