WRITTEN QUESTION E-2186/01 by José Gil-Robles Gil-Delgado (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Inconsistent attitude to the Spanish language at the European Schools.
Date: 2001-07-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Patent Office, European school, Germany, Spain, discrimination on the basis of nationality, nationality, official language

C 93 E/74

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

In addition to the information provided in those replies, it should be noted that the use of age limits must
be viewed in the light of the creation of a European Recruitment Office, which in future will organise
competitions for all the European Institutions. The Secretaries General of the European Institutions agreed
at their meeting of 9 July 2001 that it will be the responsibility of the Management Board of this future
Office to take a decision with regard to age limits on the basis of a qualified majority. The Commission
confirmed this line in its Communication ‘New orientations for the reform of personnel policy’ of 18 July
2001 (4) and invited its Directorate General for Administration and Personnel to prepare a decision to set
up this structure to be presented for adoption by the Commission and the other Institutions as soon as
possible.

The Commission published a report in February 2000 in preparation for the negotiations in the Council
which led to the adoption of Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general
in employment and occupation (5)
framework for equal
irrespective of religion or belief,
disability, age or sexual orientation. The report provides details of Member States’
legal provisions to
combat discrimination in force at that time. A copy is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to
Parliament’s Secretariat. Directive 2000/78/EC must be transposed by Member States into national law by
2 December 2003.

treatment

(1) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 156.
(2) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 132.
(3) Written answer of 13.6.2001.
(4) SEC(2001) 1202/6.
(5) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(2002/C 93 E/092)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2186/01

by José Gil-Robles Gil-Delgado (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 July 2001)

Subject: Inconsistent attitude to the Spanish language at the European Schools

According to my understanding, it is normal practice for category III children to be admitted to any
section at any of the European Schools.

When the EP Committee on Petitions asked for information on this subject at its meeting of 26 May 1999,
the Commission stated in reply that the Munich European School, the only Spanish-language educational
establishment serving that city and its environs, was not discriminating against Spanish pupils by
restricting their admission, given that there were so few category I pupils enrolled in the Spanish section.

The information in my possession suggests that the criteria governing the admission of category III pupils
to other sections in 1999 were much more generous than in the Spanish section, even when the number
of eligible children was lower. (Out of the three small sections, the Spanish, Dutch, and Greek sections, the
Spanish section is the smallest, consisting as it does of just 32 children, 47 % of whom are category III
pupils. The proportion of category III pupils in the Dutch and Greek sections, however, is higher, standing
at 62 % and 66 % respectively).

Assuming that the above figures are correct, can the Commission say why the admission criteria vary
according to nationality?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 2001)

The primary and continuing purpose of the establishment of a European school in Munich, authorised by
the Protocol of 15 September 1975, is to educate the children of staff of the European Patents Office
(EPO). Other children who are nationals of one of the Member States of the European Community or one

18.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 93 E/75

of the other States party to the European Patent Convention may also be admitted in accordance with rules
laid down by the Board of Governors of the European Schools. Since this school has a special relationship
with the EPO, that body provides most of its funding.

At its meeting on 25 and 26 May 1976, the Board of Governors took the following decision:

1. The children of staff of the EPO, including the children of staff of the Munich European School,

should be admitted (Category I pupils).

2.

If places are still available, children who are nationals of one of the Member States of the European
Community or one of the other States party to the European Patent Convention (Category III pupils)
may also be admitted. ‘Places available’ means places in a class which may be taken up without that
class having to be split.

The admission and grading of pupils are decided by the Headteacher of the School.

Concerning the specific question of whether the School has applied the admission criteria for Category III
pupils equally rigorously and without distinguishing by nationalities, in particular in the Spanish, Dutch
and Greek language sections, the Commission can provide the following information from the school
management:

1.

In the academic year 2001-02, there were 42 pupils (including 18 in Category III) in the Spanish
section, 39 (18 in Category III) in the Greek section and 41 (25 in Category III) in the Dutch section.

The fact that the percentage of pupils in Category III, compared with the pupils in Category I, is not
the same in the three language sections in question is not the result of a discriminatory policy by the
School. It arises from other reasons including, for example, the lack of Category I pupils in certain
classes of a language section. This was the case in the Spanish section, where there was no 1st-year
class in 1997 or 2nd-year class in 1998 because no Category I pupils were enrolled in those classes.
This is, following the Board of Governors’ rules, the only condition allowing the opening of new
classes.

2. The selection of Category III pupils to fill the places available in all the School’s language sections is
carried out by the School’s management using the following criteria: children of diplomats of the
Member States and the patent agents approved by the EPO, pupils transferred from other European
Schools, and the siblings of pupils already enrolled in the School. The school management may also
admit other pupils for educational reasons, such as a very small number of Category I pupils in a
class, in which case selection is by ballot.

3.

In the Munich European School, the Spanish and Greek sections exist only in the primary school
while the Dutch section exists in both the primary and secondary schools. This section has three
combined primary classes, while the Spanish and Greek sections have only two combined primary
classes, which explains the slightly higher percentage of pupils in Category III in some Dutch section
primary classes.

Taking all of these objective factors into account, the Commission can see no evidence of discrimination
by nationality in the arrangements for the admission of Category III pupils that are applied by the Munich
European School.

(2002/C 93 E/093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2188/01

by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 July 2001)

Subject: Financial implementation of the Community Support Framework for Portugal

On 3 May 2001 the Council and the European Parliament approved the transfer, to the 2002-2006
period, of the Structural Fund appropriations which had not been authorised in 2000 and which could not
be transferred to the 2001 financial year. On account of the delay which occurred in the adoption of
certain programmes co-financed by means of the Structural Funds, 6 152 billion euros of the appropri-
ations earmarked for 2000 could be neither authorised nor transferred to 2001. Of the 26 297 billion
allocated under the 2000 budget, only 12 107 billion was actually authorised and 8 038 billion was
transferred to the 2001 financial year.