WRITTEN QUESTION P-3731/00 by Florence Kuntz (UEN) to the Commission. European Charter of Minority Languages and the teaching of Armenian.
Date: 2000-11-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Armenia, EU aid, language teaching, minority language

C 163 E/202

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2001

(2001/C 163 E/235)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3730/00

by Francesco Turchi (UEN) to the Commission

(30 November 2000)

Subject: Underground LPG tanks

The LPG sector in Italy has a national turnover of more than ITL 6 000 billion and employs approximately
5 000 people.

Between 1996 and 2000 an estimated 150 000 epoxy-coated underground LPG tanks with cathodic
protection were produced in Italy and 110 000 in France; this type of LPG tank is approved and used on
a regular basis in other EU Member States such as Germany, Spain and the United Kingdom.

Article 2 of Abruzzo Regional Law No 107 of 22 September 2000 stipulates that underground LPG tanks
must be protected by bitumen cement casings or must be double-walled, so as to contain any leaks and
enable the space between the inner and outer walls to be inspected. That technical requirement would
appear to cover specific types of construction only, thus excluding epoxy-coated tanks with cathodic
protection.

The new European directive concerning pressure equipment (97/23/EC) (1) draws attention to the fact that
disparities in the contents of the relevant laws, regulations and administrative provisions in force in the
Member States and in the certification and inspection procedures laid down by national law may well
constitute barriers to the free movement of the relevant products within the Community.

Does the Commission consider that the above law hampers the freedom of movement of such products
and leads to unjustified disparities in treatment between products which have been approved in accordance
with the relevant national provisions? If it does, what does it intend to do about this situation?

(1) OJ L 181, 9.7.1997, p. 1.

Answer by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 2001)

The matter to which the honourable Member refers has been the subject of a number of complaints that
have recently been lodged with the Commission. An inquiry concerning the Member State in question is
currently under way, with the aim of securing all
the necessary information on the matter. The
Commission will not hesitate, if need be, to take suitable measures in accordance with the procedure laid
down in Article 266 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

(2001/C 163 E/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3731/00

by Florence Kuntz (UEN) to the Commission

(28 November 2000)

Subject: European Charter of Minority Languages and the teaching of Armenian

Since the 1915 genocide, the situation of the Armenian people has been without parallel: over half of the
world(cid:146)s Armenians are scattered across the entire planet. Thus in the EU Member States, we find Armenian
communities making sure that their culture survives by making educational and linguistic provision for
their children.

Learning Armenian and the language of the host country within the framework of official school education
allows these children to acquire complete mastery of their twofold cultural inheritance and to grow and
develop, both culturally and spiritually, within their own tradition and in their daily lives.

In France, western Armenian, taught in certain schools, has been classified as a language to be taken into
consideration within the framework of the European Charter of Minority Languages.

6.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 163 E/203

Can the Commission provide information as to the full range of community actions, programmes and/or
budgetary items under which it might be possible to find funding for the teaching of Armenian in schools?

In certain well-known French schools, Armenian is taught in premises which should be enlarged, due to
growing demand. Can the Commission tell me whether the requisite school extensions could be paid for
by the EU, and if so, how and within what framework? Could subsidies for such work come under the
same heading as the teaching of minority languages, and if not, what programmes or budgetary items
might be appropriate as possible sources of funding for school extensions?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 2001)

Article 149 of the EC Treaty (ex Article 126) stipulates that the Member States are responsible for the
content of teaching and the organisation of their education systems; the Community contributes to the
development of quality education by encouraging cooperation between Member States and supplementing
their action.

The Comenius action within the Socrates programme is the main Community instrument for school
education.
Its objective is to enhance the quality and reinforce the European dimension of school
education, in particular by encouraging transnational cooperation between schools and helping to improve
initial and further training for staff directly involved in school education, as well as to promote language
learning and understanding of different cultures. It offers the possibility of funding for projects involving
native-language teaching for pupils of non-European origin and projects involving intercultural education.

Two other Community actions also apply to language learning in schools. However, the Lingua action
within the Socrates programme is restricted to the official languages of the European Union together with
Irish and Luxembourgish, while the preparatory action for regional and minority languages and cultures
gives priority to the non-official native languages of the Union.

Investment in the restructuring of school buildings is not regarded as eligible expenditure under these
actions. However, it is possible that such projects could be eligible for support from the Structural Funds,
provided the schools in question are in the areas to which the Funds(cid:146) objectives apply and the aims of the
project correspond to the Community priorities in the relevant field.

(2001/C 163 E/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3735/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 November 2000)

Subject: Millennium bug

Will the Commission please cite estimates made of the spending on preparations by Member State for the
millennium bug, and also cite estimates of the actual disruption to economic activity caused by the
millennium bug at the beginning of 2000?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(26 January 2001)

At the present time, the Commission does not have the resources to undertake the lengthy research that a
detailed answer to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question would require. However, in January 2000, Member
States did provide very broad estimates of the level of spending on the millennium bug. In general, public