WRITTEN QUESTION E-3064/00 by Francesco Rutelli (ELDR) to the Commission. Death penalty.
Date: 2000-10-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, death penalty, fundamental rights, general budget (EU), non-governmental organisation

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/235

(2001/C 113 E/257)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3055/00

by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 September 2000)

Subject: Nuclear safety at Sellafield

Bearing in mind that the Commission is currently suing Britain over plans to dismantle Windscale No 1
pile reactor at Sellafield Nuclear Reprocessing Plant, given the callous disregard shown for Irish citizens(cid:146)
safety by British Nuclear Fuels at Sellafield, as outlined in secret memos leaked from the BNFL Public
Relations Office this week, in the light of the appalling history of safety and security breaches at the
plant (1), and in the light of BNFL(cid:146)s plans to introduce changes to its nuclear waste handling procedures,
which include a series of unmanned radioactive dumps and plans to scale back on the protective cladding
for decommissioned reactors which would ultimately weaken the protection of the reactor cores, would
the Commission outline its concerns regarding these three issues and the action it feels should be taken at
all levels of authority against the Sellafield nuclear plant?

(1)

(cid:145)The Guardian(cid:146), 11 September 2000 The Guardian, Special Report on Britain(cid:146)s Nuclear Industry.

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

The Commission considered that the United Kingdom had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 37 of
the Euratom Treaty, because it had not submitted the general data related to the dismantling of the
Windscale Pile I nuclear reactor. The Commission therefore decided in July 2000 to pursue an infringe-
ment case against the United Kingdom. The case related to a difference in interpretation of the Treaty, the
United Kingdom arguing that the Euratom Treaty (and in this case Article 37) does not apply to the use of
nuclear energy for military purposes. The Commission believes that Chapter III of the Euratom Treaty
applies to protection from ionising radiation from all sources. The United Kingdom authorities have since
indicated that there is currently no plan to dismantle the pile, and that when a feasible design concept is
identified, general data will be submitted according to Article 37, as they consider the proposed operations
to dispose of the waste to no longer be related to the defence programme.

The Commission is not in a position to confirm, or otherwise, the validity of references to British Nuclear
Fuels Limited (BNFL) internal documents made in the Guardian article of 11 September 2000.

The Commission has as yet no information as regards plans for unmanned waste dumps nor details of
planned dismantling operations such as those to which the Honourable Member refers. This information
would be part of the general data submitted by the United Kingdom for any such plan for any location.

The Commission takes all appropriate measures to ensure that Community legislation, relating to common
basic safety standards for the protection of workers and the public from the effects of ionising radiation, is
applied within Member States.

(2001/C 113 E/258)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3064/00

by Francesco Rutelli (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 October 2000)

Subject: Death penalty

A commitment to end the use of the death penalty has for some time been a priority for Parliament and
for the European Union(cid:146)s foreign policy. In 1999, with a view to actively helping to affirm the principle of
the inviolability of human life, Parliament adopted several amendments to enable budget headings B7-702,

C 113 E/236

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

B7-703, B7-704, B7-705 and B7-707 to be used, additionally, for campaigns and initiatives promoting a
moratorium on capital punishment. In moral terms, this represents a highly significant undertaking to
provide active support to those who are fighting against the death penalty all over the world. Could the
Commission therefore give details of the initiatives taken under the various budget headings to implement
Parliament(cid:146)s amendments?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(18 October 2000)

Since 1995 the Community budget has included an appropriation under which funding can be provided
for measures by non-governmental organisations against the death penalty (heading B7-7040). Two
regulations adopted by the Council on 29 April 1999 provide a legal basis for conducting human rights-
related activities and allow initiatives of this sort to be developed (1).

In 1999 the Commission and the Council of Europe jointly financed a programme intended to win public
support for the ending of the death penalty in Council of Europe member countries. Two operations were
approved in 2000, one to provide condemned prisoners in the Caribbean with funds to appeal against the
death sentence (€ 512 952) and the other to raise public awareness and support those campaigning for
abolition of the death penalty in the Philippines, the United States, the Caribbean and Europe (€ 675 859).

(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 975/1999 of 29.4.1999 laying down the requirements for the implementation of
development cooperation operations which contribute to the general objective of developing and consolidating
democracy and the rule of law and to that of respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms, and Council
Regulation (EC) No 976/1999 of 29.4.1999 laying down the requirements for the implementation of Community
operations, other than those of development cooperation, which, within the framework of Community cooperation
policy, contribute to the general objective of developing and consolidating democracy and the rule of law and to
that of respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms in third countries (OJ L 120, 8.5.1999).

(2001/C 113 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3070/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(2 October 2000)

Subject: The Working Time Directive

What plans does the Commission have to include all or part of the transport industry in the Working
Time Directive?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2000)

In accordance with Article 1(3) of Council Directive 1993/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning
certain aspects of the organisation of working time, (1) air, rail, road, sea,
inland waterway and lake
transport were originally excluded from the scope of that Directive.

On 22 June 2000, the Council and the Parliament adopted Directive 2000/34/EC (2) amending Council
Directive 1993/104/EC to cover sectors and activities excluded from that Directive. This Directive extends
the scope of the Working Time Directive to cover workers in all the above sectors (except sea transport,
see below) (cid:129) although only certain provisions apply to mobile workers in these sectors. The implementa-
tion deadline for this Directive is 1 August 2003 (except for doctors in training).