WRITTEN QUESTION P-1933/03 by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Social development.
Date: 2003-06-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: abortion, aid policy, development aid, health aid, interpretation of the law, legal basis, reproductive health, use of aid

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/377

represent 13 % of the total number of Polish meat establishments expected at the day of accession.
Transitional periods were also granted to 169 Polish milk establishments representing 51 % of the total
number of Polish milk establishments expected at accession. These transitional periods are valid for Poland
until 31 December 2007. In Hungary, 44 high capacity meat establishments have been granted transitional
periods, representing 7 % of the total number of Hungarian meat establishments. These transitional periods
for Hungary are valid until 31 December 2006.

During the transitional period, all products from establishments subject to such a transitional measure
must be specifically labelled and only marketed locally; consequently releasing into the Internal Market will
be prohibited.

Based on the Commission’s monitoring, agro-food establishments without a transitional period and not
complying with the Union food safety requirements by accession will need to be closed. In the meantime,
the Commission provides assistance in the upgrading of agro-food establishments by providing expertise
through Technical Assistance Information Exchange Office (TAIEX) and peer reviews, training activities
and through the Twinning programme. It furthermore provides significant financial support from PHARE
and Sapard.

(2004/C 88 E/0383)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1933/03

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 June 2003)

Subject: Social development

The Commission proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on aid for
policies and actions on reproductive and sexual health and rights in developing countries (1) provides for
the funding of healthcare in developing countries. During the legislative procedure, it became clear that the
Commission intends to use the appropriations allocated to this programme to fund (cid:1) inter alia (cid:1) abortion
on demand.

The Community’s powers with regard to development policy, set out in Article 177(1) of the Treaty, uses
the term ‘social development’, which is open to interpretation. Articles 136 to 145 of the Treaty expand
the meaning of the term ‘development’ in social policy with regard to domestic policies. It is undisputed
that the Community has no power to rule on or to finance abortion within the Community. It would,
therefore, be inconsistent if the same legal term were to be interpreted differently. It therefore seems
appropriate, with regard to the first sentence of Article 5 of the Treaty, to interpret Article 177(1) of the
Treaty accordingly and not to authorise Community activities which are legally not possible within the
Community.

Does the Commission take the view that the term ‘social development’ referred to in Article 177(1) of the
Treaty provides a legal basis for activities facilitating abortion on demand?

(1) COM(2002) 120 final (cid:1) OJ C 151 E, 25.6.2002, p. 260 and COM(2003) 168 final.

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(30 June 2003)

The recently adopted Regulation on aid for policies and actions on reproductive and sexual health and
rights in developing countries (1) aims to fund innovative actions that will improve the reproductive and
sexual health of men and women in developing countries. The assertion of the Honourable Member that

C 88 E/378

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

this regulation will fund abortion on demand is misleading. It is clearly stated in Recital 16 of the
Regulation that ‘No support is to be given under this Regulation to incentives to encourage sterilisation or
abortion, or to the improper testing of contraception methods in developing countries. When cooperation
measures are implemented, the decisions adopted at the ICPD (2), in particular point 8.25 of the ICPD
Programme of Action, according to which, inter alia, abortion should in no case be promoted as a method
of family planning, must be rigorously observed. Post-abortion counselling, education and family planning
services should be offered promptly, which will also help to avoid repeat abortions.’

As already explained in the Commission’s answer to the Honourable Member’s written question E-3323/
02 (3), Community competence in the field of development policy is provided for in title XX of the Treaty
establishing the European Community. Accordingly, all actions of
the Community in the field of
development co-operation must fall under the objectives defined in Article 177 of the EC Treaty.

The Commission recalls that it follows from the judgement of the Court of Justice in Case C-268/1994
(Portugal/Commission, [1996] ECR I-6177) that a measure in the field of development co-operation may
lay down provisions on specific matters without there being any need to have recourse to other legal
bases, or indeed to participation of the Member States in the conclusion of the agreement, in so far as the
essential purpose of the agreement is to pursue the objectives referred to in Article 177, and on condition
that the clauses concerning specific matters do not impose obligations so extensive that they in fact
constitute objectives distinct from those of development co-operation.

The Community, therefore, has full competence in the area of Sexual and Reproductive Health in
developing countries. Community developmental assistance is always implemented within the legal
framework of the country concerned.

(1) OJ L 224, 6.9.2003.
(2)
(3) OJ C 11 E, 15.1.2004.

ICPD: International Conference on Population and Development.

(2004/C 88 E/0384)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1948/03

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject: Lithuanian referendum

Would the Commission please comment on the fact that seriously underhand tactics appear to have been
used in Lithuania’s referendum campaign for accession to the EU, namely that:

(cid:1) electoral law was broken with consistent campaigning for a ‘Yes’ vote in the 30 hours preceding the

referendum, which is contrary to Lithuanian electoral law,

(cid:1) senior government officials, celebrities and businessmen were used to put out the key ‘Yes’ message on
State radio and television during the 30 hour purdah period before the referendum and throughout
the two days of voting; that they used key political messages to persuade the voters not just to turn
out but also to vote ‘Yes’,

(cid:1) the key ‘Yes’ message, to ‘vote for tomorrow’s youth’, cannot be interpreted as merely awareness-

raising,

(cid:1) goods (cid:1) drinks, confectionery and detergent (cid:1) were offered by the largest supermarket chain to
Lithuanians who could prove that they had voted in the referendum, which promoted a surge of
voters who took the overall vote above the necessary 50 % participation level,