WRITTEN QUESTION E-1811/03 by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Erasmus World programme.
Date: 2003-06-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Catalonia, EU programme, European language, higher education, mother tongue, multilingualism

C 11 E/230

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

15.1.2004

All of these details have been set out in full in answers to various Parliamentary Questions since autumn
2002.

As the Honourable Member is aware, the salaries and allowances of Members of the Commission are
public knowledge and so are the conditions applying to the weighted transfer system. The Commission has
always ensured that salaries are paid, and weighted transfers made, in strict conformity with the relevant
rules, including those relating to limits. The Commission does not, however, consider that there is any
legitimate public interest to be served in disclosing details of how individual Members of the Commission,
the Court of Justice or the Court of Auditors organise their personal financial affairs in relation to
arrangements which they have been, and are, legally entitled to use.

(2004/C 11 E/258)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1811/03

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject: Erasmus World programme

The Council of the European Union recently reached a political agreement concerning the implementation
of the Erasmus World programme. The aim of this programme is to create a quality framework with a
view to attracting greater numbers of postgraduate students from all parts of the world.

It has been suggested in various milieux that this programme should be viewed as an opportunity to boost
competitiveness and further the objectives laid down by the Lisbon European Council in March 2000 with
the aim of making the EU ‘the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world’.

Under the programme, it is planned to create grants for Masters-level courses, subject to the condition that
the courses should be offered in at least two of the EU’s official languages. This would have the effect of
marginalising the Catalan language in the teaching of Masters and other courses. Catalan, despite being the
native tongue of more than seven million people and an official language in Catalonia, the Valencia region
and the Balearic islands, has still not been granted official status at EU level. The Catalan language will,
therefore, not be eligible for the above-mentioned aids. This amounts to yet another blow against the long-
established Catalan language and culture (cid:1) even more so considering that Barcelona, in which university-
level teaching is carried out mainly in Catalan, receives more Erasmus students than any other university
town in the Spanish state.

Does the Commission intend to take action to correct the adverse effects of this policy on the

1.
teaching of Catalan (and other European languages) at university level?

Does the Commission believe this policy to be compatible with its own efforts to promote

2.
multilingualism and the learning of non-majority languages in the Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 2003)

The Annex to the Council’s Common Position on Erasmus Mundus (1) provides under Action 1 (cid:1) Erasmus
Mundus Masters Courses (cid:1) point 2.i the following:

[2. For the purpose of the programme, Erasmus Mundus Masters Courses shall:]

without prejudice to the language of instruction, provide for the use of at least two European
languages spoken in the Member States where the higher education institutions involved in the
Erasmus Mundus Masters Course are situated and, as appropriate,
for language preparation and
assistance for students.

15.1.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 11 E/231

The Commission fully supports this wording. The text does not refer to ‘official’ Union but rather
‘European’ languages and does not prejudge (cid:1) or exclude (cid:1) the use of any particular language as the
language of instruction. It does encourage the use of at least two European languages spoken in the
Member States where the higher education institutions involved in the Erasmus Mundus Masters Course
are situated.

The Commission considers that no European languages suffer from this provision. On the contrary, such
provision is coherent with other Commission initiatives aimed at promoting multilinguism and the
learning of European languages.

(1) 2002/0165 (COD).

(2004/C 11 E/259)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1816/03

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject: The increasing use by Member States of off-balance items to reduce public-sector deficits

Enron has become infamous for its use of off-balance items to disguise the true level of the company’s
indebtedness. Less well-understood is the increasing frequency with which EU Member State governments,
including the British government, are using this facility. In the UK Private Finance Initiatives are used in a
range of economic activities from the building of foundation hospitals to maintaining railway networks.
Off-balance sheet vehicles with or without public sector involvement are often thinly capitalised with
interest payments frequently accounting for most of the profit before anything is left for the shareholders.
Recent investigations by The Times revealed that the lead contractor will typically have an equity interest
of only 5 per cent in a project, and that even on that basis the equity invested by the five biggest
construction-related PFI contractors in the UK is supporting unreported debts of GBP 2 billion, suggesting,
in turn, that the special purpose vehicles that own the various PFI contracts of these companies alone have
collected debts of about GBP 40 billion.

As Enron showed, the issue of whether potential liabilities should be allowed to appear as off-balance
items is a very real one. Many accountants are increasingly nervous at the implications of this growing
practice, arguing that a liability is a liability and that hiding it somewhere off the balance sheet doesn’t
make it go away, whilst others point to the political reality that a government is unlikely to allow nuclear
power plants, rail networks or foundation hospitals to go bankrupt. According to a Conservative Party
analysis the total off-balance sheet debt held by the Chancellor comes to more than GBP 100 billion,
indicating a real public sector debt level of 40 rather than 32 per cent of national income.

In the case of Network Rail, a dispute arose at the end of last year as to whether the Chancellor should be
allowed to offload up to GBP 21 billion of debt by keeping it off the public sector balance sheet. The
Office of National Statistics (ONS) agreed with this procedure based on consultations with the department
chief accountant Alan Beard who was later reported to have said that it would be a mistake to assume that
the ONS decision. The Department of Transport defended its
his judgement
accounting procedures, saying that they were in line with European guidelines. Is that correct, and what
are the obligations of the Member States in this regard under the terms of the Growth and Stability Pact?
Does the Commission believe that in both the private and public sector there needs to be discussion with
the International Accounting Standards Board to ensure consistent and transparent accounting and what
steps has the Commission taken to ensure that EU governments comply with their obligations in this area?

‘necessarily supported’