WRITTEN QUESTION E-1838/03 by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE), Charles Tannock (PPE-DE),Sir Robert Atkins (PPE-DE), Giles Chichester (PPE-DE),Hartmut Nassauer (PPE-DE) and Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission. Free Trade Agreement between Singapore and the EU.
Date: 2003-06-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, Singapore, free-trade agreement, free-trade area, trade policy, trade relations

C 78 E/388

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2003)

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to its reply to his previous question E-0807/03 (1).

In addition at the appropriate moment in time, a closure proposal will be made to the Greek authorities
on the basis of the information made available by these authorities to the Commission services. It should
be noted that the date of 31 May 2003 refers to the deadline to be respected as a general rule. The
experience from the closure procedure for the majority of programmes in almost all the Member States
has shown that this deadline will be difficult to comply with in view of the quantity and quality of the
dossiers submitted by the Member States. The closure proposal for Greece will take account, in due time,
of the findings of Espel concerning any sub-standard works, and the extent to which the required remedial
works are certified by the Greek authorities as having been subsequently carried out.

(1) OJ C 11 E, 15.1.2004, p. 122.

(2004/C 78 E/0411)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1838/03

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE), Charles Tannock (PPE-DE),
Sir Robert Atkins (PPE-DE), Giles Chichester (PPE-DE),
Hartmut Nassauer (PPE-DE) and Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Free Trade Agreement between Singapore and the EU

(3 June 2003)

Does the Commission recognise the substantial mutual benefits that could result from an Free Trade
Agreement between the EU and Singapore? Does the Commission share our concern that Singapore either
has, or is negotiating, FTAs with surrounding countries including Japan, China and India, and that the EU
may therefore be disadvantaged in dealing with Singapore unless we too have an FTA? Does the
Commission agree that Singapore’s status as a country with tiny agricultural production makes it a
particularly straightforward country with which to negotiate an FTA?

We understand that tentative offers of an FTA from the EU to Singapore have been linked to rather
specific conditions, for example that the FTA should apply to at least two countries from ASEAN,
Singapore and at least one other. Would the Commission not agree that, given the benefits to the EU, we
should seek to make the offer as easy as possible for Singapore to accept? Would the Commission agree
that the wide variations in economic and political development between ASEAN countries might make the
‘Two Countries’ criterion very difficult for Singapore to fulfil, and might prove an unnecessary and
counter-productive barrier to an FTA?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 2003)

The priority for Union attention and resources remains the multilateral negotiations in the World Trade
Organisation (WTO) under the Doha Development Agenda.

The Commission, nevertheless, follows closely and with interest the development of various regional
economic integration initiatives currently taking place within East Asia, including the Free Trade Area
(FTA) negotiations which Singapore has already concluded with Japan, New Zealand, the European Free
Trade Association (EFTA), Australia, and the United States, and is currently pursuing with India, Canada,
and Mexico.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/389

Singapore has also made a proposal to enter into negotiations on a FTA with the Union. Singapore, as a
trading nation with a very small domestic market,
is widely recognised to be one of the most open
economies in the world, with very few existing barriers to trade. Negotiating any FTA requires substantial
resources and effort, which must be justified in terms of the associated political and economic benefits.
This would be true even for a country such as Singapore, whose lack of an agricultural sector could be
expected to facilitate certain areas of negotiations.

In this instance, in order to have a clearer understanding of the possible benefits to the Union from such
an agreement, in terms of specific market access barriers or other regulatory practices in Singapore which
are of the greatest importance to European business, the Commission requested several European business
organisations to collect information from their members. Until now, neither Singapore nor interested
parties in Europe have presented convincing evidence that the Union would draw any substantial benefit
from a FTA with Singapore or that an agreement would promote a stronger trade and economic
relationship with the other countries of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) or elsewhere
in the region. Furthermore, the Union business sector has yet to indicate that there are areas where it feels
that Singapore’s bilateral FTAs have placed it at a disadvantage.

At this time, the Commission has not made any proposal (cid:1) tentative or otherwise (cid:1) of a FTA to
Singapore, nor has it stated any specific conditions or preconditions for a potential future FTA. The
Commission is developing other avenues besides a Free Trade Agreement to enhance or trade and
investment relations with ASEAN as a whole, by developing more effective co-operation on regulatory
issues.

(2004/C 78 E/0412)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1839/03

by Ilka Schröder (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: EU relations with Syria and association agreement

(26 May 2003)

Given that the EU is Syria’s most important trading partner and that EU-Syria negotiations on the
conclusion of an association agreement, most recently in March 2003, are making further headway, how
does the Commission view the possible successful conclusion of such an agreement in view of Syria’s
provision of infrastructure support for the PFLP-GC, PFLP, Hamas and Islamic Jihad organisations? Is the
Commission’s policy to be taken as a statement opposing the European Council’s list of
terrorist
organisations, which includes the organisations referred to? During the negotiations, has Syria’s support for
those organisations and for Hizbollah in Lebanon been raised? Given the Syrian President’s restatement, as
recently as this month, of continued support for Hizbollah, does the Commission view continued support
and encouragement of organisations whose policy is to murder Israeli civilians as a reason for the
conclusion of an association agreement not to go ahead? Is the Commission considering inducing Syria to
end its support for those organisations? How does the Commission view the continued deployment of
Syrian troops in Lebanon and their support for Hizbollah, which is continuing to mount attacks on Israeli
territory, though the UN has officially established that, in withdrawing its troops from southern Lebanon
in May 2000, Israel has made its contribution towards complying with UN Resolution 425? Against the
backdrop of
international efforts to renew peace negotiations between Syria and Israel, does the
Commission think it helpful for the Syrian President to announce, as he did on 27 March 2003 in the
Lebanese newspaper ‘Al-Safir’, that Israel would never be recognised as a state and would constitute a
threat to Syria for as long as it existed and that, as he said in May 2001, the Jews were to blame for Jesus’
crucifixion? How does the Commission view the continued circulation of
inflammatory anti-Semitic
material by members of the Syrian Government, e.g. by Mustafa Tlass, Minister of Defence and Deputy
Prime Minister for many years, whose book ‘The Matzah of Zion’ containing the claim that Jews bake
matzah from Christians’ blood, is now in its eighth print run?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2003)

The Commission is acting under directives from the Council of Ministers to negotiate an Association
Agreement with Syria. Negotiations are still ongoing and it is too early to judge the prospects for the