WRITTEN QUESTION P-1541/00 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council. Infringement of Rule 44 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.
Date: 2000-05-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Parliament, interinstitutional relations (EU), written question

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46 E/167

(2001/C 46 E/193)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1541/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(12 May 2000)

Subject: Infringement of Rule 44 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament

I have submitted a number of questions to the Council on the subject of Austria:

(cid:129) a priority question tabled on 21 February 2000 and registered on 25 February. Pursuant to Rule 44(5)
of the Rules of Procedure, priority questions must be answered within three weeks of being registered.
Accordingly, this question should have been answered by 17 March,

(cid:129) two questions tabled on 21 February and registered on 13 March. Pursuant to Rule 44(6) of the Rules
of Procedure they must be answered within six weeks of being registered by the Council: they should
therefore have been answered by 25 April.

In view of this infringement of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, is the Council aware of
the provisions of the Rules of Procedure currently in force and does it intend to comply with them in
future?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1299/00, E-1300/00 and P-1541/00

(10 July 2000)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that it is not bound by the deadlines mentioned, as
these ensue from Rule 44(5), (6) and (7) of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.

It would, however, stress that with a view to better collaboration with the European Parliament in this area
the Council has acted swiftly to introduce a series of internal measures enabling it to reply to written
questions within two months.
its preparatory bodies have defined a procedure for
examining questions intended to strike the requisite balance between this objective and the essential need
to provide replies of the highest quality possible after consultation with the competent departments and an
exchange of views at Council level.

In this context

Over the years various factors have made it harder to keep this balance, with adverse consequences on the
promptness of replies, examples being the significant increase in the number of written questions put to
the Council, which should not be under-estimated, the emergence of questions in areas which call for in-
depth study, or the topical nature of certain issues which on occasion require some time for Members to
be given genuine updates.

The Council does, in any case, share the concern expressed by the Honourable Member and reaffirms its
commitment to providing, in all circumstances, the most appropriate and fullest replies possible to written
questions put to it. It will reflect on solutions to optimise the current procedures for studying questions, in
compliance with the requirements listed above.

(2001/C 46 E/194)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1303/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(27 April 2000)

Subject: The EU and Austria

A study carried out by the Irish Institute of European Affairs is critical of the measures taken by the other
fourteen EU Member States against Austria which, it says, violate not only Community law but also the
principles of democracy. The study, written by Eugene Regan, an Irish lawyer and former member of the
private office of EU Commissioner Peter Sutherland, is also highly critical of the action of the Portuguese
Presidency.