WRITTEN QUESTION E-0114/02 by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Publication European Dialogue.
Date: 2002-01-29
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU publication, European Commission, administration of the Institutions, commercial contract, promotion of the European idea, termination of a contract

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 5 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

C 205 E/72

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

about the benefits of EU membership. When Commissioner Verheugen assumed office the magazine was
abruptly discontinued. The Commission terminated the contract and had to pay the publisher a six-figure
sum as compensation for the fact that ‘European Dialogue’ would no longer be published.

How much compensation was paid?

How much had it previously cost to publish the magazine? Why were no attempts made to improve or
change the magazine’s quality and content?

If the magazine and its editorial staff were so bad and supposedly beyond correction that the publication
contract had to be terminated ahead of time, with the high compensation costs this entailed, why did the
magazine exist unchallenged for so long and at such great expense?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 2002)

The quarterly magazine ‘European Dialogue’ published in the central and eastern European languages was
launched in 1995 under the responsibility of the former DG for Information, Culture and Communication
and was financed by the PHARE programme. Its objective was to provide basic and timely information on
the European Union. The publication appeared for four years at an annual cost of about EUR 600 000.
This first contract ran for the full term and the publication met the agreed objectives with a satisfactory
standard of quality.

At the end of the four-year period, an invitation to tender was published in August 1998 with a view to
concluding a new contract. As the company to be selected withdrew its tender following internal
restructuring, in line with usual practice the second best tender was accepted and the contract was signed
in 1999. The first issue of the new version, which appeared after some delay, proved to be of poorer
quality than the preceding one. The new enlargement DG, now responsible for the magazine following the
restructuring of the Commission, tried to explore with the publisher how the publication’s quality and
editorial line could be improved. After various initiatives to that end it became clear that the new partner
could not achieve the objectives of the new communication policy in the candidate countries, which was
based on the Commission delegations themselves taking charge of information tools for enlargement
preparation. Being present in the candidate countries, the delegations were in a better position to gear
information tools to the needs of the individual candidate countries, including in regard to language.

In the light of this new approach in its information strategy, the Commission’s Enlargement DG as
authorising officer decided to terminate the contract with the contractor in question and did so with a
compensatory payment of EUR 136 250.

(2002/C 205 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0120/02

by Eurig Wyn (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(29 January 2002)

Subject: Cost of food safety measures to producers

The costs of Community measures taken in order to protect consumer health (tests for SRM and MBM) are
considerable. Does the Council not think that the failure to harmonise regulations relating to costs
incurred by the application of health measures taken at Community level lead to competition distortion
within the Single market?