WRITTEN QUESTION E-3177/00 by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission. Transparency.
Date: 2000-10-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, access to EU information, electrical industry, liberalisation of the market, transparency in decision-making

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/197

(2001/C 136 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3170/00

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Setting up of an immigration monitoring centre

(10 October 2000)

Following the debate on the report submitted to the European Parliament on 30 March 2000 by Jorge
Salvador Hernandez Mollar on the action plans drawn up by the High-Level Working Group on the main
countries of origin and transit of asylum-seekers and migrants, will the Commission not propose the
setting up of an immigration monitoring centre in Italy, and specifically in Puglia, which is a habitual
region of transit for illegal immigration?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 2000)

On 24 March 2000 the Commission presented to the Council and Parliament a scoreboard to chart
progress on the creation of an area of (cid:145)freedom, security and justice in the European Union(cid:146) (1), stressing
how important it was to improve the exchange of statistics and information on asylum and immigration,
with a view to managing migration flows more efficiently.

In that context, it referred to the setting-up of a (virtual) European centre for monitoring migration flows,
calling to mind the preparatory measures financed by the Odysseus programme on the basis of a prior
feasibility study.

Following its communication of 23 February 1994 on immigration and asylum policy (2), the Commission
had requested University College London to carry out a study analysing in detail all the information
collected by the institutions relating to international migration in Europe, with a view to identifying
shortcomings, suggesting the best means to remedy these shortcomings and outlining the options open to
the Commission to attain that end, including the setting up of a new body.

The results of that study led to two pilot projects under the Odysseus programme. In 1998, as part of the
first project, the Free University of Brussels developed a European university network to find and exchange
information on asylum and immigration. In 1999, the second project led University College London to
develop a network and website known as the (cid:145)European migration information network(cid:146) (EMIN).

Bearing in mind these attainments and the work of the (cid:145)Centre for information and exchange on asylum(cid:146)
(CIREA) and the (cid:145)Centre for information and exchange on external border crossing(cid:146) (Cirefi) in the Council,
together with the statistical action plan adopted by the Council in 1998 and implemented by Eurostat, the
Commission is currently examining with the Member States how to develop these initiatives further in
keeping with the objectives which have been reaffirmed on a number of occasions, and by Parliament in
particular.

(1) COM(2000) 167 final.
(2) COM(94) 23 final.

(2001/C 136 E/230)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3177/00

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Transparency

Since it took office, the Prodi Commission has made repeated promises regarding transparency. Transpar-
ency in the management of public affairs would require that no meetings be held in secret and that, in any
case, the substance of all meetings be made public.

C 136 E/198

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

It has emerged from Spanish press reports that the Spanish Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Rato, travelled
incognito to Brussels on 14 September 2000 to hold a meeting with Mr Monti.

In the interests of transparency, will the Commission answer the following questions:

1. Was a meeting held between Mr Monti and Mr Rato on 14 September 2000?

2. Was the meeting a normal scheduled appointment for Mr Monti or was secrecy requested by the

Spanish side?

3. Did Mr Rato bring pressure to bear regarding any matters currently being dealt with by the

Commission?

4.

If so, what were the matters concerned and what was he seeking to achieve?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(15 November 2000)

The Member of the Commission with responsibility for competition met Mr Rato, second Vice-

1.
President of the Spanish Government on 14 September 2000.

2.
The meeting had been planned for quite some time. As Mr Rato was in Brussels on that day and the
Member of the Commission with responsibility for competition had no prior engagements that evening,
the meeting was organised quickly. The Spanish authorities certainly did not request the meeting to be
kept secret.

3. and 4.
The meeting discussed the costs of transition to competition in the Spanish electricity sector
((cid:145)CTC(cid:146)) and was part of normal contacts between the Commission and the Member States for handling state
aid cases. No pressure was brought to bear,
it was simply a matter exchanges of information and
discussions on various points of view. The Honourable Member must be aware that any such pressure
would have been unacceptable.

(2001/C 136 E/231)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3178/00

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Independence of the Commission in the case involving the Kingdom of Spain concerning the costs

of transition to competition for electricity companies

In the past the Commission has maintained that, in its view, it was not inappropriate for Commission
Vice-President Mrs de Palacio to act in the case relating to the costs of transition to competition (CTCs) for
the electricity companies, despite having been a member of the government which adopted this measure.

New developments have now occurred which may alter that situation. On the one hand, it has been
announced that the Commission is to open formal proceedings and, on the other, the Spanish Government
(essentially the same as the one of which Mrs de Palacio was a member) has stepped up its pressure, while
the statements made by the Vice-President show a great deal of understanding and sympathy for the
government(cid:146)s position.

In the light of the above:

(cid:129) Does the Commission still believe that it is in no way inappropriate for Mrs de Palacio to be involved

in the CTCs case?