WRITTEN QUESTION P-0056/00 by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission. The choice of cultural and ethnic categories on equal opportunities forms.
Date: 2000-01-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, equal treatment, ethnic discrimination, ethnic group, form, infringement of EU law, official document, political parties, statistical nomenclature, statistics

3.10.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 280 E/165

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2000)

The Commission recognises the importance of the Constanta-Trieste oil pipeline for reducing environ-
mental risks associated with transporting oil across the Bosphorus, and for diversifying the energy supply
base of the countries of South Eastern Europe by giving them access to the resources of the Caspian
region, inter alia via the Trans-Caucasian corridor and the seaports of the west coast of the Black Sea,
including the oil port of Constanta.

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member of the Community(cid:146)s position on the importance
of resources from the Caspian Sea region for European energy supplies, the need to have a number of safe
supply routes to the European and international markets, and the importance of investors building such
routes on the basis of commercial criteria.

Consequently, in view of the impending enlargement of the Community and in the interests of secure
energy supplies, the Commission has been implementing an interstate technical assistance programme
(Inogate-Interstate oil and gas transport to Europe) since 1995, being aware of the need to facilitate the
integration of oil transport networks between the former Soviet Union, the countries of Central and
Eastern Europe and the Community.

The aim of the programme is to develop cooperation between the countries in these regions to create the
conditions to attract public and private investment in the rehabilitation and modernisation of existing
networks and the development of new technically and economically viable and environmentally sound
routes.

In institutional terms the programme has enabled a new system to be developed for cross-border transport
of oil and gas compatible with international standards: the Inogate Umbrella Agreement. This has so far
been signed by representatives of the Governments of 16 countries in Central Asia, the Caucasus, Central
and Eastern Europe (accession candidates, including Romania) and the Balkans.

It has facilitated the emergence of a variety of projects linking the Caspian Basin to European markets via
the Trans-Caucasian corridor, the port of Supsa and ports on the Western shore of the Black Sea. These
included the Constanta-Trieste, Odessa-Gdansk, Burgas-Alexandropoulis and Burgas-Vlore projects.
Although it does not wish to express any preferences, the Commission recognises the importance of the
Constanta-Trieste project for the markets of South-Eastern Europe.

The Romanian authorities intend to organise a meeting under the Inogate Agreement in the near future
bringing together the industry ministers of the countries which might be concerned by the corridor to
identify the institutional and technical pre-conditions before submitting the final project to interested
private and institutional investors.

The Commission is willing to provide technical assistance under the Inogate programme to the Govern-
ments of Romania and any other countries that may be involved to help prepare and, if it is adopted,
implement the project.

(2000/C 280 E/188)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0056/00

by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: The choice of cultural and ethnic categories on equal opportunities forms

What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of the contents of a recent (cid:145)Monitoring of EQUAL Opportunities Policy(cid:146)
form, distributed by the European section of a large political party, which used the following classifications
of cultural and ethnic origin (cid:145)as recommended by the (UK) Commission for Racial Equality(cid:146): White, Black
Caribbean, Black African, Black Other, Indian, Irish, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Chinese, Asian, Other; why
there should be an (cid:145)Irish(cid:146) category distinct from the broad classification of (cid:145)white(cid:146) (whereas no other EU
Member State is deemed different enough to warrant such a distinction) and whether requesting that
citizens from Ireland should be asked to distinguish themselves differently on such a form is legally
permissible?

C 280 E/166

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.10.2000

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2000)

the choice of cultural and ethnic categories on equal
As the Honourable Member will be aware,
opportunities forms is not in itself the subject of Community law. However, Directive 95/46/EC of the
Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the
processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data (1) expressly prohibits the processing of
personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade-
union membership, and the processing of data concerning health or sex life. This prohibition is lifted in a
number of limited circumstances, including where the consent of the individual concerned has been given.

Subject to the conditions laid down in that Directive, the Commission believes that the collection of
statistical information on discrimination related to racial and ethnic origin, whether real or presumed, can
make a useful contribution to ensuring equality of treatment and opportunity. The proposal for a Council
decision establishing a Community action programme to combat discrimination (2001-2006), adopted by
the Commission on 25 November 1999 (2), includes a strand devoted to the collection and analysis of data
related to discrimination on the grounds covered by the programme, including racial and ethnic origin.

As regards the particular categories to be used in such monitoring, the Commission believes that this
should be left to the particular Member States concerned, given the existence of different minority ethnic
groups in the different Member States. The Commission cannot in any case comment on the choices made
in the internal documents of political parties.

(1) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.
(2) COM(99) 567 final.

(2000/C 280 E/189)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0062/00

by Evelyne Gebhardt (PSE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Increase in air fares

Is the European Commission aware that

1.
the major European airlines, acting in unison, have
terminated their current agency contracts with travel agencies and offered them new contracts involving
lower agency fees, those fees being in every case identical?

2.
Is it also aware that the travel agencies have offset the consequent reduction in their revenue by
levying a new (cid:145)transaction fee(cid:146) on travellers who, being final consumers, are therefore unable to avoid a
hidden and mutually agreed increase in air fares?

3.
Does the Commission share my view that, although travellers may circumvent this increase in air
fares by booking with the airlines directly, they must, if they do so, put up with poorer service and accept
that a large number of jobs in travel agencies may be lost?

4.
Does the European Commission consider that such price agreements, the cost of which is ultimately
paid by the final consumer and which jeopardise the job security of people working in travel agencies, are
compatible with current European law? When, and how, will the Commission intervene if there has been a
breach of Community law or if even the slightest whiff of suspicion exists that Community law has been
breached?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2000)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that it has been actively studying the relationship
between airlines and travel agents. In a recent competition law decision (1) the Commission set out its
policy on the commissions paid by airlines to travel agents. One of the facts established in this decision