WRITTEN QUESTION E-1313/00 by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Suitability of tender documents for a contract concerning the supply of work clothes for the Italian postal workers.
Date: 2000-04-27
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, infringement of EU law, invitation to tender, occupational safety, postal service, protective equipment

C 26 E/162

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.1.2001

A few months earlier, she had appeared before the Washington Human Rights sub-committee to denounce
the death threats and verbal and physical abuse of which she was the victim. Officers of the Northern
Ireland police force, the RUC, were named as being responsible for the abuse and the reason for it was her
reputation as (cid:145)the IRA(cid:146)s lawyer(cid:146). A report published by British-Irish Rights Watch claims that the British
Government was aware of the threats to Rosemary Nelson.

Does the Council believe that the British Government was wrong not to include Rosemary Nelson in

1.
its protection programme?

Does the Council not think that there should be the greatest possible transparency in the inquiry into

2.
the murder, for which the RUC itself is apparently responsible?

Does the Council think it should ask the British Government to open its own inquiry into the

3.
murder?

Reply

(26 June 2000)

The Honourable Member(cid:146)s questions relate to matters which are not within the Council(cid:146)s competence.

(2001/C 26 E/201)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1313/00

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 April 2000)

Subject: Suitability of tender documents for a contract concerning the supply of work clothes for the Italian

postal workers

The CESAR research centre (centre for aeronautical and environmental studies) acts as a consultant to
several government departments (including the department for civil protection of the Prime Minister(cid:146)s
Office) on matters of environmental protection and the protection of the health and safety of workers. In
this capacity it was therefore asked for its opinion on the invitation to tender and the related specifications
issued by the Poste Italiane SpA (Italian postal service) concerning a contract for the supply of items of
clothing, including 100 000 items of personal protective equipment (PPE).

CESAR found that
the tender
the said tender documents were unsuitable for two reasons:
specifications were such that it was highly likely that the PPEs offered by companies would be entirely
useless as a means of protecting workers (owing to their poor quality) and, secondly, that they would
actually be unusable (if the invitation to tender for the supply of PPEs is not accompanied by an invitation
to tender for the laundering, replacement and repair of the said items, the clothes will be unusable).

firstly,

So far, these findings have been completely ignored. Can the Commission check whether the Community
laws on tenders and on safety in the workplace have been complied with and, if not, urge the Italian postal
service to suspend and/or cancel the contract in question?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2000)

On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, the Commission is not in a position
to determine whether the invitation to tender in question is in conformity with Community procurement
rules and, in particular, with the provisions of Council Directive 93/36/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating
procedures for the award of public supply contracts (1).

26.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 26 E/163

The information provided indicates rather that the provisions contained in the procedural documents
supposedly cannot lead to a satisfactory result.

In order to be able to answer the question fully, the Commission would be particularly grateful to the
Honourable Member if he could forward the additional information he has on the subject of the breaches
of Community procurement law alleged to have occurred in the contract award procedure initiated by
Poste Italiane.

When it has examined this information, the Commission will assess the possibility of initiating infringe-
ment proceedings under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty, should it be of the opinion that an
infringement of Community law has taken place.

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.

(2001/C 26 E/202)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1344/00

by Jean-Louis BerniØ (EDD) to the Commission

(18 April 2000)

Subject: The Commission(cid:146)s challenging of the principle of (cid:145)assumption of employment(cid:146) for performing

artists laid down in Article L 762-1 of the French Labour Code

France is threatened with legal proceeedings before the European Court of Justice for its refusal to waive
the (cid:145)assumption of employment(cid:146) for foreign artists referred to in Article L762-1 of the French Labour
Code.

Is this measure not excessive, given that to apply this article exclusively to French artists in effect puts
them at a disadvantage in their own country?

In fact, it means that those who employ foreign artists would no longer have to pay social costs but would
have to do so when employing French artists.

This downwards harmonisation will prejudice French performing artists. Is this not tantamount to a
sentence of death for this specifically French provision which offers performing artists one of the highest
standards of social protection in Europe?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 May 2000)

Firstly, the Commission would like to stress that it has not yet decided to refer the matter of (cid:145)assumption
of employment(cid:146) for foreign artists to the Court of Justice. However, it has delivered a reasoned opinion. As
yet the French Government has not replied.

In this reasoned opinion, the Commission called on France to take the necessary measures to ensure that
(cid:145)assumption of employment(cid:146), as provided by Article L 762-1 of the French Labour Code, is compatible
with the free movement of services, as referred to in Articles 49 and 50 (ex Articles 59 and 60) of the EC
Treaty.

Freedom to provide services is one of the fundamental freedoms of the EC Treaty. The concept of service
provider, as per Articles 49 and 50 of the EC Treaty, has Community implications and cannot be defined
simply by referring to the legislation of a Member State. Otherwise, the effectiveness of the free movement
of services could be compromised, as the meaning of this term could be laid down and modified
unilaterally by national
legislation which could at will exclude certain categories of persons from the
benefits gained under the Treaty.

The Commission would therefore point out that it does not wish to harmonise the conditions of access to
and pursuit of artists(cid:146) activities at Community level, or to discriminate against French artists in relation to
foreign artists, nor does it want the employers of foreign artists to pay greater social costs.

On the other hand,
it calls for recognition of the status of self-employed service providers who are
established as such in another Member State where they legally and regularly provide services similar to
those they wish to offer occasionally in France. It seems that (cid:145)assumption of employment(cid:146) in France does