WRITTEN QUESTION E-0375/00 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Higher education tuition fees.
Date: 2000-02-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Scotland, United Kingdom, competence of the Member States, decentralisation, educational system, equal treatment, foreign student, higher education, national law, school fees, student, student mobility

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/143

(2000/C 330 E/160)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0372/00

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 February 2000)

Subject: Implementation in the UK of Article 33 of the EC Treaty

Is the Commission satisfied that the United Kingdom is honouring its obligations under Article 33(1)(b) of
the EC Treaty (consolidated version)?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 2000)

Article 33 (ex Article 39) of the EC Treaty sets out the objectives of the common agricultural policy. As
the Court of justice has stated, it is the responsibility of the Community institutions, in adopting the
common organisation of agricultural markets under the EC Treaty, to secure the permanent harmonisation
between the various objectives of the common agricultural policy set out in Article 33, which may prove
to be contradictory, and, where necessary, allow any one of them temporary priority in order to satisfy the
demands of the economic factors or conditions in view of which their decisions are made. The Court has
repeatedly referred to the broad discretion which the Community institutions have in this respect.

As a result,
in itself, an
in principle no single one of the objectives listed in Article 33 constitutes,
appropriate yardstick by which the acts of any individual Member State are to be judged, and it therefore
does not fall to the Commission to make any such judgment. Of course, the Member States, in applying
the common agricultural policy within their competence, are subject
to the general principles of
Community law, and specific rules laid down in Community legislation, and it is the Commission(cid:146)s task
to ensure compliance with these requirements in specific cases.

(2000/C 330 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0374/00

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Higher education in the United Kingdom

(14 February 2000)

Does not the Commission feel that its educational programmes such as Erasmus and Socrates (which offer
all EU students the chance to study in other Member States), are being undermined by the inequitable
situation in the UK whereby a non-British student wishing to study in Scotland will have the payment of
fees deferred, whilst one wishing to study in England will have to pay upon enrolment?

Does not the Commission agree that this situation gives Scottish universities an unfair advantage over their
English, Welsh and Northern Irish competitors when trying to enrol students, and does it not agree that
this therefore constitutes a breach of EU competition law?

(2000/C 330 E/162)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0375/00

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Higher education tuition fees

(14 February 2000)

Devolution within the UK now presents a situation whereby students from other Member States in the EU
will be exempt from paying tuition fees in Scotland but not in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

C 330 E/144

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

If, for example, a French student studying in Scotland did not have to pay fees, although a French student
studying in England, which is still the same Member State, did have to pay fees, would the Commission
consider this to be discrimination?

(2000/C 330 E/163)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0376/00

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 February 2000)

Subject: Higher education tuition fees

Devolution in the UK has led to the anomaly where Scottish and EU students will be exempt from paying
tuition fees in Scotland whereas English, Welsh and Northern Irish students will be the only EU students
who are not exempt.

As there is no precedent for this type of devolution within the EU, does the Commission feel that this
constitutes a case of discrimination against English, Welsh and Northern Irish students? If so, what actions
do it intend to take?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0374/00, E-0375/00 and E-0376/00
given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 2000)

Under the terms the EC Treaty, each Member State is responsible for the content of its teaching and the
organisation of its education system.

Under Community law, the Member States are not obliged to award grants or aid to help students to cover
their education fees. This is a matter for the Member States to decide. It is only when a Member State
awards grants of this kind to nationals that the Treaty requires it to treat non-nationals in the same way.
The principle of equal treatment means, in practice, that all teaching establishments must accept students
from other Member States under the same conditions as their own nationals. Students may therefore not
be required to make any extra payment on grounds of nationality.

Given that students from other Member States are treated in education establishments in Scotland in the
same way as students from that country, the situation to which the Honourable Member refers does not
involve discrimination on grounds of nationality and is therefore not contrary to Article 12(ex Article 6) of
the EC Treaty.

The fact that the regulations governing enrolment fees are different in the rest of the United Kingdom is a
matter of national law and is not within the Community(cid:146)s competence.

As regards the mobility of students under the Erasmus programme, the general rule is that all students
participating in the programme are exempted from enrolment fees. Consequently, the Scottish arrange-
ments do not affect mobility under Erasmus.

Finally, as regards the application of the competition rules to which the Honourable Member refers, the
Commission feels that the activities of universities within the national education system should not be
considered as commercial or financial activities and that the competition rules do not therefore apply.

Nor can these activities be regarded as services within the meaning of the Treaty. The Court of Justice has
already ruled that courses provided in a higher education establishment which are funded primarily by the
State do not constitute services within the meaning of Article 50 (ex Article 60) of the EC Treaty.