WRITTEN QUESTION E-0333/03 by Luigi Cocilovo (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Conclusion of an association agreement between the European Union and the Principality of Monaco.
Date: 2003-02-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Union, Italy, Monaco, association agreement, bilateral agreement, frontier worker, social security

C 161 E/210

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 2003)

Only the Brussels-based organisation Church & Society Commission, which provides the secretariat for
A Soul for Europe covering the main faiths (Christian, Muslim and Jewish) as well as humanism, received
financial assistance for activities involving the coordination and representation of religious organisations at
European level during the period 2000-2002. This was a result of ‘earmarking’ by Parliament for budget
heading A-3021. The grant amounts awarded in 2000, 2001 and 2002 were EUR 44 000, EUR 41 000 and
EUR 39 780 respectively.

Heading A-3024 of the Union’s general budget makes provision for grants for specific projects organised
by associations and federations of European interest.

This budget heading was allocated an identical amount for each of the three years 2000, 2001 and 2002,
namely EUR 1 260 000 per year.

This appropriation was exclusively intended to support activities and projects with a European focus as
well as activities connected with reflection at European level on the ethical and spiritual foundations of the
building of Europe.

Lists of beneficiaries during the three years in question are being sent directly to the Honourable Member
and to the General Secretariat of Parliament.

(2003/C 161 E/219)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0333/03

by Luigi Cocilovo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 February 2003)

Subject: Conclusion of an association agreement between the European Union and the Principality of

Monaco

The situation of EU citizens who live in Italy and work in Monaco is rendered very difficult and
complicated by the existing social security agreement between the two countries.

The real root of the problem is the absence of any agreement on social security between the European
Union and the Principality of Monaco, which prevents the application of the provisions for coordination
contained in Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 (1).

Does the Commission intend to propose the conclusion of an association agreement between the European
Union and the Principality of Monaco, which would include agreements on the free movement of persons
and social security, so as to enable the situation of EU citizens in Monaco to be covered by the relevant
Community provisions?

(1) OJ L 149, 5.7.1971, p. 2.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2003)

While the Principality of Monaco is a third country outside the European Union, it is covered by several
Community policies because of its privileged relationship with France. For example, Monaco is part of the
territory of the European Community’s customs union and has the right to coin and print euros.

It should be noted that in the area of social security each Member State may conclude a bilateral
agreement with a third country. Italy took this option by concluding a general social security agreement
with Monaco.

However, the Commission is aware that the current situation is causing an increasing number of problems,
not only for European citizens working in the country but also, for example, for tourists requiring
emergency health care.

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/211

For the above reasons, the Commission is currently investigating the possibility of strengthening relations
between the Community and the Principality of Monaco within a legal framework specially suited to the
nature of those matters which are of common interest.

(2003/C 161 E/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0344/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

Subject: Women’s organisations (cid:1) budget heading A-3046

(10 February 2003)

In 2002, at the European Parliament’s instigation, a new budget heading A-3046 was created and was
allocated annual funding of EUR 300 000, intended to cover ‘grants to women’s organisations not covered
by the European Women’s Lobby’. An identical entry appears in the 2003 budget which has now been
adopted.

Since the budget heading in question is a new one, would the Commission answer the following
questions?

In 2002, which women’s organisations applied for funding under budget heading A-3046? Which of them
were granted subsidies under that heading and how much money did they receive? Which had their
applications rejected? What were the grounds for either accepting or rejecting applications? What lessons
has the Commission drawn from budget heading A-3046’s first year (2002) of operation?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(21 March 2003)

the Commission launched an open call

Under new budget heading A-3046 entitled ‘Women’s Organisations’ to which the Honourable Member
refers,
for proposals aimed at a consortium of women’s
organisations not covered by the European Women’s Lobby, which assist women victims of trafficking
across Europe. Such an initiative would complement the range of instruments currently available in the
Union for combating trafficking, by developing an additional aspect, i.e. assistance on the ground for the
female victims of trafficking.

The Commission published the text of the open call for proposals (VP/2002/014) and the guidelines for
applicants on the Gender Equality Unit’s website (1) in mid July 2002 and the deadline for the submission
of proposals was set for 16 September 2002.

Two proposals were received in response to the call. A project submitted by Associazione IRENE (a non-
governmental organisation (NGO) representing an Italian network of established NGOs) aiming to co-
ordinate the action of local women’s associations from Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Spain, France, Italy and
Norway, which are active in the field of providing support and assistance to victims of trafficking, was
selected for funding.

The main grounds for such a decision were related to transnationality and financial status of the project
proposals evaluated.

As for the lessons drawn from the first year of operation of budget heading A-3046, the Commission
considers that the response to its initiative has been positive and, therefore, intends to use the identical
heading in the 2003 budget for the same type of activities.

(1) http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/equ_opp/index_en.htm.