WRITTEN QUESTION P-1952/02 by Bernd Posselt (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU flag.
Date: 2002-06-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU sponsorship, European symbol, consumer society, image, promotion of the European idea, work of art

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/179

The Commission has contacted STUK (Mrs Salomaa, Research Director) and the Coordinator of the Reflex
project, Professor Adlkofer of the VERUM Foundation in order to receive clarification on this issue and the
following are the facts:

The study was published in a scientific journal (Differention) two months ago. It is an in vitro study
performed with cell cultures. The cell lines used were human endothelial cells (blood vessel cells). When
these cells were exposed in vitro to mobile phone radiation, changes in phophorylation and expression of
several proteins was observed. These proteins included the heat shock protein hsp27. However, these
biochemical changes were small and reversible (the effect disappeared about one hour after the exposure
ceased).

This study has two points that are new and interesting: 1) the cells react to mobile phone radiation and
show a response, and 2) this effect is non-thermal (there was no change in cell culture temperature, it
occurs already at 2 SAR level). However, cells do respond to a variety of environmental and endogenous
stimuli, including heat, pH and hormones. At the moment it is not possible even to say whether the
observed effect is harmful or not.

The future aim of this research group is to study, whether such changes could cause any negative health
effects and therefore they propose a hypothesis on the potential effect on the brain-blood barrier, as they
were indeed studying blood vessel cells. The blood-brain barrier acts as a filter between blood circulation
and brain, protecting brain from a range of substances, like toxins and some proteins. This is just a
hypothesis for future research (cid:1) nothing so far has been proven.

As regards the protection of health, the Commission in accordance with the latest opinion of the Scientific
Committee on Toxicology, Ecotoxicology and the Environment (SCTEE), which has reaffirmed in its
opinion published in November 2001 the validity of the limits of the 12th July Council Recommendation,
does not intend to take additional measures for the time being. Nevertheless, the Commission and the
SCTEE will regularly keep the matter under review.

(2002/C 309 E/207)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1952/02

by Bernd Posselt (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 June 2002)

Subject: EU flag

According to reports in the press, the Commission is planning to scrap the time-tested EU flag which was
introduced on a proposal from the European Parliament, namely twelve gold stars on a blue background,
and replace it with a new design, for instance by the architect Rem Koolhaas. Is this true, or can the
Commission give an assurance that the time-tested and recognised flag of Europe will be retained?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2002)

In contrast to what has been widely reported in the press, the Commission has no plans to propose the
replacement of the existing European emblem.

The Prime Minister of Belgium, Guy Verhofstadt, and the President of the Commission, Romano Prodi,
were patrons in 2001 of a project on ‘Brussels, capital of Europe’ and asked a group of intellectuals to
discuss the needs and functions of the European capital and how Brussels could best express them.

C 309 E/180

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

The group proposed a number of ideas. One of the recommendations contained in the final report is that
the communication about Europe should be improved and made more attractive in order to be understood
and shared by citizens. The barcode design, reproduced in some media, is the work of a distinguished
Dutch architect and designer, Rem Koolhaas, and was intended to be one example of how this could be
realised. It was not, however, proposed to replace the Union flag.

The project ‘Brussels, capital of Europe’ did not have any formal Community status and the Commission
has no intention to propose a new emblem.

(2002/C 309 E/208)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1964/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(28 June 2002)

Subject: Problems concerning aid to the Galician surface fleet during biological pauses

According to recent media reports (e.g. in the 15 May 2002 issue of the newspaper ‘La Voz de Galicia’),
the Commission now appears unwilling (cid:1) thus departing from its practice in earlier years (cid:1) to grant the
Galician regional government (the Xunta) the funding under the FIFG which is needed to compensate
fishermen and vessel owners in the surface fleet for the biological pause which that fleet had to observe in
March.

In view of the fragile state of the sardine stocks, it has been necessary to adopt exceptional measures for
the Galician fleet. These measures are set out in a three-year recovery plan for the species.

The above-mentioned press report also states, citing the Xunta as a source, that the Commission appears
unwilling to grant compensatory aid for this year’s biological pause (the third and last provided for under
the plan), and that it has written to the regional administration asking for more details concerning the
pause.

The numerous fishermen and vessel owners affected by this development now wish the Commission to
provide reliable information.

Does the Commission intend to grant aid under the FIFG in respect of this fleet’s biological pause for
2002?

Can the Commission explain the reasons for the problems which have arisen over the granting of aid for
this year? Can it explain why, having granted such aid for the last two years, it now appears unwilling to
do so for this year?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2002)

A recovery plan for sardines to be part-financed by the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance was
notified to the Commission by the Spanish authorities in March 2002. The dossier is currently being
studied by the Commission in accordance with the rules of procedure applying to aid granted to the sector
by the Member States.

Following that notification and an initial scrutiny of the plan, a request for additional information was
made to the Spanish authorities in April 2002. That information was forwarded to the Commission in
mid-June. Since the plan is a recovery plan for the resource, the Commission will be submitting the
information transmitted by the Spanish authorities to the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee
for Fisheries for its opinion, in accordance with Article 16(1)(c) of Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999
of 17 December 1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural
assistance in the fisheries sector (1).

The information in question will be submitted to the Scientific Committee in the course of July 2002, and
the Commission will take a decision as soon as it has received the Scientific Committee’s opinion.

(1) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999.