WRITTEN QUESTION E-1418/03 by Maria Carrilho (PSE) to the Commission. Revision of the Europe-Asia strategic framework.
Date: 2003-04-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Asia, EU policy, EU relations, South-East Asia, international relations

C 78 E/368

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

4. What impact does the Commission foresee if, after the first five successful parties in a court action,
thousands of other tax evaders also succeed in having their claims for compensation upheld in court? Will
that result in increasing pressure on the governments of the Member States in which banking secrecy still
operates to tighten up measures to combat and punish the provision of information to other Member
States?

5.
Does the Commission expect that actions brought by tax evaders against banks may become an
appropriate method whereby banks which claim that the accounts held with them may remain secret are
saddled with costs that are so heavy that they would have to give up banking secrecy once and for all on
the grounds of self-preservation?

In what way can these disputes inside the EU be terminated when tax evasion is not only not

6.
punished but actually rewarded and banks are given an incentive to withhold tax revenues?

Source: the edition dated 3 April 2003 of ‘de Volkskrant’ a Dutch newspaper.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(27 May 2003)

The Commission is aware of the decision of the Luxembourg Court to which the Honourable Member
refers. National judicial proceedings and decisions of independent national judicial authorities in this area
belong to the internal competencies of Member States. The Commission does not wish to speculate on the
possible consequences of a particular national court decision for other similar cases or indeed for the
legislation of the Member State concerned.

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that the problem of tax fraud and evasion gives
cause for concern. The Commission is convinced that its policy which aims at increased co-operation and
exchange of information between the competent authorities of Member States can assist Member States in
tackling this problem more effectively. In recent years, the Commission has made a number of proposals
to improve the administrative assistance between Member States in the area of direct and indirect taxes.

In July 2001 the Commission presented a proposal for a Directive (1) on taxation of savings income which
provides for the automatic exchange of information between tax authorities with respect to interest paid to
individuals resident in other Member States. Although this proposal provides for transitional arrangements
for Belgium, Luxembourg and Austria, all Member States will ultimately be expected to participate in the
automatic exchange of information. The discussions on this proposal are at an advanced stage and the
Commission hopes that it will be adopted shortly. The Commission is convinced that this Directive will
enable Member States to fight cross-border tax evasion more effectively.

(1) Proposal for a Council Directive to ensure effective taxation of savings income in the form of interest payments

within the Community, OJ C 270 E, 25.9.2001.

(2004/C 78 E/0388)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1418/03

by Maria Carrilho (PSE) to the Commission

(23 April 2003)

Subject: Revision of the Europe-Asia strategic framework

It is a well-known fact that the deepening of relations between the European Union and Asia is of major
importance to both parties. These relations have been stepped up, especially since the mid-1990s, through
structures and fora, such as ASEAN-EC/EU meetings (which began in 70s), ASEM, the EU’s participation in
the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF), as well as the EU-China, EU-India, EU-Japan and, more recently,
EU-Korea summits. To give European action more coherence, the Commission published a communication

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/369

in 1994, entitled ‘Towards a new strategy for Asia’. This framework was reviewed in 2001, even before the
events of 11 September, resulting in the Commission communication on ‘Europe and Asia: A strategic
framework for enhanced partnerships’ (1). The European Parliament, for its part, adopted a resolution on
5 September 2002, endorsing much of the Commission communication, whose broad lines continued to
be adequate.

However, following major events such as those of 11 September 2001 and the war in Iraq, with all their
implications, would the Commission not consider it appropriate to bring the revision scheduled for 2004
forward to the second half of 2003?

(1) COM(2001) 469.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 2003)

The Commission shares the view expressed by the Honourable Member on the importance of deepening
relations between the Union and Asia. Accordingly, it has contributed to enhancing these relations through
various exchanges and fora as stated by the Honourable Member.

The Commission likewise acknowledges the changes resulting from the events of 11 September 2001 that
happened only a few days after the publication of the Communication ‘Europe and Asia: A Strategic
Framework for Enhanced Partnerships’.

However, the six general principles set out in this Communication on the Asia Strategy which were
endorsed in the Council Decision of 27 December 2001 (1), remain valid and have also covered the priority
the Resolution of Parliament of
subsequently given by the Union to Afghanistan. Furthermore,
5 September 2002 welcomed the Commission’s Asia Strategy and the consistent emphasis it attached to
the Union’s relations with Asia. This is also reflected in the Commission’s current work in co-operation
with its delegations in the region in monitoring the results of the actions proposed in the strategy paper.
First indications from this exercise suggest positive results.

In addition to this monitoring of the Asia Strategy of 2001, the Commission is now in the process of
preparing a Communication on a Strategy for Southeast Asia, which will certainly take account of recent
developments. The cross-fertilisation of the monitoring and the work on the new Southeast Asia Strategy
will then greatly contribute to the review of the overall Asia Strategy and allow the Commission to
maintain its calendar for a thorough preparation of its update in 2004.

(1) OJ L 344, 28.12.2001.

(2004/C 78 E/0389)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1451/03

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Cooperation with the Slovak Institute of Metrology

(28 April 2003)

There is evidence which would appear to point to significant shortcomings in terms of the quality of
research results, health protection and also of staff at the Slovak Institute of Metrology (SMU) in Karlova
Ves.

Such concerns have been voiced, ‘inter alia’, by the national institute of health of the Slovak Republic and,
following a petition from a citizen, by the committee on health of the Slovak parliament (in its 65th
session of 11 July 2002), as well as by Mr Gabris of the dosimetry laboratory of the Austrian federal office
of metrology (BEV) in Seibersdorf.

In particular, serious irregularities have been reported in connection with the project for the building of
the cyclotron centre. The Euromet 526 project carried out in cooperation with the Physikalisch-Technische
Bundesanstalt (PTB) in Braunschweig, Germany was so seriously affected that the SMU’s involvement in the
project had to be terminated.