WRITTEN QUESTION E-2460/99 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. The Commission's attitude towards the European Museum project.
Date: 1999-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, European Parliament, European identity, cultural pluralism, museum, public building

C 219 E/168

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

1.8.2000

(2000/C 219 E/214)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2455/99

by Lousewies van der Laan (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Mismanagement at the Energy Charter Secretariat

(16 December 1999)

The European Commission was present at the meeting of the Energy Charter Conference on 30 July 1999,
when the Conference Chairman, Mr Christophersen, drew attention to the serious malfunctioning of the
Secretariat, as outlined in the Arthur D. Little report commissioned by his predecessor, Ambassador
Rutten. The European Commission is a signatory to the Energy Charter and, as such, should be concerned
to ensure its effective implementation.
through contributions in kind
(providing meeting and translation facilities).

It has assisted the Secretariat

1. What steps has the Commission undertaken since that meeting to ensure that the situation is
resolved as a matter of urgency?

2. What will the Commission do to ensure that such a situation will not recur?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2000)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it is not a signatory to the Energy Charter
Treaty. Signatories or contracting parties to the Energy Charter Treaty are the Communities and their
fifteen Member States.

The Communities are represented in the Energy Charter by the Commission and the Presidency of the
Union.

from the Union,

On a proposal
the Energy Charter Conference supported by its Chairman,
Mr Christophersen, decided on 7 December 1999 by consensus to replace the Secretary General,
Mr Sch(cid:252)tterle (Germany) as of 1 January 2000 by Mrs Kemper (Germany) for four years with an option
for an additional period of two years.

(2000/C 219 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2460/99

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: The Commission(cid:146)s attitude towards the (cid:145)European Museum(cid:146) project

At the (cid:145)Museum for Europe(cid:146) symposium on 21 and 22 October, which was attended by Commission
President Romano Prodi, a number of politicians promised their support for a museum in the European
Parliament. The cost price is estimated at BEF 1 billion, of which Parliament, the Belgian Federation and
the private sector would each pay one third. The historical starting point of the permanent exhibition is
Charlemagne(cid:146)s empire

Is the Commission aware of

the initiative by vzw Museum van Europa (non-profit making
1.
organisation (cid:145)Museum of Europe(cid:146)) to house a museum on the premises of the European Parliament,
which is what may be concluded from the Commission President(cid:146)s presence at the symposium? If so, when
was the Commission informed of this project, by whom and how?

2.

(a) What objectives has vzw Museum van Europa made known to the Commission concerning the
construction of the museum and what is on display in it?

(b) Who, in the opinion of vzw Museum van Europa, is responsible for the way in which the museum is

managed and organised?

1.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 219 E/169

Has the Commission promised any financial or material support to vzw Museum van Europa for
3.
accommodating a museum on Parliament(cid:146)s premises? If so, what specific commitments have been made
(subsidies, premises etc.) and what are the Commission(cid:146)s reasons for granting this support? If not, why is
the Commission not providing such support to vzw Museum van Europa?

Does the Commission support the decision to take Charlemagne as the historical starting point of the
4.
permanent exhibition in the museum? If so, does this not detract from the major contributions that the
Greco-Roman civilisations and Byzantium have made to European ideas? If not, what does the Com-
mission feel is the appropriate way of realising the European museum concept in full?

5. Will the Commission request vzw Museum van Europa to apply in the museum correctly and in its
entirety the language legislation of the Belgian Federation, since such legislation can be regarded as a form
of mutual respect for languages and cultures? If not, why not, given that failure to apply such legislation
would detract from mutual respect for languages and cultures in the Belgian Federation?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2000)

The Commission has also been informed of the plans for a (cid:145)Museum for Europe(cid:146) project in Brussels.

It is important to point out that this project is a private initiative by an association and that the
Commission is in no way bound by the statements made concerning it. Moreover, no documentation or
request concerning the project has been referred to the Commission.

Without wishing to prejudge the importance of creating a museum of
the
Commission finds it inconceivable that a European cultural measure could fail to recognise the diversity
of traditions and cultures on which our identity is based today.

this kind in Brussels,

(2000/C 219 E/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2462/99

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: European firearms pass

Within the EU, all persons who go hunting are required to have a firearms pass (in the UK, shotgun
certificate and/or firearms licence), a licence to use and carry firearms for hunting purposes, international
insurance cover, a visitor(cid:146)s firearms permit to allow them to hunt in the country where they are visiting for
that purpose, and a hunter(cid:146)s licence. They must also be fully acquainted with the standards which apply in
the country where they are hunting. Over and above these indisputably necessary requirements, they are
also required to carry a European firearms pass, issued by the relevant national authorities, which merely
repeats the information contained in the national firearms pass.

This European pass causes a substantial amount of extra bureaucracy, while simply duplicating the
compulsory national firearms pass to no purpose.

Does the Commission not think that national firearms passes could usefully be harmonised at European
level (as has been done with passports). Since such harmonised national passes would be valid at European
level, and it would therefore be possible to get rid of the present European firearms pass.

Does the Commission intend to take measures to this effect?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2000)

Article 12 of Council Directive 91/477/EEC of 18 June 1999 on control of the acquisition and possession
of weapons (1) provides for the use of the European firearms pass for a person in possession of a firearm