WRITTEN QUESTION E-3714/01 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Commission relations with the ERT.
Date: 2002-01-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, business policy, consultation procedure, group of companies, interest group

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/227

stating in its judgment that ‘[the home page] is considered to serve a journalistic purpose of informing,
exercising criticism and arousing debate on social issues of importance to the public’. The Supreme Court
stresses, however, that it is not for the court to make a qualitative assessment of the page or of its
contents, which may instead be the subject of a normal defamation lawsuit.

The Supreme Court ruled that public fugues such as bank directors and politicians must tolerate criticism
of their professional roles, even if such criticism appears on private home pages on the internet. The
Supreme Court takes the view that this does not run counter either to the Personal Data Protection Act or
to the European directive on which that act is based. The judgment has great fundamental significance for
all Swedish home pages. The term ‘journalistic purposes’ must henceforth be interpreted much more
broadly than in the past. The relevant exception must apply not only to journalists and constitutionally
protected media but also to ordinary members of the public who wish to level criticism at named persons
in positions of power.

Does the Commission consider that the term ‘journalistic purposes’ should be interpreted broadly, as
maintained by the Supreme Court?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2002)

The Commission would recall that, under the terms of Article 9 of Directive 95/46/EC of the Parliament
and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of
personal data and on the free movement of such data (1) (‘the data protection Directive’), Member States
shall provide for exemptions or derogations from some provisions of the Directive for the processing of
personal data carried out solely for journalistic purposes or the purpose of artistic or literary expression,
to privacy with the rules governing freedom of
only if
information.

they are necessary to reconcile the right

In implementation of this article, the Swedish Data Protection Act of 1998 provides as follows [Swedish
version]:

7 § Bestämmelserna i denna lag tillämpas inte i den utsträckning det skulle strida mot bestämmelserna
om tryck- och yttrandefrihet i tryckfrihetsförordningen eller yttrandefrihetsgrundlagen.

Bestämmelserna i 9-29 och 33-44 §§ samt 45 § första stycket och 47-49 §§ skall inte tillämpas på
sådan behandling av personuppgifter som sker uteslutande för journalistiska ändamål eller konstnärligt
eller litterärt skapande.

It is not for the Commission to comment on national court rulings, including the Swedish Supreme Court
Ruling the Honourable Member refers to, applying national law in specific cases. The interpretation of the
Directive is in the final resort a matter for the European Court of Justice, in particular through preliminary
rulings issued on the basis of Article 234 of the EC Treaty. In this respect, the Commission would note that
the Göta Hovrätt in Sweden has submitted a series of questions to the Court of Justice concerning a home
page (Case C-101/01, Åklagarmyndigheten I Jönköping, pending).

(1)

JO L 281, 23.11.1995.

(2002/C 147 E/241)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3714/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 January 2002)

Subject: Commission relations with the ERT

The European Round Table of Industrialists (ERT) is an important interest group in the Union.

Does the Commission have any idea how often various Members of the Commission took part in official
meetings with the ERT during 2001?

C 147 E/228

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.6.2002

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2002)

Within the framework of its preparation of proposals and actions, the Commission’s policy is to consult all
its interlocutors. In the area of enterprise policy, the ERT is amongst these interlocutors.

Members of the Commission have had a number of meetings with representatives of the European Round
Table (ERT) of Industrialists as part of the Commission’s general process of consultation with civil society.

Discussions with ERT representatives have generally concentrated on issues related to enterprise and
competitiveness issues.

(2002/C 147 E/242)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3715/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(9 January 2002)

Subject: Colour coding for milk

Within the UK there exists a number of different colour codes for different types of milk.

In Plymouth, for example, skimmed milk is colour coded green. However, in Bristol, skimmed milk is
coded red, and green is allocated to the semi-skimmed milk.

For people travelling regularly from one part of the country to another, this can lead to great confusion.

Can the Commission indicate if it is considering colour coding the packaging for milk, in order to ensure
greater harmonisation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2002)

Marketing standards for drinking milk are laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 2597/97 of
18 December 1997 laying down additional rules on the common organisation of the market in milk and
milk products for drinking milk (1). This Regulation deals notably with sales denominations and
compositional requirements for drinking milk but contains no provisions on the use of colour codes.

It should be underlined that the use of colour codes is a typical British phenomenon linked to the
important market share of fresh milk sold in glass bottles. The Commission believes there is not sufficient
justification for regulating the use of colour codes at Community level and that, therefore, the principle of
subsidiarity should apply in this case.

(1) OJ L 351, 23.12.1997.

(2002/C 147 E/243)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0004/02

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 January 2002)

Subject: Placing on the market of seed potatoes: Article 4 of Directive 98/95 amending Directive 66/403

Article 4, Paragraph 2 of Directive 98/95/EC (1) amending Directive 66/403/EEC (2) contains the following
text in relation to the placing on the market of seed potatoes: ‘The supply of seed under certain conditions