WRITTEN QUESTION E-0652/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Conflict between the large increase in the price of residence permits in the Netherlands and promotion of freedom of establishment in the EU.
Date: 2003-03-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, Netherlands, free movement of persons, price increase, residence permit, right of establishment

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/103

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 2003)

Respect for fundamental rights is a basic principle of the legal order of the Union and its Member States.

Where a person feels that his fundamental rights have been infringed, the fact that he can bring the matter
before the European Court of Human Rights after exhausting all domestic judicial remedies guarantees him
legal protection as a last resort.

Finally, it should be noted that the Council adopted on 19 December 2002 its decision 2003/48/JHA on
the implementation of specific measures for police and judicial cooperation to combat terrorism in
accordance with Article 4 of Common Position 2001/931/CFS (1) 1.

(1) OJ L 16, 22.1.2003.

(2004/C 11 E/103)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0652/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Subject: Conflict between the large increase in the price of residence permits in the Netherlands and

promotion of freedom of establishment in the EU

1.
Is the Commission aware that the Immigration and Naturalisation Service in the Netherlands raised
the price of applying for a residence permit by several hundred euro both in August 2000 and at the
beginning of 2003, with the result that migrants from other Member States and from third countries living
in the Netherlands now have to pay EUR 890 for an open-ended residence permit, instead of, initially,
EUR 227 and, later, EUR 539, while the price of temporary permits has risen from EUR 56 to 430 for
students, workers and new arrivals from third countries, while those for EU nationals cost EUR 28?

2.
Is the Commission also aware that this increase is made particularly swingeing by the fact that an
extension of a permit that expires as of 1 March 2003 is no longer free of charge, but will cost EUR 285,
people who do not pay the new high prices are expelled from the country (cid:1) and there are no
arrangements to help people with low incomes and large families -, and migrants whose application for a
residence permit is rejected do not have their money refunded?

3.
How do the amounts referred to in point 1 compare with those that people in comparable situations
have to pay for similar permits in other EU Member States? Which countries issue such permits free of
charge?

4. What impact does the Commission expect these measures to have on the possibility for foreigners to
work and study in the Netherlands?

5.
Are these prices compatible with the European Union’s policy of promoting freedom of establish-
ment for nationals of one Member State in another and of taking increasing account of the situation of
third-country nationals who have been resident here for a long time? Does the Commission see any way of
doing away with or lowering these prices?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(9 April 2003)

The Honourable Member’s question relates to the increase in the price of residence permits in the
Netherlands.

The Commission was aware that the costs of issuing and renewing residence permits for third-country
nationals had increased.

C 11 E/104

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

According to the information available to the Commission, the price of issuing and renewing residence
permits of third-country nationals is not so high in the other Member States, regardless of the reasons for
which they are residing.

With regard to Union citizens, the Commission confirms, following discussion with the Dutch authorities,
that the Dutch circular on the 2000 foreigners act has been altered and that the cost of temporary
residence permits (under one year or under five years) for Union citizens has increased from EUR 15,88 to
EUR 28. A Union citizen may request a residence permit for an indefinite duration.

Community legislation regarding the right of Community nationals to move and reside freely stipulates
that residence permits shall be issued free of charge or against payment of a sum not exceeding any
charges nationals are required to pay to be issued with an identity card. The Commission has checked that
the increase in the price of residence permits for Community nationals and members of their family was
almost identical to that of identity cards for nationals which cost EUR 28,77. The increase is therefore non-
discriminatory in relation to residence permits for nationals and is in accordance with Community law.

As far as the common immigration policy is concerned, the proposal for the right to family reunification
on which the Council recently reached political agreement subject to Parliament’s opinion, does not
stipulate what the cost of a residence permit should be for family members who are third-country
nationals. However, this proposal lists briefly the grounds on which the residence permits of these family
members may be withdrawn or not renewed. Within this context, the fact that a person is unable to pay
the cost of his or her residence permit is not considered sufficient reason to withdraw his or her residence
permit.

Specific provisions have been introduced regarding the cost of residence permits in other Commission
proposals for directives concerning the entry and residence of third-country nationals for the purposes of
paid employment or self-employed economic activities (1), studies, vocational
training or voluntary
service (2) and in the proposal concerning the status of long-term residents (3). It is proposed that these be
issued free of charge or against payment of a sum not exceeding any charges nationals are required to pay
to be issued with an identity card, or that the level of charges should not exceed the administrative costs
incurred. These proposals are nevertheless still being negotiated in the Council and are not yet positive
law.

(1) OJ C 332 E, 27.11.2001.
(2) OJ C 45 E, 25.2.2003.
(3) OJ C 240 E, 28.8.2001.

(2004/C 11 E/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0663/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 March 2003)

Subject: Initiation of proceedings before the European Court of Justice in respect of State aid for Olympic

Airways

The Commission representative has announced that the Commission will shortly be initiating proceedings
against Greece before the Court of Justice, because Olympic Airways (OA) is refusing to comply with the
decision providing for the reimbursement of State aid amounting to EUR 194 million. The Legal Council
of State argues in its opinion that the State is only obliged to pay the sum of EUR 41 million, since this is
the precise sum specified in the judgement.

1.

How can the difference of EUR 153 million be accounted for?

2.
Is it true that the same representative has threatened OA, saying that the Commission would re-open
the dossier on State aid since 1994 if the company appealed to the Court of Justice about this judgement?
If so, is this not tantamount to abolishing the basic right of Member States to judicial protection when
their rights are infringed by decisions by the EU institutions?