WRITTEN QUESTION E-3560/00 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) and Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission. The consequences of using depleted-uranium shells in Kosovo.
Date: 2000-11-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Kosovo, Serbia, cooperation policy, emergency aid, nuclear weapon, radioactive pollution

C 163 E/162

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

(2001/C 163 E/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3555/00

by Antonio Di Pietro (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 November 2000)

Subject: ECB transparency

The ECB(cid:146)s decision not to publish minutes of meetings of its decision-making bodies has been the subject
of strong criticism from various quarters. Though regrettable, this decision might be justified by the need
to allow open discussion on monetary policy decisions. However, it is impossible to share the ECB(cid:146)s view
on the confidentiality of such minutes regarding discussions which do not concern monetary policy
decisions but the use of public finance, in particular the institution(cid:146)s budget, fraud prevention, manage-
ment of reserves, the printing and introduction of the new bank notes and criteria for recruiting and
promoting personnel.

Will the Commission state its position on the transparency of the ECB(cid:146)s decision-making procedures and
provide Parliament with all the information available to it as an observer regarding decisions taken by ECB
decision-making bodies in areas not strictly related to monetary policy?

We have also been informed that some of the ECB(cid:146)s key decisions are not taken within the Executive Board
but at informal meetings held the day before the relevant Executive Board meeting, at which all the Board
members are present, but not the Commission representative.

Is the Commission aware of this practice? Does it consider that this is in keeping with the letter and spirit
of the Treaty? If not, what steps does it intend to take to ensure that the ECB complies with the Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 2000)

Article 10.4 of the Statute of the European system of central banks (ESCB) states that (cid:145)The proceedings of
the meetings [of the Governing Council] shall be confidential. The Governing Council may decide to make
the outcome of its deliberations public(cid:146). Therefore, any decision on the publication of minutes of the
Governing Council meetings is unequivocally in the exclusive responsibility of the Governing Council itself
and does not involve the Commission. It should also be noted that the EC Treaty does not make a
distinction between decisions related to monetary policy and other decisions.

According to Article 12.1 of the Statute of the ESCB, the Governing Council, in whose meetings the
President of the Council and a Member of the Commission may participate, is the sole decision-making
body to ensure the performance of the tasks entrusted to the ESCB under the EC Treaty and the Statute of
the ESCB. There is no other body which could take such decisions.

(2001/C 163 E/183)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3560/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) and Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: The consequences of using depleted-uranium shells in Kosovo

(15 November 2000)

Mindful of the emergency package of assistance to Serbia worth € 200 million and the undertaking given
by Commissioner Patten at the sitting of 25 October that he would review the environmental and health
hazards caused by events over the last year, and given an alleged increase in the incidence of cancers and
birth defects in parts of Kosovo following the use by NATO forces of depleted-uranium U-238 (DU) shells
during last year(cid:146)s bombing campaign, will the Commission put in hand without delay a comprehensive
impact analysis study, perhaps jointly funded by and in cooperation with the proposed UNEP/UNCHS
Balkans Task Force (BTF), with a view to offering assistance to those who have been affected?

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/163

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(1 December 2000)

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the replies which it has already given to Oral
Questions H-429/00 by Mr Alavanos and H-431/99 by Mr Papayannakis during question time at
Parliament(cid:146)s September 1999 part-session (1) and to Written Question E-1481/99 by Mr Manisco (2), as
well as Written Question E-1256/00 by Mr Cossutta (3), concerning whether there is radioactive pollution
as a result of the use of depleted uranium bombs in Kosovo. In its replies to these questions, the
Commission indicated that two assessments (cid:129) including by the United Nations environment programme
(UNEP) (cid:129) concluded that the Kosovo conflict did not cause an environmental catastrophe for the region.

As the Honourable Member is aware, the UNEP Balkans Unit is returning to the issue with a field visit in
the coming weeks, following new information supplied by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).
The Commission is closely following their work, and rather than duplicating their efforts, will await
UNEP(cid:146)s assessment before making any decisions on Community action in this area.

Regarding the € 200 million emergency assistance package which has been announced for Serbia, this is
to address priority needs for the coming winter months, focusing on priorities identified with President
Kostunica and his team. Environmental concerns, while important in their own right, do not form part of
these immediate priorities. The Commission is also beginning, with the World Bank, an assessment of the
general needs in Serbia, the results of which should be ready in some months, and will determine future
assistance priorities on that basis.

The Commission is also supporting a regional environmental reconstruction programme, within the
framework of the Stability Pact, which will assist in environmental reconstruction throughout the wider
Balkans region.

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (September 1999).
(2) OJ C 203 E, 18.7.2000.
(3) OJ C 72 E, 6.3.2001, p. 32.

(2001/C 163 E/184)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3561/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 November 2000)

Subject: Abolition of pig crates

A few years ago the Council and Parliament adopted a directive to phase out cages for keeping chickens,
whilst pigs still live in unacceptable conditions, shut up in small spaces and often tied up up with rope or
even chains. Some time ago the Commission announced that it intended to draw up a proposal to revise
Directive 91/630 (1) which should put an end to the practice of keeping pigs and sows in crates. However,
the Directorate-General for Agriculture recently requested further information on the economic impact on
the sector of the total abolition of crates and hence the submission of the proposal continues to be
delayed.

Can the Commission say why, despite the fact that countries such as the United Kingdom and Sweden
have already banned the use of gestation crates and this measure has clearly not had serious economic
repercussions, it continues to delay the submission of its proposal to revise Directive 91/630?

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, p. 33.