WRITTEN QUESTION E-1517/03 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. Economic Partnership Agreements.
Date: 2003-05-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: ACP countries, ACP-EU Joint Assembly, EU relations, assistance in training, cooperation agreement (EU), economic cooperation, information policy, non-governmental organisation

C 78 E/370

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

1. What financial and other EU support does the Slovak Institute of Metrology receive/has it received
overall and within the framework of Euromet?

2.
In what specific ways, and by whom, has the use of resources and research, measurements and
equipment (for example apparatus, quality of staff employed, health protection) been monitored and
examined?

3. What is the Commission’s view of the above serious concerns and criticisms expressed regarding
research and management at the Slovak Office of Standards, Metrology and Testing (UNMS SR) and the
SMU?

4. What conclusions does the Commission intend to draw with regard to further cooperation?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2003)

The cyclotron and Euromet 526 projects referred to in the question of the Honourable Member have not
been supported by Community Funds. The Slovak Institute of Metrology (SMU) was, however, a
beneficiary of a 1999 PHARE Twinning project aimed at
improving the overall administrative
infrastructure in the internal market area. In particular, the SMU received a one-off assistance supporting
the introduction of a quality management system meeting ISO 9001-2000. This was provided primarily
through the provision of expert advice from Member State experts. A total of EUR 179 245 was budgeted
for the provision of this support to the SMU. In September 2002, the main objective of this assistance was
met as the SMU received ISO 9001-2000 accreditation.

SMU is also a beneficiary of three research projects, within the specific research programme ‘Competitive
and sustainable growth’ of the Community’s 5th Framework Programme for Research and Technological
Development. More information on these projects is available on the Cordis data base at
(http://
www.cordis.lu/growth/src/projects.htm).

In the course of the Commission’s monitoring of Slovakia’s preparations for accession and the ability to
fulfil the requirements of the ‘acquis’, the Commission has generally found the Slovak Office of Standards,
Metrology and Testing (UNMS) to be functioning well, although further improvements could be made. In
view in particular of the Comprehensive Monitoring Report that the Commission will produce this
Autumn on the acceding countries preparation for accession, the Commission particularly welcomes
hearing the views of all stakeholders in order that these can be taken into account. The Commission will
continue to co-operate with the Slovak bodies concerned to identify shortcomings, including any of the
nature mentioned by the Honourable Member, and in order to support efforts aimed at
further
improvements.

(2004/C 78 E/0390)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1517/03

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(6 May 2003)

Subject: Economic Partnership Agreements

Information and training sessions on how to facilitate non-state actors’ participation in dialogue on EPAs
are being prepared for EU Delegations. Would the Commission agree that, as ACP Parliaments should be
kept informed on such issues and be encouraged to scrutinise the process, these training sessions should
also be extended to ACP Parliaments?

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/371

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(26 May 2003)

The Commission has repeatedly stressed that Economic Partnership Agreements (EPA) negotiations will
need to be accompanied by comprehensive consultations with ‘non-state actors’ in both the Union and
African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States. This process has already started, but communication and
consultations in the ACP States will be enhanced as soon as negotiations on the regional level have started.
Commission Delegations will have an important role to play in this context.

The target groups of these activities will vary among countries and regions, and should include business
and employer associations,
farmers associations, consumer groups, non governmental
organisations (NGOs), etc. The involvement of trade experts in ACP universities and research institutions
will be important as well, especially also in the context of the Sustainability Impact Assessment.

trade unions,

ACP parliaments, and notably those parliamentarians who focus in their work on trade and regional
integration, should be fully associated with this process and will have the opportunity to form part of
informal contact groups the Commission is going to establish on a regional basis. Indeed, parliamentarians
should be in the best position to contribute to the negotiations, as they can make use of official ACP
channels, the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly and the informal consultation networks which will be
established.

The Parliament, and first of all the European members of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly, could
be very helpful in identifying appropriate ACP parliamentarians for this purpose. First contacts on this
have been made and the Commission would welcome close co-operation in this regard.

(2004/C 78 E/0391)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1526/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 May 2003)

Subject: Failure to remove blue and brown asbestos from contaminated flats, workshops and other

buildings in EU accession State Hungary

1.
Is the Commission aware that at least 400 000 square metres of sprayed asbestos containing the
most carcinogenic blue asbestos were used in the building of large estates of flats in Hungary in the
1960’s, 1970’s and 1980’s and that particles of this material are released after between 10 and 15 years, as
a result of which they spread inside and outside the blocks of flats and that it would cost between EUR 65
and 130 million to clean up the contamination?

2.
Is the Commission also aware that these flats, which were initially rented out to residents by the
State, were sold to the occupants before it became known in Hungary that a clean-up operation is required
in the interests of both the survival of the residents and the obligation to comply with the Community
‘acquis’ but that the removal of one square metre of asbestos costs between EUR 160 and 190, which is
more than a resident’s average weekly salary?

3.
Can the Commission confirm that the Hungarian government has no financial resources available or
earmarked for making a start on the removal of these large quantities of asbestos from residential buildings
and that it was only in March 2003 that an investigation began into the scale of the problem and the
implications for public health?

Is brown asbestos still being used in Hungary in garden sheds, hen houses, cellars and garages, partly

4.
because of the lack of adequate information?