WRITTEN QUESTION E-1954/02 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission. European Year of Remembrance and Reconciliation.
Date: 2002-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European cultural event, Second World War, commemoration

C 33 E/4

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

Tax competition is addressed in this Communication and more particularly in Section 2.3 which states that
the EU tax policy ‘must, as a priority, serve the interests of citizens and business wishing to avail
themselves of the four freedoms of the Internal Market (the free movement of persons, goods and capital,
and the freedom to provide services). It must, therefore, focus on the removal of tax obstacles to the
exercise of those four freedoms. Moreover, to the extent that tax systems are used as a tool for allocation,
redistribution, and stabilisation objectives, the tax consequences must be clear to the intended economic
agents. For both these reasons, tax systems must be made simpler and more transparent. In this context it
is important to recognise that, while harmful tax competition must be addressed both at EU level and at
the broader international level, notably within the OECD, and the State aid provisions of the Treaty must
be respected, some degree of tax competition within the EU may be inevitable and may contribute to
lower tax pressure.’

In this Communication it is also recognised that tax policy cannot be designed in isolation but should be
coherent and underpinning other Union policy objectives and in particular support the modernisation of
the so-called European social model. In this context, it is also up to the Council of Ministers to decide
which actions to take up as a priority. And, as the Communication also makes clear,
it remains the
Commission’s view that a move to qualified majority voting at least for some tax issues is indispensable.

Accordingly, the statements made on the subject of tax competition in the article in De Morgen are fully in
line with the Communication adopted by the Commission. But
this
Communication contains several levels of actions for the short, medium and long term.

it needs to be realised that

(1) COM(2001) 260.

(2004/C 33 E/004)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1954/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2002)

Subject: European Year of Remembrance and Reconciliation

What consideration is the Commission giving to whether it would be desirable to designate 2005 as the
European Year of Remembrance and Reconciliation in order to positively mark the 60th anniversary of the
end of the Second World War?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(7 October 2002)

The Commission has given careful consideration to the suggestion that 2005 should be designated as the
‘European Year of Remembrance and Reconciliation’.

It is clearly desirable that the 60th anniversary of the end of the Second World War (cid:1) the end of war
within the boundaries of our Union (cid:1) should be marked in a positive way. The Commission believes,
however, that the process of enlargement including the welcoming of new Members of the Parliament and
new Members of the Commission is its most tangible demonstration of reconciliation. It is, of course,
precisely because it remembers the First and Second World Wars and the sacrifices made by its fellow
Europeans that the Commission is determined to ensure the peace, security and stability of an enlarged
Union.

Whilst the Commission is not proposing to designate 2005 as the European Year of Remembrance and
it is considering the possibility of focusing
Reconciliation as suggested by the Honourable Member,
activities on 9 May 2005 on these specific themes. This would be an effective means of informing citizens
of the very essence of the Union, of the values on which the Union was founded and which continue to
guide the aims and objectives of the enlarged Union. The celebration of the peaceful enlarged Union of
2005 would be fitting act of remembrance.