WRITTEN QUESTION E-3182/02 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Access to Kaliningrad.
Date: 2002-11-07
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Russia, accession to the European Union, harbour installation, maritime transport, rail transport, territorial enclave

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/33

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 2002)

The Commission, in meetings with Palestinian Authority representatives but also in written communi-
cations to President Arafat has made its view point clear that violence and terror must end and that the
Palestinian Authority, as legitimate governing body in the Palestinian territories, must fight terrorism. In the
same fashion the European Council and the General Affairs Council raised this issue on numerous
occasions, e.g. declarations of Laeken (14 & 15 December 2001) and Seville (21 & 22 June 2002).

The Commission has also drawn attention to the need for the Palestinian Authority to address the problem
of incitement to violence.

Equally, the Commission has expressed its regret that periods of relative calm, like at the end of last year
and in July/August 2002 have not been seized as opportunities in finding a negotiationed solution on the
principle of two states. It is the Commission’s view that matters relating to security must be addressed at
the same time as political and economic aspects in order to allow the political process to move forward.

(2004/C 11 E/033)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3182/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 November 2002)

Subject: Access to Kaliningrad

Can the Commission confirm that the European Union is beginning to move towards the idea of
subsidising non-stop sealed trains designed to link Kaliningrad to mainland Russia as a solution to the
problems of access whilst respecting the security concerns of Poland and Lithuania?

Has the Commission discussed with the Russian government the possibility of building civilian as opposed
to military port facilities on Kaliningrad’s Baltic coast with a view to improving maritime links between
Kaliningrad and ports in mainland Russia, and would this be a project that the European Union might be
prepared to subsidise?

Finally, is the Commission aware of any plans to change the name of the exclave, which is named after the
first President of the Soviet Union, and, if so, does the Commission believe that this holds any significance
for its future political status?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(29 November 2002)

The Commission recalls the General Affairs and External Relations Council
(GAERC) conclusions of
30 September 2002 and 22 October 2002, which were confirmed by the Brussels European Council on
25 October 2002.

These Council conclusions clearly state that, while the Union should explore, in full cooperation with the
Republic of Lithuania, the feasibility of visa-free travel by non-stop train for Russian citizens travelling
between the Kaliningrad region and the rest of Russia, any eventual decision on such a scheme:

could only be taken by an enlarged Union, on the basis of a thorough evaluation of the political and
legal aspects and once the technical obstacles have been overcome.

The GAERC conclusions of 22 October 2002 further agree that:

A decision to launch a feasibility study in 2003 by independent consultants will be taken by the
Union with the agreement of Lithuania when there is agreement with Lithuania on the Terms of
Reference for the study.

C 11 E/34

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

In this context, it is clear that neither the technical, political nor legal feasibility of such trains has been
established. The Commission has therefore made no proposal, nor the Council discussed, the prospects for
Union subsidies for any mode of transport connecting Kaliningrad with mainland Russia.

No discussions have taken place with Russia on the conversion for civil purposes of military port facilities.
Via the Tacis technical assistance programme, the Union is, however, providing on-going assistance for the
development of the Kaliningrad Port in a EUR 998 000 project aimed at strengthening its competitiveness
by attracting national and foreign investments.

The Commission is unaware of any plans to change the name of the Kaliningrad Oblast.

(2004/C 11 E/034)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3190/02

by Armando Cossutta (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 November 2002)

Subject: TotalFina-Elf and forced labour

According to the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), certain multinational
companies, including TotalFina-Elf, have used forced labour in Burma. According to a 350-page report
drawn up by ICFTU, in 2002 this French company paid the ruling military junta in Burma for the use of
civilians removed by force from their villages for the construction of roads and other associated
the Yadana gas pipeline. TotalFina-Elf denies any
infrastructure connected with the completion of
involvement in the incidents referred to, but ICTFU is convinced that, unfortunately, there is a genuine link
between investment by certain multinationals in Burma and the increasing use of forced labour.

1.

Is the Commission aware of these instances of exploitation?

Does the Commission agree that it is unacceptable for European companies to be involved in

2.
situations of this kind?

3. What measures does the Commission intend to take to protect the most fundamental human rights
from abuse by European companies operating outside Union territory?

Does the Commission agree that this question involves not only an affront to human dignity, but

4.
also the infringement of the rules on fair competition?

5. Would it not be appropriate to impose a tax on all goods that Community undertakings produce
outside the Union, thus bypassing the requirements of European social legislation?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 2002)

The Honourable Member will understand that the Commission is not in a position to comment on a legal
case which currently is under investigation in one of the Member States.

in
The Union has taken a number of measures, set out in its Common Position on Burma/Myanmar,
response to the political situation in the country, as well as to widespread human rights abuses, including
forced labour.

The Common Position was first adopted in 1996 and has been strengthened on a number of occasions
since. It imposes an arms embargo, as well as a ban on the export of any equipment that might be used
for internal repression or terrorism, and suspends defence co-operation and all bilateral aid other than
strictly humanitarian assistance. High level Government visits to Burma/Myanmar are also suspended and
there is a ban on the granting of visas for entry into or transit through the Union to members of the
military regime, members of the government, senior military and security officers and their families, as