WRITTEN QUESTION E-1469/00 by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Immigration policy.
Date: 2000-05-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, Schengen Agreement, accession to the European Union, cooperation policy, human rights, illegal migration, immigration, trafficking in human beings

C 113 E/16

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(9 June 2000)

In 1995 the Commission submitted a proposal to the Council (1) for an amendment to Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed
persons and their families moving within the Community (2) inserting provisions for the co-ordination of
pre-retirement benefits. In the explanatory memorandum the Commission pointed out that pre-retirement
schemes of which the Danish efterlon forms part, are not explicitly covered by the scope of Regulation
(EEC) No 1408/71. Therefore, the Commission proposed that a separate chapter be created for these
benefits as well as provisions to ensure the aggregation of insurance periods and the exportation of the
benefit. However, the proposal has not yet been adopted by the Council. Furthermore, the Commission has
included provisions of a similar nature in its proposal for a review and simplification of Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71 (3). This proposal is being dealt with by Council.

Therefore, pre-retirement benefits, such as the efterlon, do not yet fall under the scope of Regulation (EEC)
No 1408/71 (see for example case law C-171/82, Valentini (4); C-198/90, Commission v. Netherlands (5);
C-25/95, Otte (6)).

It should be noted, nevertheless, that the Danish government agreed recently with the Commission that the
Danish pre-retirement benefit constitutes a social advantage in the sense of Article 7 of Regulation (EEC)
No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the
Community (7) and that its residence requirement constitutes indirect discrimination to the detriment of
workers exercising their right of free movement. Subsequently, the Danish government informed the
Commission that this requirement will be eliminated.

(1) OJ C 62, 1.3.1996.
(2) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971 last consolidated version: Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996 (OJ L 28,

30.1.1997).

(3) OJ C 38, 12.2.1999.
(4) ECR 1983 p. 2157.
(5) ECR 1991 p. I-5799.
(6) ECR 1996 p. I-3745.
(7) OJ L 257, 19.10.1968.

(2001/C 113 E/015)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1469/00

by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 May 2000)

Subject: Immigration policy

Illegal immigration to Europe is increasingly taking the form of slave-trafficking, devaluing human dignity
and often costing lives.

Does the European Union bear any responsibility for this? As an area which receives immigrants, should
the European Union not develop a common immigration policy establishing clear and mutually acceptable
relations with the immigrants(cid:146) countries of origin, which will combat illegality and trafficking in human
beings, as well as illegal employment in the European Union? Will the countries applying for membership
participate in the process of drawing up and implementing these policies?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Since the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty on 1 May 1999, the Community enjoys explicit
powers in the field of immigration policy (Title IV of the EC Treaty, articles 61 et seq.). Article 63 of the
EC Treaty stipulates that the Council shall adopt within five years measures relative to immigration policy
which will concern, inter alia, the field of illegal immigration (Article 63(3) lit. b of the EC Treaty).

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/17

On 3 December 1998, the Justice and Home Affairs Council adopted an action plan to implement the new
provisions of Title IV of the EC Treaty (1) which was later endorsed by the Vienna European Council. In this
action plan, combatting illegal immigration has been identified as one of the priority measures in the field
of immigration policy.

The special European Council meeting, held in Tampere (Finland) on 15 and 16 October 1999, adopted
far-reaching conclusions on the way in which the future Union immigration and asylum policy should be
shaped. It underlined the need to develop a comprehensive approach to migration addressing political,
human rights and development issues in countries and regions of origin and transit. In this connection,
reference was made to the action plans prepared by the high level working group on migration and
asylum which target the situation in a number of third countries and could be considered a first step in the
development of such a policy. The European Council also expressed support for the management of
migration flows at all their stages and called for the development, in close co-operation with countries of
origin and transit, of information campaigns on the actual possibilities for legal migration, and for the
prevention of all forms of smuggling and trafficking in human beings. To this end, it invited the Council
and Member States to tackle at its source illegal immigration, especially by combating those who engage in
trafficking of human beings and economic exploitation of migrants, to adopt legislation to this end,
foreseeing severe sanctions against this serious crime, to direct, together with Europol, the efforts to
detecting and dismantling the organised criminal networks involved, to secure the rights of the victims of
trafficking in persons with special emphasis on women and children, to assist the countries of origin and
of transit in order to help the authorities of those countries to strengthen their ability to combat effectively
trafficking in human beings and to cope with their readmission obligations towards the Union and the
Member States, and to promote closer co-operation and mutual technical assistance between the Member
States(cid:146) border control services, such as exchange programmes and technology transfers, especially on
maritime borders, and for the rapid inclusion of the applicant States in this co-operation.

The Commission is already working on the proposals and actions needed to give full satisfaction to the
mentioned objectives of Tampere conclusions, as foreseen in the scoreboard to review progress on the
creation of an area of (cid:145)Freedom, security and justice(cid:146), as communicated to the Council and Parliament (2).
As a consequence of the tragic events in Dover, the Community institutions and the Member States should
commit themselves to ensure that all the relevant actions foreseen in the scoreboard are taken and the
measures put in place within the deadlines fixed. The Commission services are also considering the
possibility of taking new initiatives in order to prevent that similar events happen again.

The Tampere European Council also stressed that, as a consequence of the integration of the Schengen
acquis into the Union, the candidate countries must accept in full that acquis and further measures
building upon it when acceding to the Union.

(1) OJ C 19, 23.1.1999.
(2) COM(2000) 167 final.

(2001/C 113 E/016)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1489/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(11 May 2000)

Subject: Acceptability of the production and sale of fast-growing giant salmon for human consumption

1.
On 20 April 2000 the Dutch newspaper (cid:145)Trouw(cid:146) reported that the American firm (cid:145)AF Protein(cid:146) has
been working for years on using genetically manipulated hormones to produce salmon that grow ten times
as fast and to five times the weight of the natural species and that these salmon are the first transgenic
animals intended for human consumption. Is the Commission familiar with this development?