WRITTEN QUESTION E-2461/99 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. The Council's attitude towards the European Museum project.
Date: 1999-12-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Parliament, European social policy, museum, promotion of the European idea

C 303 E/66

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

The Commission can therefore confirm that it will ensure that the right of WTO members to regulate, and
to introduce new regulations, on the supply of services within their territories in order to meet national
policy objectives, as recognised in the preamble to the GATS, is safeguarded in any WTO discussions on
the matter. This is a pre-condition for successful services negotiations based on reciprocal trust among all
WTO members. It is up to WTO members to decide their national policy objectives.

The GATS offers a number of instruments to reduce progressively the obstacles which might flow from
regulatory diversity or inadequate regulation, which fully respect the national regulatory sovereignty of
WTO members. Members are offered the possibility to develop disciplines on domestic regulation aimed at
ensuring that national regulations do not create unnecessary obstacles to trade in services. They also have
the possibility to negotiate or grant recognition of other members(cid:146) regulations.

The Commission can confirm that the flexibility to undertake specific commitments on market access and
national treatment, that is a basic feature of the GATS, will also be safeguarded. Based on their national
regulations, members undertake specific commitments which they have to respect and which should not
be undermined by new or different regulations. Nonetheless, they have the possibility to negotiate
modifications in their commitments as they deem appropriate. Finally, the general exceptions contained
in Article XIV allow them to adopt any measure necessary to protect public morals or the fundamental
interests of society, or human, animal or plant life or health.

(2000/C 303 E/058)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2461/99

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(16 December 1999)

Subject: The Council(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

1.
Is the Council aware of the initiative by vzw Museum van Europa (non-profit making 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 Council
informed of this project, by whom and how?

2.

(a) What objectives has vzw Museum van Europa made known to the Council 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?

Has the Council 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 Council(cid:146)s reasons for granting this support? If not, why is the
Council not providing such support to vzw Museum van Europa?

4.
Does the Council support the decision to take Charlemagne as the historical starting point of the
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, as the Greek Minister of Culture
has pointed out? If not, what does the Council feel is the appropriate way of realising the European
museum concept in full?

24.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 303 E/67

5. Will the Council 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?

Reply

(10/11 April 2000)

At its meeting on 23 November 1999, the Council was informed by the Greek delegation of the project
for the creation of a European Museum. On that occasion,
it noted the concerns expressed by that
delegation regarding the objectives and priorities for the project, as conceived by the Belgian association
under private law which is organising it.

The Council has never had any direct contact with the non-profitmaking organisation in question.

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that, under the Treaty,
the Community is to
contribute to the flowering of the cultures of the Member States while respecting their national and
regional diversities and bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore.

In the context of its competence in this respect, and if the matter is directly referred to it, the Council will
adopt an appropriate position.

(2000/C 303 E/059)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2479/99

by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) and Fiorella Ghilardotti (PSE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Directive 96/67/EC

1.
By letter of 7 September 1999, the Director-General of the Commission(cid:146)s Directorate-General VIII
(Transport), Mr Robert Coleman, informed the Italian Government that he had some misgivings as to the
compatibility with Community law of certain provisions of Decree Law No. 18 of 13 January 1999. In his
opinion, Articles 13, 14 and 20 of the Decree Law, which concern not only the qualifications required of
those providing ground-handling services but also social protection, formed an obstacle to the opening-up
of the market sought by Council Directive 96/67/EC.

2.
Recital 6 of the Council directive, however, confirms the right of the Member States, in the light of
the principle of subsidiarity, to take into consideration the specific, in other words national, nature of the
sector, recital 10 the right of the Member States to introduce this directive gradually, recital 8 the need to
take account of employment conditions, in other words established employment conditions, at airports,
recital 24 the right of the Member States to ensure an adequate level of social protection for the staff of
undertakings providing ground-handling services, and Article 18, finally, the right of the Member States to
take the necessary measures to ensure protection of the rights of workers.

3.
It is well-known that, given the existence of high unemployment, protection of employment levels
and of the employment conditions of employed workers is a matter of major concern and action on the
part of the main Institutions of the European Union (cid:129) the Council, the Commission and Parliament.

In view of these facts, and given that Mr Coleman(cid:146)s letter of 7 September 1999 to the Italian Government
is clearly unjustified, can the Commission say whether it intends to take action to remedy this situation so
as to comply rigorously with the letter and fundamental principles of Community law and, in addition,
what action it intends to take with regard to officials, such as Mr Coleman, whose actions on behalf of the
Commission far exceed their authority?