WRITTEN QUESTION E-2911/00 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council. Austria/Sanctions.
Date: 2000-09-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Austria, European Union membership, extreme right, international sanctions

C 151 E/22

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.5.2001

Already, the long-established relationship between the EU and the ACP countries has just entered a new
phase with the signature in June of the Cotonou Agreement, which re-asserts the primary aim of
eradicating poverty, through a partnership which ensures a comprehensive and integrated approach to
the intricate network of factors now recognised as essential components for sustainable development. The
particular points mentioned by the Honourable Member (cid:129) support for debt relief, careful targeting of
development strategies to ensure maximum impact, the fight against HIV/AIDS and the improvement of
health systems in general (cid:129) are all reflected in specific provisions of the Cotonou text. Crucially, practical
work in these fields will be guided by the overall approach of the Agreement, which recognises inequities
in the distribution of world wealth and seeks to operate a true partnership between the cooperating
countries, based on democratic principles and ownership by ACP states of the development strategies for
their countries.

In another initiative earlier this year, the Plan of Action which emerged from the Africa-Europe Summit
held in Cairo in April strongly reiterated the commitment to poverty reduction and sustainable develop-
ment. Again, the points raised by the Honourable Member are all included in the broad range of topics
covered by the Plan of Action. The assembled States welcomed debt relief initiatives and, in particular, the
EU commitment to contribute 1 billion euros to the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) initiative and
the link of this contribution to measures on poverty reduction. The bi-regional group of Senior Officials
charged with promoting implementation of the Action Plan is to prepare a report for Ministers on the
external debt of African countries. The Summit also provided for cooperation on the eradication of
endemic diseases, such as malaria, tuberculosis, polio and river blindness and on a range of responses to
the HIV/AIDS pandemic.

In this latter regard, the Council has asked the Commission to draw up a communication on potential
additional EU efforts to confront major poverty diseases such as HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis and to
improve the health of people in developing countries.

The Honourable Member is assured that the Council
is fully cognisant of the key concerns of the
international community, including poverty focus, AIDS, debt relief and is committed to ensuring that
these issues are tackled in EU internal policies and in EU action on the broader international front.

(2001/C 151 E/026)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2911/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(20 September 2000)

Subject: Austria/Sanctions

In its answers to various parliamentary questions from the undersigned Member on the subject of
(cid:145)Sanctions against Austria(cid:146), the Council repeatedly had recourse to phrases such as (cid:145)not yet examined(cid:146),
(cid:145)has no opinion(cid:146) or (cid:145)not yet dealt with(cid:146). How does the Council justify its action, if it does not deal with (cid:129)
or appears to not deal with (cid:129) a very topical issue, such as the sanctions of the 14 against Austria?

However, as the official version, the publication and the statement of the 14 by the Portuguese Presidency
show, it is evident that the Council must have dealt with the subject.

In addition, according to media reports, the question of sanctions against Austria has been discussed at
ministerial level at various working lunches, for example, at the General Affairs Council on 14 February, in
Lisbon on 23 March, in the Azores on 5 May and at the Feira European Council on 19 June 2000.

Without a proper discussion on this topic (cid:129) as shown by the Council(cid:146)s unsatisfactory answer (cid:129) it is clear
that the action of the Portuguese Council Presidency both presumes and exceeds authority.

Will sanctions consequently be imposed against Portugal? Is an inquiry actually being carried out? Precisely
how long will it be before there is any new information on this matter?

22.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 151 E/23

Reply

(22 December 2000)

The statement to which the Honourable Member refers was issued by the Prime Minister of Portugal on
behalf of the Government of 14 Member States. It was not discussed by the Council. The Council cannot
respond in substance to the questions raised by the Honourable Member since it has never taken a view on
them.

(2001/C 151 E/027)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2912/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(20 September 2000)

Subject: Austria/sanctions

According to the statement presented to the APA and AFP news agencies on 26 June, the 14 EU Heads of
State and Government have decided to maintain measures against the Austrian Government.

Officially, the 14 Heads of State and Government had not yet reached a conclusive agreement on the
Portuguese initiative. The spokesman for the EU Presidency revealed on Tuesday evening that there was no
conclusive consensus. He also announced that the Austrian Government would be informed of the plan as
soon is it had been officially presented.

This approach reveals several faults:

(cid:129) two news agencies were clearly informed prior to the Austrian Federal Government. The Federal

Government had to find out about an (cid:145)Exit Strategy(cid:146) via the media;

(cid:129) there was no indication of a time-frame for the implementation of the plan;

(cid:129) a council of three wise men is to present a report on the basis of a thorough examination, focusing on
the obligation of the Austrian Government to uphold common European values, with particular
regard to the rights of minorities, refugees and immigrants.

The action of the 14 is lacking greatly in sensitivity and appears somewhat grotesque.

The Council:

1. Why did it not initially enter into direct dialogue with the Austrian Federal Government and only then

pass the information onto the news agencies?

2. How does it conceive the long since necessary conclusion of the scandalous (cid:145)witch hunt(cid:146), if it is not

even willing to set down a time-frame?

3.

If it really wishes to emphasise the common European values and to examine the Austrian Govern-
ment
in relation to the observance of minority rights, why is its commitment, as far as the
embodiment of minority rights in a charter of fundamental rights for the EU is concerned, so lacking?

4. How is it possible that France and Belgium (cid:129) two of the most avid supporters of the sanctions (cid:129)
have still not ratified or signed the Council of Europe(cid:146)s Framework Convention on the Protection of
National Minorities?

Reply

(22 December 2000)

The Council has not taken a view on any of the issues raised by the Honourable Member, and is not
therefore in a position to respond to the question.