WRITTEN QUESTION E-1482/01 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. Clergy and employment rights in the UK.
Date: 2001-05-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, clergy, interpretation of the law, wage earner, worker information

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/123

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2001)

The Council of Ministers delivered to the Commission in September 1995 a negotiating directive to enter
into negotiations and conclude a fisheries agreement with the Republic of South Africa.

Despite many attempts by the Commission to open the fisheries negotiation, South Africa was not in
a position before December 2000, to accept a fisheries negotiation with the Community.

The 1st round of these negotiations took place in Brussels on 5-6 March 2001. The South African
delegation forwarded a draft co-operation agreement on fisheries which excluded any access to South
African fisheries.

The Commission delegation could not accept this draft and presented a complementary draft including
access to South African fisheries. South Africa could not accept such a draft because it did not correspond
to their negotiating mandate.

South Africa cancelled the 2nd round scheduled for early April 2001 in Cape Town.

The failure of the negotiating process is due to the South African reluctance to include in any fisheries
agreement the issue of access to fisheries which, according to the Union mandate, is the main element of
the fisheries agreement.

In fact the Commission, when it negotiates fisheries agreement with third countries, does not only take
account of the Community fishing interest, but in addition need for sustainable development of the sector
in the third country concerned.

The Union proposed draft fisheries agreement offered to South Africa a cooperation for the development
of research, surveillance and transfer of technologies and would have promoted joint operations in
fisheries between Union partners and South African partners.

Under these circumstances, a successful outcome of the negotiations with South Africa seems unlikely for
the foreseeable future.

(2001/C 364 E/136)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1482/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(18 May 2001)

Subject: Clergy and employment rights in the UK

Given that the UK, in the Employment Rights Act 1996, did not provide for any exclusion from the
Council Directive 91/533/EEC (1) of 14 October 1991 for the clergy, is it the view of the Commission that
they must be covered?

Does it not follow that any court ruling that the clergy are excluded cannot be made without a preliminary
reference to the European Court of Justice?

If such a ruling were made without a preliminary reference what remedy is available and should the
Commission not take the matter up with the UK Government as a breach of Community law?

(1) OJ L 288, 18.10.1991, p. 32.

C 364 E/124

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(12 July 2001)

Council Directive 91/533/EEC (Written Statement Directive) (1) specifies that employers are obliged to
notify employees of the essential aspects of their contract or employment relationship. This includes
information on the identities of the parties, the place of work and certain other working conditions.

This directive was implemented into British Law through the Employment Rights Act of 1996, which
makes no specific provisions with respect to clergy.

Article 1 of the Directive deals with the scope of its application. The Directive applies only to (cid:145)paid
employee[s] having a contract or employment relationship defined by the law in force in a Member State
and/or governed by the law in force in a Member State(cid:146) (Article 1(1)). If, according to British law, clergy do
not have the status of paid employees in the meaning of that provision, they are therefore not covered by
the provisions of the Employment Rights Act which implement the Directive.

The application of national legislation implementing Community Directives is subject to national judicial
review. According to Article 234 (ex Article 177) of the EC Treaty, a preliminary ruling by the Court of
Justice is required if any question concerning (i) the interpretation of the EC Treaty, (ii) the validity and
interpretation of acts of the institutions of the Community and of the European Central Bank, or (iii) the
interpretation of the statutes of bodies established by an act of the Council, where those statutes so
provide, is raised before a court or tribunal of a Member State against whose decisions there is no judicial
remedy under national law. The Commission is not aware of such cases in the UK with respect to Directive
91/ 533 and clergymen.

If a national court or tribunal would not comply with its obligations under Article 234 of the EC Treaty it
would commit an infringement of treaty rules for which the Member State would be responsible.

(1) Council Directive 91/533/EEC of 14 October 1991 on an employer(cid:146)s obligation to inform employees of the

conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship (OJ L 288, 18.10.1991).

(2001/C 364 E/137)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1484/01

by Concepci(cid:243) Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Catalan and the European Year of Languages

(18 May 2001)

A study on Europeans and languages commissioned by the Commission(cid:146)s Directorate-General
for
Education and Culture is being carried out at INRA (Europe) and it was decided, for the purposes of this
study, to add Turkish and sign language to the official languages of the European Union.

Since there are other official languages in Europe, such as Catalan, which is spoken in three EU countries
(Spain, Italy and France) by a total of 10 million people, is the official language in a Member State of the
UN (Andorra) and one of the official languages in Spain, can the Commission explain why it did not
include Catalan in this study?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 2001)

The objective of the survey in question was to obtain general information on Europeans(cid:146) knowledge of and
attitudes
to languages and language learning. The survey was conducted according to standard
Eurobarometer methodology, based on a random sample of about 1 000 people in each Member State.
The list of languages coded in the survey was drawn up on the basis of previous experience with such
surveys according to expectations of interviewee responses that would give rise to statistically significant