WRITTEN QUESTION E-2366/01 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Council. Utilities bill for low-income users.
Date: 2001-08-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, competence of the Member States, consumer price, fixing of prices, marginalisation, poverty, water supply

4.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/159

occasion of the G8 in Genoa, Italy suspended the Schengen Convention and re-introduced checks at the
Italian borders. However, despite those checks, many people, including people from outside Italy, caused
physical injuries to persons and damage to property in Genoa. Various sources have confirmed that some
of the perpetrators were already known to the police, evidently because they were reported on Community
data bases on grounds of public policy or public safety.

Would the Council clarify the following points:

(cid:129) Was the SIS data base consulted by the Italian authorities when the border checks were carried out for
the G8? If so, how many people were refused entry at the border on the basis of data supplied by the
SIS?

(cid:129) Were some of the people arrested during the G8 already entered on the SIS data base or other
Community data bases because they had a criminal record of crimes of violence? If so, on what
grounds were they allowed to enter Italian territory?

(cid:129) Were the data concerning persons arrested or reported during the G(cid:246)teborg European Council and

other demonstrations entered in the SIS or other Community data bases?

Reply

(29 November 2001)

The question of the Honourable Member refers to the use of the SIS database by the Italian public
authorities in connection with the G8 in Genoa.

As the use of the SIS database by these public authorities is a matter of national responsibility, the Council
is not able to inform whether and how the Italian authorities consulted the SIS database at the border
checks carried out for the G8 and what the possible results of these checks were regarding the refusal of
entry onto Italian territory. However, the Council wishes to clarify that a suspension of the Schengen
Convention on the basis of Article 2(2) of the Schengen Convention only concerns the re-introduction of
border checks at internal borders and does not have an impact on the availability and/or functioning of the
SIS.

The Council is equally unable to answer the second question as it has no information on what persons
were arrested during the G8.

As to the question whether data concerning persons arrested or reported in G(cid:246)teborg were entered in SIS,
it is recalled that this is a responsibility of the Swedish authorities and, moreover, it should be kept in
mind that according to Article 94 of the Schengen Convention (1), data can only be entered (cid:145)as required for
the purposes laid down in Articles 95 to 100(cid:146).

(1) OJ L 239, 22.9.2000.

(2002/C 81 E/187)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2366/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Council

(28 August 2001)

Subject: Utilities bill for low-income users

Under the 1991 UK Water Industries Act, water companies set their water charges according to the
rateable value of the property they were serving.

In a recent case in the South-West, a low-income constituent of mine, Mr Ken Cole, was charged a high
price for his water consumption, because the property he was living in at the time had a high rateable
value.

C 81 E/160

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.4.2002

Although he is on a low income and unable to pay this bill, the water company has pursued Mr Cole
through the courts to reclaim its money.

The Water Industry Act of 1999 has changed this situation, and enables water companies to more
accurately tailor their bills to reflect the real water consumption of their customers. However, this
legislation is not retrospective. As a result, Mr Cole(cid:146)s previous iniquitous situation has been (cid:145)recognised(cid:146),
but unfortunately it will not alter the fact that he still is confronted with a bill of £ 700 which the Courts
in England say he is legally obliged to pay.

Would the Council of Ministers consider intervening in national issues to help low-income groups who are
penalised in this way?

Reply

(6 December 2001)

The Council regrets to inform the Honourable Member, that it is not within its powers to interfere directly
in domestic matters such as water pricing or, indeed, local taxation.

The Council would like to recall, however, that it devotes considerable effort at present to the questions of
combating poverty and social exclusion.

The Council(cid:146)s work is being prepared and coordinated, as its first priority, by the Social Protection
Committee, set up by the Council in June 2000, and operating within the framework of the new open
method of coordination, as defined by the Lisbon European Council in March 2000. Subsequent European
Councils have given additional emphasis to these activities.

This work is being pursued intensively and is covering a wide range of
issues, given the very
multidimensional character of poverty and social exclusion. Currently the Committee, together with the
Commission, is preparing a joint Commission/Council report based on the National Action Plans on social
inclusion. It is also working on a set of indicators, to enhance future cooperation and development. The
results of these two activities are to be submitted to the Laeken European Council in December 2001.

Moreover, the Council and the European Parliament have just reached agreement on a draft Decision
establishing a five-year programme (2002-2006) of Community action to encourage cooperation between
Member States in combating social exclusion, with a budget of € 75 million. The objectives of the
Programme are the improvement of the understanding of the phenomena of social exclusion and poverty,
the organising of exchanges of experience on policies followed and the promotion of mutual learning, as
well as the development of the capacity of operators to address social exclusion and poverty effectively.

It has to be stressed that the programme to combat social exclusion complements actions funded by the
European Social Fund and under the (cid:145)Equal(cid:146) initiative to combat poverty.

(2002/C 81 E/188)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2367/01

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(6 August 2001)

Subject: Animal transport

In June the Council of Ministers adopted a resolution calling on the Commission to submit to the Council:
(a) suitable proposals to (i) achieve effective implementation and strict enforcement of existing legislation,
(ii) improve the protection and welfare of animals as well a preventing the occurrence and spread of
infectious animal diseases; and (b) an animal health and welfare report on (i) issues arising from the
transport of live animals, also taking into account the public interest to prevent the spread of infectious