WRITTEN QUESTION E-1621/01 by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Lottery for the preservation of the European artistic heritage.
Date: 2001-06-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU competence, budget policy, cultural policy, financing of the EU budget, game of chance, heritage protection

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/63

Reply

(8 October 2001)

The Honourable Member of Parliament refers apparently to Council Decision No 2001/264 concerning the
adoption of the Council security regulations. The role of Member States in the implementation is spelled
out in Article 2, paragraph 2 of this Decision:

Member States shall take appropriate measures, in accordance with national arrangements, to ensure
that, when EU classified information is handled, the regulations referred to in Article 1 are respected,
within their services and premises by:

(a) members of Member States(cid:146) permanent representations to the European Union as well as by
its bodies, or

the Council or of

members of national delegations attending meetings of
participating in other Council activities,

(b) other members of the Member States(cid:146) national administrations handling classified information,

whether they serve in the territory of Member States or abroad, and

(c) Member States(cid:146) external contractors and seconded personnel, handling classified information (cid:133)

No Member State is exempt from the before mentioned Council Decision.

(2002/C 40 E/061)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1621/01

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Lottery for the preservation of the European artistic heritage

(12 June 2001)

The recent suggestion by the director of the Louvre on taking his retirement that a lottery should be
created for the preservation of France(cid:146)s national artistic heritage is in line with a long-standing European
view that the artistic heritage can be preserved by this means.

The British model of a lottery tax for culture underlies such a proposal. It would contribute to the
protection of our European artistic heritage via the payments of those playing the lottery, who could
consider it an ethical justification for their gaming habit.

Does the Commission consider that it could submit, for the consideration of experts in the field, a
suggestion that a Europe-wide lottery could be created with a view to its profits being used to protect the
European artistic heritage from the depredations of richer nations, from neglect, or from any other
circumstance that could damage an inheritance which is the pride of large numbers of Europeans whose
identity is bound up with the accumulated culture of Europe(cid:146)s long history?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2001)

The Community(cid:146)s activities in the cultural sector have their legal basis in Article 151 (ex Article 128) of the
EC Treaty.

Under this Article, the Community is competent for:

(cid:129) encouraging cultural cooperation between Member States and

(cid:129) if necessary, supporting and supplementing (through financial support) action by Member States in the

following areas:

(cid:129) improvement of the knowledge and dissemination of the culture and history of the European

peoples;

C 40 E/64

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

(cid:129) conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance;

(cid:129) non-commercial cultural exchanges;

(cid:129) artistic and literary creation, including in the audiovisual sector.

The single Community instrument in the cultural sector is the (cid:145)Culture 2000(cid:146) programme, which is
financed from the Community budget, and the Community is not competent to intervene to safeguard the
artistic heritage of Member States outside the framework of the existing programmes and initiatives.

Moreover, as regards the possibility of creating new forms of financing for programmes or initiatives, it
should be noted that the financing of the Community budget is based on a system of own resources
(Article 269 (ex Article 201) of the EC Treaty), the provisions of which are laid down by the Council,
acting unanimously on a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament.
These provisions must be adopted by the Member States in accordance with their own constitutional
requirements. Pursuant to the principle of budgetary universality, these resources may not be earmarked
for specific expenditure but must be used towards the overall financing of the Community(cid:146)s total budget
costs.

(2002/C 40 E/062)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1622/01

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Council

Subject: Punishment of the authors of the Rwanda genocide

(12 June 2001)

Those responsible for the extermination of 800 000 Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994 are still walking free, while
the international community remains indifferent to the massacres which raged over a hundred days in that
African country.

The Rwandan government is continuing to press for the arrest of the ringleaders of the massacre and of
the hundreds of criminals who concocted and implemented the plan to eliminate the Tutsi community
from the face of the earth.

Can the Council state what action the EU is currently taking to ensure that the authors of these brutal
crimes are arrested, put on trial and sentenced for the worst act of genocide suffered by humanity since the
Nazi era?

Reply

(8 October 2001)

The Council shares the opinion of the Honourable Parliamentarian that those responsible for the genocide
in Rwanda in 1994 should be brought to trial. Already in 1994 the Council adopted a Common Position
on the objectives and priorities of the EU vis-(cid:224)-vis Rwanda (1), where it stressed the importance of bringing
to justice those responsible for the grave violations of humanitarian law, including genocide. In this respect
the EU considered the establishment of an international tribunal as an essential element to stop a tradition
of impunity and to prevent future violations of human rights. This is still the opinion of the EU and even
fall within the
though the actual arresting,
competencies of the Council, the EU Member States and the Community have supported the International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda set up by the UN in November 1994.

those responsible does not

judging and sentencing of

(1) OJ L 283, 29.10.1994.