WRITTEN QUESTION E-2354/00 by Mario Mauro (PPE-DE), Giorgio Lisi (PPE-DE) and Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council. Infringement of the principle of non-discrimination and competition in connection with the situation of teachers in schools officially recognised as equivalent to State schools.
Date: 2000-07-24
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, access to a profession, application of EU law, teacher

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/131

Commission to reimburse payments to the Member States earlier. It would involve budgeting a very large
amount twice over in the transitional financial year, thus leading to an overrun of the ceilings laid down in
the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 between Parliament, the Council and the Commission on
budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure. It is therefore not possible to introduce
early payment of this aid.

With regard to payment of aid for arable crops by the Italian paying agency AGEA, the Honourable
Members(cid:146) attention is drawn to the fact that the Commission requested Italy to tighten up controls in this
sector. Since these checks had to be carried out before making payment, the Commission authorised Italy
to delay these payments until the first six-month period following the time limit laid down in the rules.

Also, with regard to payments under the old accompanying measures, Council Regulation (EEC) No 2078/
92 of 30 June 1992 on agricultural production methods compatible with the requirements of the
protection of the environment and the maintenance of the countryside, and Council Regulation (EEC)
No 2080/92 of 30 June 1992 instituting a Community aid scheme for forestry measures in agriculture, did
not lay down any time limits for payment. They left it to the Member States to introduce administrative
provisions at national level best suited to the programmes(cid:146) specific requirements.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2001/C 103 E/145)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2354/00

by Mario Mauro (PPE-DE), Giorgio Lisi (PPE-DE) and Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council

(24 July 2000)

Subject: Infringement of the principle of non-discrimination and competition in connection with the

situation of teachers in schools officially recognised as equivalent to State schools

The perpetuation in officially recognised schools in Italy of blatant disparities and discrimination contrary
to the spirit of the Italian Constitution and European legislation on competition has prompted the
questioners to raise the following issues at a higher level.

The question is therefore not intended to refer to or interfere with Article 126 of the EC Treaty, since the
aim is not to deal with the organisation of school systems but with the infringement of the right to work
caused by discrimination between the teaching staff of State schools and of those officially recognised as
equivalent.

1.
Teachers in these officially recognised schools have been allowed access to the competitive qualifying
examination, in which, incomprehensibly, only half the years of service are recognised (cid:129) the overall mark
includes both the level achieved in the examination and half the number of years of service. Why, when
the final list is drawn up, is the service is ignored?

2.
Can the Council explain why the Italian Ministry of Education does not systematically allow teachers
in officially recognised schools access to competitive examinations by qualification only since, once again,
the years of service do not count?

in the provincial authorities(cid:146)

3. Why,
lists of supply teachers, does service in officially recognised
schools only count for half (why not one third or two thirds? Does a teacher in such a school only work
half time?).

4. Why, when a teacher passes the ordinary competitive examination, are the marks relating to teaching
not recognised?

C 103 E/132

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

Reply

(7 November 2000)

The Honourable Member(cid:146)s question concerns a domestic Italian matter which does not fall within the
sphere of competence of the Council. If a Member State has failed to fulfil one of the obligations imposed
on it by the Treaty, it is for the Commission, in accordance with Articles 211 and 226 of the EC Treaty, to
ensure that the provisions of the Treaty and any provisions laid down by the institutions pursuant to the
Treaty are respected.

(2001/C 103 E/146)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2359/00

by Marialiese Flemming (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 July 2000)

Subject: Temelin nuclear power station

Is the Commission aware:

(cid:129) that in 13 procedures calling for structural changes to the Temelin nuclear power station project, the
Czech Environment Ministry has drawn attention to the failure to carry out environmental impact
assessments and characterised the existing situation as contrary to law;

(cid:129) that execution of the environmental impact assessments still outstanding is being called for by the

Czech Environment Minister, Dr Kuzvart;

(cid:129) that the introduction of fuel and subsequent activation of Block 1 in the Temelin plant before
environmental impact assessments are duly completed would inadmissibly compromise the outcome
of the assessment procedure and call that important mechanism into question;

(cid:129) that no detailed information on safety standards at the Temelin plant has to date been made available

to Czech and international public opinion enabling them to assess the safety levels achieved;

(cid:129) that precipitate activation of the plant before clarifying all outstanding questions would be associated

with increased risk and possible economic damage?

Is the Commission prepared:

(cid:129) to urge the government of the Czech Republic to ensure that neighbouring countries are guaranteed
their full rights under the Espoo Convention in relation to environmental impact assessments at the
Temelin plant;

(cid:129) further to urge the government of the Czech Republic to ensure that Czech and international public
opinion have detailed information made available to them by the Temelin operators and the Czech
national nuclear supervisory authority (SUJB) on the basis of which an expert assessment can be made
of the levels of security achieved in Temelin;

(cid:129) to urge the Parliament of the Czech Republic to guarantee the rights to which citizens of neighbour-
ing countries are entitled in relation to environmental impact assessments by promptly ratifying the
Espoo Convention?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2000)

The Commission is following the Czech domestic political and legal debate on the issue of the Temelin
impact
nuclear power plant (NPP) and the application of current Czech legislation on environmental
assessment.

The evaluation of the safety levels at the Temelin NPP falls exclusively within the responsibility of the
Czech national nuclear safety regulatory authority. Public involvement in environmental impact assessment
procedures is regulated by national legislation.