WRITTEN QUESTION P-3584/00 by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Council. Damaged British nuclear submarine HMS Tireless, docked in Gibraltar.
Date: 2000-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Andalusia, EU environmental policy, Spain, United Kingdom, maintenance, nuclear safety, submarine

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/83

Is it true that European Commission Member Leon Brittan wrote to South African Vice-President
1.
Thabo Mbeki on 23 March 1998 to prevent South Africa from taking up the option under the TRIPS
agreement of producing low-cost medicines itself or buying them abroad?

If so, what was the precise content of the letter and what arguments are used to justify such action?

2.

Has any other, comparable, action been taken by the European Commission?

If so, what?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 2000)

The Commission does not oppose the use by World Trade Organisation (WTO) Members of
1.
legitimate possibilities offered by the Trade related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPs) agreement.
On the particular issue of compulsory licensing, the Commission acknowledges the WTO members(cid:146) right
to resort to this instrument, provided that the conditions set out in the TRIPs agreement are respected. A
copy of the letter mentioned by the Honourable Member has been forwarded to the Parliament.

2.

No.

The Commission would also refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Questions E-2316/00
by Mr E. Meijer (1) and P-2672/00 by Mrs H. Maij-Weggen (1).

(1) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001.

(2001/C 174 E/086)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3584/00

by Laura GonzÆlez `lvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(13 November 2000)

Subject: Damaged British nuclear submarine HMS Tireless, docked in Gibraltar

The British nuclear submarine HMS Tireless has been docked at the British naval base in Gibraltar since
19 May 2000 for repairs to its damaged primary coolant circuit. The British authorities have given
conflicting accounts regarding the extent of the damage, whilst the repair period, initially announced as
lasting only three months, has now been extended to summer 2001. The Royal Navy prohibits repairs to
nuclear-powered submarines in ports with facilities such as those in Gibraltar (Z-class ports) and only
authorises such repairs in X-class bases such as those at Devonport and Faslane in the United Kingdom,
which have medical equipment, evacuation plans and special machinery. This fact, together with the
hypothetical danger of a radioactive leak to public health, has prompted requests from the Autonomous
Government of Andalusia and the mayors of the areas of Spain bordering Gibraltar that the submarine be
moved back to the United Kingdom.

Could the Council approach the British and Spanish authorities with a request that they provide the
inhabitants of the Gibraltar area with precise, ongoing and comprehensive information as to the potential
risks, the extent of the damage and the repair plans, that they guarantee permanent monitoring of
radioactivity levels in the local water and air and, should the vessel undergo repair in Gibraltar, that they
implement a nuclear emergency and evacuation plan, which the Gibraltar area currently lacks?

Could the Council recommend that the damaged submarine be moved back to the United Kingdom, where
it could undergo repair at a specialised and safe base?

C 174 E/84

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

Reply

(8 March 2001)

The United Kingdom authorities have not referred the matter of the submarine docked in Gibraltar to the
Council, which cannot therefore reply to these questions.

(2001/C 174 E/087)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3588/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 November 2000)

Subject: Budgetary contributions of Member States

It is noted with regret that the Commission, when asked in Written Question E-2025/00 (1) to indicate the
net contributions of each of the Member States for the last financial year, did not list the net contributions
as requested, but instead referred to a website which was only available in French and did not, in any case,
provide the required information; furthermore, the Commission stated that (cid:145)despite the availability of
estimates of budgetary balances by Member State, it is to be noted that there exists no optional way to
measure net contributions.(cid:146)

Could the Commission explain the above statement, and, in particular, identify what other ways it believes
exist of calculating net contributions other than subtracting the amounts received from the European
institutions from the amounts paid in to those same institutions, and could the Commission, in any event,
list in the answer to this question without reference to any website (useful though websites may be as
additional sources of information) the financial contributions and receipts of each of the European Union(cid:146)s
Member States for the last two financial years for which figures are currently available?

(1) OJ C 72 E, 6.3.2001, p. 170.

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(10 January 2001)

The Commission is sending to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament
the report on the allocation of 1999 Community operating expenditure by Member State. The Honourable
Member will see this is in English.

The Commission has explored the issues related to the definition of budgetary or net balances in its report
on the operation of the own resources system, in particular in annex 3 on the concept and measurement
of the budgetary balance. The statistical annex of this report also provides data on budgetary balances
according to different definitions. This report and its annex is also sent direct to the Honourable Member
and to the Parliament(cid:146)s secretariat.

(2001/C 174 E/088)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3590/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(22 November 2000)

Subject: Health expenditure in Cuba

Would the Commission give a detailed financial breakdown, including historic figures, on support to the
Cuban health sector?

Would the Commission be specific about the nature of that support, for example, did it include funding
for infrastructure?