WRITTEN QUESTION E-1033/00 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Clause 19 of the UK Financial Services and Markets Bill.
Date: 2000-04-04
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, electronic commerce, financial market, freedom to provide services, infringement of EU law

C 374 E/202

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.12.2000

Mrs Beate Winkler(cid:146)s statements give the impression that she has the authority to monitor, report on and
reprimand Danish citizens and political parties because they hold views which her Centre deems to be
incorrect. This is a serious infringement of Danish citizens(cid:146) democratic rights and it is of the greatest
importance to establish whether the Commission takes the view that Mrs Winkler(cid:146)s political activities are
consistent with the EU Treaty and the tasks conferred on the Monitoring Centre.

In the Commission(cid:146)s view, what authority do the EU Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia and its
Director, Beate Winkler, have to criticise democratic political parties and political positions in a Member
State?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(11 May 2000)

The European monitoring centre on racism and xenophobia was established by Council Regulation
(EC) No 1035/97 of 2 June 1997 (1). The Regulation creates an independent body which, while being
answerable to the Community institutions for the use of Community funds, has maximum autonomy in
the performance of its tasks (recital 23).

The Regulation lays down the objectives of the centre as being to provide the Community and its Member
States with objective, reliable and comparable data at European level on the phenomena of racism,
xenophobia and anti-semitism in order to help them when they take measures or formulate courses of
action within their respective spheres of competence; and to study the extent and development of the
phenomena and manifestations of racism, xenophobia and anti-semitism, analyse their causes, conse-
quences and effects and examine examples of good practice in dealing with them.

The Regulation also defines a number of tasks which the centre may carry out to reach those objectives.
Those tasks include carrying out scientific research and surveys, preparatory studies and feasibility studies
and formulating conclusions and opinions for the Community and its Member States.

It is evident in this context that the task of studying the development of racism and xenophobia involves a
wide range of action which must necessarily include the declarations made by political parties. To this end,
the Commission notes that the monitoring centre has supported and promoted the signature by political
parties from across Europe of the Charter of political parties for a non-racist society, which commits the
parties to avoiding language in their political platforms which could promote or legitimise racist and
xenophobic attitudes.

(1) OJ L 151, 10.6.1997.

(2000/C 374 E/239)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1033/00

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 April 2000)

Subject: Clause 19 of the UK Financial Services and Markets Bill

(available on the internet at http:/
Under Clause 19 of the UK Financial Services and Markets Bill
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldbills/032/2000032.htm),
the UK is seeking to impose
extra territorial jurisdiction over financial service providers operating outside the UK. This clause would
allow the UK Government to regulate companies based in other Member States who are selling financial
services on the UK market via the internet.

28.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374 E/203

Does the Commission believe that this clause contravenes single market legislation? In the Commission(cid:146)s
view, does this clause contravene the spirit of the EU(cid:146)s single market legislation and/or the single market
principle? Is Clause 19 likely to contravene the e-commerce directive (assuming it is enacted in accordance
with the Council(cid:146)s recent agreement on a common position)?

Does the approach of the UK Government undermine the home country/country of origin control
principle of the single market?

If it is the view of the Commission that Clause 19 breaches any EU laws or principles, what action does it
intend to take against the UK Government?

Has the Commission received any complaints from the public concerning Clause 19?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(19 May 2000)

The Commission is aware of the draft financial services and markets bill (FSMB).

The Commission is concerned to ensure that Clause 19, once it comes into force,
is consistent with
internal market principles and in particular, with the provisions in the draft Directive on a legal framework
for e-commerce (1). The Commission and the British authorities are in contact to this effect.

The Commission has not received any official complaints concerning clause 19, which is not yet in force.

(1) COM(98) 586 final.

(2000/C 374 E/240)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1061/00

by Karin Riis-Jłrgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 April 2000)

Subject: Discrimination by a Member State between its own citizens

With reference to my priority written question to the Commission (P-0555/00) (1), the Commission did
not, in my view, answer the question.

The Danish Government has put forward a draft law to amend Danish legislation on holidays. The
problem is that this law discriminates between workers with a collective agreement and those without an
agreement.

My question was whether, in the Commission(cid:146)s view, it is consistent with the Treaties for a Member State
to discriminate between its own citizens (cid:129) i.e. employees covered by a collective agreement as opposed to
employees without a collective agreement (cid:129) so that those who are covered by a collective agreement are
able to carry over days(cid:146) holiday to a new holiday year, while those not covered by an agreement are not
offered that possibility?

Is it, in the Commission(cid:146)s view, reasonable for a Member State to discriminate between its own citizens on
the basis of whether they are covered by a collective agreement or not?

(1) OJ C 303 E, 24.10.2000.