WRITTEN QUESTION P-4018/00 by Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Relations with the State of Israel.
Date: 2000-12-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Israel, association agreement (EU), sanction (EU)

19.6.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 174 E/215

For a similar reason, the ICFTU (the body to which the main trades union congresses of the EU(cid:146)s Member
States belong) has made repeatedly protests against the holding of this referendum and sounded warnings
about its negative consequences.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of this referendum? Has it formally communicated that opinion to the
Venezuelan authorities? Does it intend to make strong representations to the Venezuelan Government
concerning the need to respect trade union freedom as one of the defining elements of a constitutional
state?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2001)

This is a domestic issue which may be discussed on occasion of the meeting between the Union and the
Andean group (scheduled for March in Santiago de Chile).

It is worth noting that Venezuela, along with the other Latin American and Caribbean countries, signed a
joint-declaration at the Rio Summit, reiterating their support for democracy and freedom of opinion. The
Commission will continue following closely the fulfillment of the agreements concluded between the
parties and, if necessary, will consider providing specific support to countries in doing so. In addition, it
should be stressed that the issues related to human rights are included in the three priority points
identified in the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the Parliament regarding the
follow-up to the Rio Summit (1).

(1) COM(2000) 670 final.

(2001/C 174 E/229)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-4018/00

by Gerardo Galeote Quecedo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 December 2000)

Subject: Relations with the State of Israel

Relations between the Community and Israel are based on the Euro-Mediterranean Association Agreement
signed on 20 November 1995 between the Community and the Member States, on the one hand, and the
State of Israel on the other, which entered into force in June 2000. In the agreement the signatories
consider (cid:145)the importance of the existing traditional links between the Community, its Member States and
Israel and the common values that they share(cid:146). They declare their desire to strengthen those links, confirm
the free-trade arrangements for industrial goods, envisage new agricultural concessions, establish for the
first time institutional political dialogue and agree on extending cooperation to new spheres.

Can the Commission say whether it considers that recent events in the region may change relations
between the Community and Israel, as might be deduced from certain reports in the media?

Can the Commission say whether there has been any contact between Commissioner Patten and the
Foreign Ministers of the Member States on this issue?

Can it say whether it has considered the possibility of imposing sanctions on Israel, or even suspending the
application of the Association Agreement?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(12 January 2001)

As the Honourable Member says, the Association Agreement between the Community and Israel entered
into force on 1 June 2000. It strengthens EU-Israeli ties significantly and has made a large number of
cooperation activities possible.

C 174 E/216

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

19.6.2001

The first Association Council meeting took place in Luxembourg on 13 June, bringing together the Israeli
Prime Minister and his 15 EU partners. The Association Council confirmed the launch of a number of
cooperation activities including: a meeting of customs experts on 11 September; the first meeting to
negotiate greater liberalisation of agricultural trade on 6 November; the third meeting of the Scientific and
Technical Joint Committee on 22 November; the first meeting of the Joint Committee on the Agreement
on good laboratory practices on 27 November and the first meeting on economic dialogue on 5 December.

Recent events in the Middle East have resulted in a number of EU and European Parliament declarations,
which make no mention of a change in EU-Israeli relations.

Naturally, the Commissioner for external relations and foreign ministers from the Member States meet
regularly, particularly at the General Affairs Council.

(2001/C 174 E/230)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4020/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE), Martin Callanan (PPE-DE), Nirj Deva (PPE-DE),
Den Dover (PPE-DE), Jacqueline Foster (PPE-DE), Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE),
Roger Helmer (PPE-DE), Bashir Khanbhai (PPE-DE), Timothy Kirkhope (PPE-DE),
Neil Parish (PPE-DE) and Geoffrey Van Orden (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Weights and measures

(21 December 2000)

Is the Commission aware that earlier this year a Sunderland greengrocer, Steve Thoburn, was approached
by two trading standards officers and two policemen, who, after informing him that it was against the law
for him to sell his goods in imperial measurements (pounds and ounces) rather than in metric measure-
ments, seized his imperial scales, and that Mr Thoburn later received a summons to appear in court on the
grounds that he had infringed the rules which came into force on 1 January of this year designed to make
Britain compliant with the EU(cid:146)s directives on metrification?

Could the Commission explain why it believes that it should be illegal for market traders to sell their wares
in imperial measurements, and, if that is because the Commission believes that it is necessary to achieve a
single market, to explain why a Single Market (as opposed to a single economy) within the European
Union requires the abolition of imperial measures for the sale of loose goods?

Could the Commission also indicate whether it supports the actions of
the British authorities in
prosecuting a man who is both respecting the traditions of his country and offering a service to his
customers which he believes they want, and if the British government were not to initiate prosecutions of
greengrocers selling produce only in imperial measures whether the Commission would seek to refer the
matter to the Court of Justice, or would it use the discretion granted to it by the Court of Justice (Case 87/
89 (1990) ECR I 1981) not to do so?

Finally, can the Commission confirm that it accepts that the articles covering (cid:145)supplementary indications(cid:146) in
the Commission(cid:146)s directives on units of measurement mean that is legal for traders in loose goods in the
UK to display prices in both imperial and metric measures at the same time at least until 2009?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2001)

The Commission has not been informed about the case of Mr Thoburn.

The Honourable Member refers to two elements in the Community legislation concerning units of
measurement.