WRITTEN QUESTION E-1403/02 by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Unemployment in Finland and emissions trading.
Date: 2002-05-15
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Finland, job cuts, pollution control measures, tradeable emission permit, unemployment

C 52 E/68

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.3.2003

The Commission assesses positively these first steps in the renewal of the Policy Dialogue with the
Government and the SPLM/A and Civil Society.

The Commission recalls that progressive normalisation of relations is conditional on progress achieved in
the political dialogue. As only five months have elapsed since the Union Troïka Mission, the Union has not
yet evaluated the overall process.

However, from the Commission’s point of view, some positive steps can be highlighted:

(cid:1) the monthly dialogue meetings between the Government and the Union are taking place regularly,

which allows a better exchange of views on the different commitments of the dialogue;

(cid:1) the Nuba mountains ceasefire and all the measures that go with it, particularly the international
monitoring system, is a first fragile step in the direction of a possible overall ceasefire and peace
process;

(cid:1) the agreement signed by both parties in March 2002 to protect non-combatant civilians and civilian

facilities from military attacks;

(cid:1) the work of the first international commission investigating alleged slavery practices and abduction

and its conclusions are a very important progress in that area of the dialogue;

(cid:1) finally, although not signing the final document for the Task Forces, the Government has not closed
all doors in the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)-led Peace Process and it is
hoped that the negotiations will restart mid-June 2002.

(2003/C 52 E/077)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1403/02

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Unemployment in Finland and emissions trading

(15 May 2002)

The Commission has expressed disquiet at the Finnish unemployment trend. That is the assessment
contained in its spring budget forecast.

However, the Commission is energetically promoting emissions trading, which according to published
reports has a direct adverse effect on employment. This applies especially to Finland, where 40 000 people
work in the industry that would be hardest hit by emissions trading and whose operations would be most
severely hampered from the economic point of view. Emissions trading thus directly affects the future of
those 40 000 people. The problems entailed are not as serious in the other Member States.

How does the Commission believe that anxiety about rising unemployment in Finland and advocacy of
emissions trading can be combined to produce a coherent policy?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2002)

The Commission has not seen the studies referred to in the question, and cannot therefore provide a
detailed rebuttal of their results. However, the Commission is unaware of any objective analysis which
concludes that emissions trading will
lead to severe job losses compared to alternative methods of
achieving Finland’s commitments under the Kyoto Protocol and the Burden Sharing Agreement.

6.3.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 52 E/69

On the contrary, there is a wide range of analysis and studies which show that a system of tradable
emission allowances will achieve any specified reduction in emissions at lower cost to output and therefore
employment than alternative instruments. This is because it offers individual enterprises flexibility in
deciding how to achieve their emission targets. It is precisely for these reasons that the Commission has
proposed that an emissions trading scheme should form a major part of the Community’s action to
achieve its emission reductions under the Kyoto Protocol.

Accordingly, far from seeing any contradiction between concerns about unemployment and its proposal
for emissions trading, the Commission believes that concerns about the economic and social impact of
climate change policy are best addressed by using cost-effective instruments to implement that policy.
The scheme of emissions trading that the Commission has proposed is such a cost-effective instrument.

(2003/C 52 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1411/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 May 2002)

Subject: Use of languages at chat session by Commissioner Lamy

On 14 March 2002, Pascal Lamy, European Commissioner for Trade, held a chat session on the subject
‘Development: what is the role of trade?’, evidently as part of a series of such sessions on European policy.
Those attending the session were allowed to ask questions in English, French, German and Spanish.
The whole debate could be followed direct in English. For some time a full record of the debate has been
on the official website, Europa. This can be accessed only in English.

Why was it not possible for this chat session to be held in the 11 official languages of the Union? Will the
Commission in future ensure that it is possible for such sessions to be held in the 11 official languages?
If not, why not?

Can the Commission explain why English, German, Spanish and French were the languages ultimately
selected for the asking of questions?

Why was it ultimately decided to place only an English version of the debate on the website?

Does the Commission agree that this limited choice of languages constitutes a violation of Article 21,
Chapter III, of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2002)

The purpose of chat sessions is to have direct real time communication with citizens. The chat of
14 March 2002 on ‘Development: What is the role of trade’ was one of the most successful in terms of
traffic (1006 communications) and it was a serious, lively and constructive debate. The Commission is,
however, well aware of the problems connected with the present level of multilingualism for this type of
exercise. The fundamental reason why chat sessions are not always available in all the official languages of
the Union is the amount of resources needed.