WRITTEN QUESTION P-0617/00 by William Newton Dunn (PPE-DE) to the Council. EU rapid deployment force: Helsinki conclusions.
Date: 2000-02-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: armed forces, common foreign and security policy

C 303 E/206

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

(2000/C 303 E/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0617/00

by William Newton Dunn (PPE-DE) to the Council

Subject: EU rapid deployment force: Helsinki conclusions

(24 February 2000)

In Annex I to Annex IV of the Helsinki Summit Presidency Conclusions, the EU Rapid Deployment Force
is described as follows: (cid:145)they (Member States) will be able to deploy rapidly and then sustain forces (cid:133) in
operations up to corps level (up to 15 brigades or 50-60 000 persons) (cid:133) They must be able to sustain
such a deployment for at least one year. This will require an additional pool of deployment units (and
supporting elements) at lower readiness to provide replacements for the initial forces.(cid:146)

However,
in the first indent of paragraph 28 of the Presidency Conclusions, the text refers purely to
Member States having (cid:145)to deploy within 60 days and sustain for at least 1 year military forces of up to
50 000 (cid:129) 60 000 persons.(cid:146)

Could the Council state whether the decision taken at Helsinki was for a maximum deployment of
5 brigades sustainable for 1 year or of the 15 brigades referred to in the Annex?

Reply

(13 April 2000)

The decision taken at Helsinki was that Member States should be able to deploy rapidly and sustain forces
capable of the full range of Petersberg tasks, including the most demanding, in operations up to Corps
level (up to 15 brigades or 50 000 (cid:129) 60 000 persons).

(2000/C 303 E/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0674/00

by Marit Paulsen (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 March 2000)

Subject: Free movement of workers

I Sweden, repayment of State study loans is governed by the Study Finance Act (1973:349) and the Study
Finance Decree (1973:418).

People residing in Sweden are required to repay study loans at an annual rate of 4 % of their combined
income from service, employment and capital. However, people residing abroad, including therefore in
other EU Member States, are required to repay them at an annual rate of 1/20 of the debt.

Admittedly, these rules apply to all, irrespective of nationality, but in reality they make it unaffordable for
those on low or middle incomes, or part-time workers, who have studied for a medium length of time
(four to five years) to live and work in another Member State, as they are required to repay a considerably
larger amount per annum than they would if they remained in Sweden (for those on high incomes, the
situation may of course be reversed). Person A has a debt of about SEK 300 000 from a study loan (a
normal amount for a person who has studied for four or five years) and an annual income of SEK 168 000
(SEK 14 000 per month). If this person lives and works in Sweden, he/she will have to repay SEK 6 720 per
annum. However, if the same person happens to live and work in France, the annual repayment will be
more than twice as much: SEK 15 000. Thus Sweden(cid:146)s repayment rules favour those in high income
groups, while those on low or middle incomes or who work part-time cannot afford to take advantage of
the fundamental freedom to live and work in another Member State (cf. ECJ judgment in the case of Kraus,
C-19/92).

Do these repayment rules violate the fundamental freedom to seek employment and to live and work in
another Member State (Article 39 of the EC Treaty)?