WRITTEN QUESTION E-3003/01 by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Council. Identity check at Charles de Gaulle Airport.
Date: 2001-11-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Schengen Agreement, air transport, free movement of persons, police checks

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/73

(2002/C 147 E/074)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2995/01

by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE), Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE)
and Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(29 October 2001)

Subject: Possibility of European regulations on night flights at regional airports

The following issues arise from the draft treaty that is to regulate the civil use of the former military
airport at Laarbruch. Does the Commission share the view that the agreement on night flight schedules at
Zurich-Kloten airport that German Transport Minister, Klaus Bodewig, regards as reasonable, should be
taken as a benchmark for night
flight schedules at all German regional airports? If not, does the
Commission not consider that this issue needs to be examined at European level?

Are there European regulations concerning areas for holding patterns above the territory of a country with
which no agreement has been concluded? If so, what are these rules? If not, does the Commission not
share our view that the draft treaty must exclude flight paths and noise nuisance that have a major impact
on the Netherlands?

Can the Commission say whether the public inquiry required for the purposes of the environmental
impact analysis in the neighbouring Netherlands was properly conducted, particularly with regard to the
data made available and opportunities to comment?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2002)

The Commission has been informed of the agreement between Germany and the Swiss Confederation
concerning the conditions for approaching Zurich airport. The detailed flight path into the airport is a
matter of local relevance and the Commission’s interest is to ensure that the agreed rules for the airport are
fully compatible with Community law, and in particular respect the principles of non-discrimination and
proportionality. In addition, the Commission has adopted on the 28 November 2001 a proposal for a
directive relating to the introduction of operating restrictions. There is at present no Community
legislation on holding patterns, although rules on airspace utilisation might in the future be developed as
part of the Commission’s Single Sky initiative.

The Commission has so far not taken a view under Community law about the agreement relating to the
airport of Zurich. Therefore the Commission is not in a position to confirm that this agreement could be
regarded as a benchmark to be followed in other contexts.

In respect to the environmental impact assessment, the Commission is aware of concerns that impacts on
the neighbouring inhabitants
in the Netherlands possibly have not been sufficiently taken into
consideration in the planning process related to the conversion of the military airport in Laarbruch.
Therefore, it is undertaking queries to assess whether the applicable environmental provisions have been
respected.

(2002/C 147 E/075)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3003/01

by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Council

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Identity check at Charles de Gaulle Airport

With reference to Question E-1485/01 (1), which I put to the Council on 21 May 2001, I am dismayed at
the tenor and quality of the answer I received on a matter as specific as respect for the right of European
citizens to move freely within the Schengen area.

C 147 E/74

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

Given that the application of this principle affects thousands of European citizens every day, could the
Council explain why it took more than four months to supply such an evasive answer?

(1) OJ C 364 E, 20.12.2001, p. 125.

Reply

(1 March 2002)

The Council has explained to the European Parliament many times, particularly in replies to written
questions, the Council’s procedures for checking replies, the decision-making procedure which has to be
followed, and the need to provide precise, reliable, high-quality information on the positions which the
Council has taken on the subjects raised in parliamentary questions inevitably require a certain amount of
time, although the Council continues to do its utmost to reply as quickly as possible.

(2002/C 147 E/076)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3007/01

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Council

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Prevention of bacteriological terrorism: checks on staff and security in the buildings and public

facilities of the European Union

The dreadful and now very real
Islamic
fundamentalists operating in Europe means it is absolutely essential and urgent to adopt strict control and
prevention measures.

terrorist attacks by networks of

threat of bacteriological

National and international institutions, not least the European Parliament, which has apparently been a
target of Islamic terrorists for some time, and public buildings such as airports, railway stations, cities,
towns, hospitals, schools, universities and so on must be seen as particularly at risk of chemical or
bacteriological terrorist attack.

These facilities, often employ staff recruited through employment agencies of nationalities and/or religions
in which Islamic terrorism recruits or infiltrates its
that have links with the cultural environment
supporters, as has been demonstrated by the investigations into the latest acts of terrorism.

In the light of the above considerations, can the Council say what urgent control and prevention measures
it intends to require of the governments of the European Union A more specifically to prevent terrorists
who have infiltrated such structures and are employed on the staff of
the internal services from
perpetrating or inciting terrorist acts, in particular bacteriological attacks?

Reply

(18 March 2002)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that it is for each Institution to arrange for a security
system providing acceptable and dependable conditions of occupation for persons required to frequent, on
a regular or occasional basis, the premises which that Institution occupies.

In addition, it would emphasise that following the dramatic events of 11 September, an Extraordinary
European Council met on 21 September. In its conclusions, it adopted a plan of action against terrorism
and called for ‘all existing international conventions on the fight against terrorism (UN, OECD, etc.) to be
implemented as quickly as possible. The European Union supported the Indian proposal for framing within
the United Nations a general convention against international terrorism’.