WRITTEN QUESTION E-2103/02 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Survival of the Ancien Régime in Portuguese.
Date: 2002-07-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Portugal, linguistics, official document, official language, terminology

C 161 E/14

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

(2003/C 161 E/014)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2103/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(16 July 2002)

Subject: Survival of the ‘Ancien Régime’ in Portuguese

In its reply E-1616/02 (1), the Commission told me that ‘any negative connotations associated with the
term (governança) dated back to the “Ancien Régime” and, consequently, had since become obsolete’.

I should like to point out that over and above the dictionaries cited and my personal impressions, there are
various other examples of the persistence of these ‘Ancien Régime’ connotations.

The expression ‘gouvernance’ was translated by the Commission as ‘governação’ in its ‘White Paper on
European Governance (cid:1) Enhancing Democracy in the European Union’ (2), and even in July of last year, it
was translated as ‘boa governação’ in the Commission’s electronic dictionary. The Council’s terminological
database provides a further example of this survival of the ‘Ancien Régime’ connotations of ‘governação’,
since it also uses the term ‘governação’ and the example it provides concerns one of the working parties of
the Convention on Europe’s future.

This being so, am I right in thinking that the Commission does not deem it more appropriate to initiate a
fresh discussion between its linguists and terminologists, possibly taking account of the opinions of the
various supporters of the ‘Ancien Régime’ cited above, before trying to convince those responsible for
Portuguese dictionaries to change the meaning of the term ‘governança’?

(1) OJ C 92 E, 17.4.2003, p. 71.
(2) SEC(2000) 1547/7 final, 11.10.2000.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2002)

the document was to pay specific attention to questions of

In October 2000, the Commission adopted its Work Programme for the preparation of the White Paper
on European Governance. This internal document (1), to which the Honourable Member refers, is not the
White Paper itself (2), but merely a preparatory document designed to bring together the Governance Team
and the various interservice groups working with it under a single organisational umbrella. One of the
particular aims of
translation and
communication in order to examine in depth possible difficulties with the term ‘governance’ which may
arise in the Union’s languages. This examination was carried out with great care and it has led, in certain
cases, to the initial choice of terms in translations being modified. In particular, early translations in
Portuguese of ‘governance’, such as the term ‘governação’, have been changed to the one used in the White
Paper itself. As explained in the previous answer given by the Commission to the Honourable Member’s
previous question (3), the final choice deliberately avoided terms which may be confused with ‘government’
or ‘governmental activity.’

The Commission supports initiatives to foster dialogue between its translators and terminologists and their
counterparts in the other Institutions. One of these initiatives is the recent decision by the Commission
Translation Service to set up the inter-institutional codecision database (eCODB) which enables
Commission translators to forward to their colleagues in both the Council and the Parliament the reasons
for their terminological choices and to obtain their feedback. The Commission’s Translation Service
multilingual study group which translated the term ‘governance’ worked closely with the Governance Team
with a specific mandate. It was therefore not possible at that stage to enlarge the multilingual group to
include the other Institutions.

No attempt was made to ‘convince those responsible for Portuguese dictionaries to change the meaning of
the term “governança” ’. The contacts made, which the Commission mentioned in its previous answer,
were also made with the Instituto de Lexicologia e Lexicografia, Academia das Ciências de Lisboa, to
ascertain the reasons why a negative connotation should persist around the term ‘governança’ in some
dictionaries’ entries and to elicit their opinion as to its new proposed meaning.

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/15

As the Honourable Member may be aware, Commission translators in Portuguese and other languages are,
from time to time, called upon to establish terminology without recourse to national bodies or institutions
which would be able to settle such linguistic matters in a consensual, and final manner. In this case, every
effort was made to obtain a maximum clarity and accuracy of terminology after seeking the advice of
recognised Portuguese experts.

(1) SEC(2000) 1547/7 final.
(2) COM(2001) 428 final, OJ C 287, 12.10.2001.
(3) Written Question E-1616/02.

(2003/C 161 E/015)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2119/02

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 July 2002)

Subject: Identity checks at Malpensa airport

At Malpensa airport in the last few days the State police have reintroduced controls in addition to the
procedures for checking identity already introduced by the airlines, even for the Schengen area. The
controls make no distinction between Schengen and other passengers and consist in people being
physically stopped and each individual passport etc being checked, as well as the boarding card. Have the
European authorities been notified about this ‘suspension’ of the Schengen Agreements?

Supplementary answer
by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2003)

Article 2(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement, which has been incorporated into
European Union law, provides that internal borders may be crossed at any point without checks on
persons being carried out purely on the ground that an internal border has been crossed.

Article 2(2) provides that checks may be reintroduced for a limited period at internal borders where there
is a threat to the public policy or national security of a Member State.

Article 2(3) provides that abolition of checks on persons at internal borders must not affect the exercise of
including
police powers under national
therefore at airports.

law throughout the territory of the Member State concerned,

According to the information received from the Italian authorities, they have not invoked the safeguard
clause under Article 2(2) but have carried out controls under Article 2(3).

Provided that the controls to which the Honourable Member’s question refers are aimed at checking
travellers’ boarding cards against their identity documents at various places in the airport, such as metal
detector checkpoints and departure gates,
following the terrorist attacks of
11 September 2001, they may be considered as controls carried out in accordance with Article 2(3).

security reasons

for

(2003/C 161 E/016)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2178/02

by Jan Wiersma (PSE) to the Commission

(18 July 2002)

Subject: Fraud involving bank cards in the Netherlands

On 17 November 1998 the European Parliament adopted a resolution (1) urging the Commission to adopt
legislation or other measures to make the use of bank and credit cards much more secure.