WRITTEN QUESTION P-0094/02 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Council. European Schools.
Date: 2002-01-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European school, competence of the Member States, decision-making, educational administration, social participation

C 205 E/70

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

Furthermore, information required in the risk assessment includes appraisal of the ways and extent of
dissemination (e.g. an estimation of how viable pollen and/or seeds declines with distance) and any specific
factors affecting dissemination, if any. The presence of sexually compatible wild relatives or cultivated plant
species and proximity to officially recognised biotopes or protected areas that may be affected must also be
considered.

In terms of information on control and monitoring, details should be provided for any precautions taken
in terms of distance(s) from sexually compatible plant species, both wild relatives and crops as well as any
measures to minimise/prevent dispersal of any reproductive organ of the genetically modified higher plants
(e.g. pollen, seeds, tuber).

Against the background of the risk assessment, GMOs are only authorised for the placing on the market
when there is no reason to believe that there is an adverse effect on human health or the environment
under the conditions of consent.

In the case of seed crops, minimum distances from undesirable neighbouring pollen sources have been
established in the seed legislation in the case of cross-pollinated plants. These distances vary according to
the species, the kind of variety and of the category of seeds. The Scientific Committee on Plants has stated
in its opinion of 7 March 2001 on the adventitious presence of GM seeds in conventional seeds (2), that
one of the measures to achieve a 0,3 % threshold for adventitious GM presence in the case of non GM
hybrids of oilseed rape would be to increase the current isolation distance up to 3000 meters.

(1) OJ L 117, 8.5.1990.
(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scp/out93_gmo_en.pdf.

(2002/C 205 E/076)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0094/02

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Council

(22 January 2002)

Subject: European Schools

Parents’ participation in the governance of schools is becoming more prevalent in EU Member States. This
is a welcome development and is in the interests of pupils, families, teachers, the well-being of schools and
the strength of the various communities. The exception appears to be the European Schools in Belgium,
Luxembourg,
to participate in the
governance of the schools attended by their children. In view of the fact that all of the Member States are
represented by national civil servants in the governing bodies of the European Schools, what arrangements
are they prepared to undertake in order to ensure that, in the interests of democratic participation and
inclusivity, there is appropriate parents’ representation on those governing bodies?

Italy, Spain and elsewhere since parents have little or no right

The European Schools are < quite rightly < funded through budgets financed by Member States and are
therefore of direct relevance to the European Parliament. Does the Council consider that the current
arrangements allow for levels of staffing by qualified teachers and teachers’ assistants that are equivalent to
levels that are normal in the Member States of the EU at primary and secondary schools in the public
sector?

Is the Council aware that the representatives which Member States appoint to the governing bodies of the
European Schools are characteristically civil servants who do not live in the countries where the schools
are located, do not have children in the schools, and do not have any clear collective responsibility for
accounting for their decisions to any plainly defined body or group? The officials concerned may have
expertise and experience in their own countries and they are likely to be well motivated. But by what
means do Member States ensure that their representatives on the governing bodies of the European
Schools are properly acquainted with the daily and strategic teaching and resource needs and with the
levels of provision and performance of the schools?

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/71

Reply

(21 May 2002)

While the Council notes and understands the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member concerning
the effective administration of the European Schools, it recalls that the European Schools were established
on the basis of the Convention defining the statute of the European Schools, adopted in 1957, to which
the Member States only (and not the European Community) are contracting Parties. The new Convention
signed by the Community and the Member States on 21 June 1994, which inter alia modified the decision-
making procedure within the organs of the Schools, has to date still only been ratified by 11 out of the 12
Member States signatories, and is consequently not yet entered into force. The questions raised therefore
fall outside the institutional competence of the Council, and should be addressed to the Member States
which are responsible for appointing the members of the Board of Governors.

(2002/C 205 E/077)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0112/02

by Emilio Menéndez del Valle (PSE) to the Council

(22 January 2002)

Subject: Statement by the President-in-Office of the Council of Ministers concerning the destruction of

Palestinian infrastrastructure in Israel

It has been reported in the press that, during his tour of the Middle East, the President-in-Office of the EU
Council of Ministers, Mr Piqué, stated that the EU was carrying out an assessment of the damage caused by
the Israeli army when it invaded autonomous Palestinian territory.

The damage in question affected various items of Palestinian infrastructure which had been financed by
means of funds provided by the EU or its Member States < including the unused airport at Gaza, which
cost 42,6 million euros (28,2 million of which were contributed by Spain).

What view does the Spanish Presidency take regarding the possibility and the merits of demanding
compensation from Israel for the damage caused by the latter country to installations which are essential
to the development of Palestinian society and which were financed by European and Spanish taxpayers?

Reply

(13 May 2002)

The Council has expressed its serious concern at the destruction of Palestinian infrastructure and other
facilities which help Palestinians in their economic, social and humanitarian development,
including
elements financed by the European Union and other donors. The European Union has urged the
Government of Israel to put an end to this practice and reserves the right to claim reparations in the
appropriate fora.

The aim of EU support for Palestinian development projects is to alleviate the difficult socio-economic
situation of the Palestinians, with a view to supporting the Middle East Peace Process (MEPP). It cannot be
in the interests of Israel to exacerbate this situation or to weaken the capacity of the Palestinian Authority
to fight terrorism.

(2002/C 205 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0114/02

by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 January 2002)

Subject: Publication ‘European Dialogue’

Up to 1999 the then DG 1A published the quarterly magazine ‘European Dialogue’, which was translated
into all the Eastern European languages and which was intended to inform the public in these countries