WRITTEN QUESTION E-0941/02 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Language discrimination — English native speakers.
Date: 2002-04-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: application of EU law, job access, linguistic discrimination, mother tongue, recruitment

26.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 229 E/161

Can the Commission say whether the silence on the part of those who run the plant, and who did not
even inform the Reggio Emilia provincial authorities during the 40 days when the harmful substances were
being emitted, infringes Community public health and environmental standards?

Does the incinerator in question comply with European legislation on the environment and public health?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2002)

A number of provisions of Community law set out the requirements for the operator of an incineration
plant to inform a competent authority in the event of the Community limit values for emissions from an
incineration plant being exceeded.

In the case of municipal waste incineration, Article 8 of Council Directive 89/369/EEC of 8 June 1989 on
the prevention of air pollution from new municipal waste incineration plants (1) requires that a competent
authority be informed as soon as possible should the measurements taken show that the limit values laid
down in the Directive have been exceeded. The operator is also required to ensure that the plant does not
continue to operate while failing to comply with emission standards and shall take the necessary measures
to ensure it is modified or no longer operated. Additional requirements regarding breakdown etc. are also
set out in this article. In the case of the incineration of hazardous waste similar provisions are set down in
Article 12 of Council Directive 94/67/EC of 16 December 1994 (2).

The Commission will ask the Italian authorities whether the relevant requirements were complied with in
this case and whether the incinerator complies with the relevant Community emission standards and will
inform the Honourable Member accordingly.

(1) OJ L 163, 14.6.1989.
(2) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.

(2002/C 229 E/187)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0941/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 April 2002)

Subject: Language discrimination 6 English native speakers

In its answer to question E-3572/01 (1),
the
formulation ‘native speaker or person with an equivalent knowledge’ is acceptable under Community law.
Nevertheless, this formulation gives the impression that an employer is primarily seeking a native speaker.
Under Belgium’s equal opportunities policy it was decided some years ago, among other things, that
references to gender (M/F) or age would no longer be allowed to appear in job adverts.

the Commission states that

the opinion that

is of

it

Does the Commission also feel that this ruling in Belgium is a better way of preventing discrimination and
will it therefore be urging the Member States to ban completely the discriminatory formulation ‘native
speaker’ from job advertisements throughout the European Union?

Will it beforehand insist with its contracting parties that they are henceforward no longer to use the
discriminatory term ‘native speaker’ under penalty of cancellation of their contract with the Commission?

(1) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 144.

C 229 E/162

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(31 May 2002)

the opinion that

the phrase ‘native speaker’

is not acceptable, under any
The Commission is of
circumstances, under Community law (see replies to the Honourable Member’s Written Questions
E-4100/00 (1) and E-0779/01 (2)). However, a requirement for ‘perfect knowledge’ cannot be seen, as
such, as illegitimate under Community law, provided that a very high level of knowledge of a particular
language is necessary for the post concerned; the employer has to justify the need for this requirement. As
the requirement for a perfect knowledge of a particular language is not, per se, contrary to Community
law,
from job
advertisements which require such a knowledge. However, the Commission recommends using a phrase
such as ‘perfect or very good knowledge of a particular language’ as a condition of access to posts for
which a very high level of knowledge of that language is necessary.

intend to urge Member States to ban this requirement

the Commission does not

The Commission will continue to use its powers to fight against any discrimination caused by a
requirement for ‘native speaker’ knowledge in job advertisements.

This also applies in its relations with its contractors.

(1) OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001.
(2) OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001.

(2002/C 229 E/188)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0951/02

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 April 2002)

Subject: Failure of Greece to comply with EU legislation concerning public health and consumer protection

Will the Commission say in how many instances Greece may be presumed to be in breach of Community
legislation on public health and consumer protection, and in relation to which matters?

In how many instances (if any) is the Commission preparing to bring Greece before the Court of Justice,
and in relation to which matters?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 2002)

The Commission is currently dealing with 21 infringement files against Greece in the field of health and
consumer protection.

Twenty of these concern Greece’s failure to adopt or notify measures transposing 17 directives.

In the case of Directives 93/118/EEC and 96/43/EC (financing of health inspections and controls) and
Directives 95/69/EC and 98/51/EC (approving establishments in the animal feed sector), the Court has
already found against Greece.

Two other cases, concerning Directives 1999/20/EC (additives in animal feed) and 1999/89/EC (poultry
meat 6 health policy), are currently pending before the Court.

As regards failure to transpose Directives 98/27/EC (consumer protection: injunctions), 1999/44/EC (sales
of and guarantees for consumer goods), 1999/74/EC (protection of
laying hens), 2000/75/EC (blue
tongue), 2000/77/EC (animal nutrition 6 inspections), 2001/10/EC (scrapie), 2000/15/EC (bovine animals