WRITTEN QUESTION P-3033/03 by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Structural Funds — Objective 2 region — province of Limburg, Belgium.
Date: 2003-10-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, EU financing, EU regional policy, job cuts, less-favoured region, motor vehicle industry, regional aid

C 65 E/260

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

framework for equal

The Honourable Member may also wish to note that Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000
in employment and occupation (1) must be
establishing a general
treatment
implemented by the Member States by 2 December 2003 at
the latest. This Directive outlaws
discrimination on grounds of religion and belief, disability, age or sexual orientation in the employment
field. However, Article 6 of the Directive provides that differences of treatment on grounds of age shall not
they are objectively and
constitute unlawful discrimination if, within the context of national
reasonably justified by a legitimate aim, such as labour market policy.

law,

The deadline for the implementation of Directive 2000/78/EC has not yet passed, and the Commission has
not yet received notification from Greece of its implementing measures. Once these have been received the
Commission will study whether they are in conformity with the Directive, and in particular whether the
practice mentioned in the Honourable Member’s questions would be justified by the exception contained
in Article 6 of the Directive.

As the Telecommunications Organisation of Greece is a public body, the Commission will, in the interim,
contact the Greek authorities in order to obtain further information in relation to the practice referred to
by the Honourable Member with a view to determining whether the practice amounts to indirect
discrimination against women. The Commission will be in contact with the Honourable Member as soon
as the necessary information is received.

(1) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(2004/C 65 E/274)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3033/03

by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 October 2003)

Subject: Structural Funds (cid:1) Objective 2 region (cid:1) province of Limburg, Belgium

On 1 October 2003, the European board of the automobile manufacturer Ford announced the company’s
plans to reorganise its European production network. The production capacity of Ford’s plant in Genk
is to be cut drastically in the near future, with disastrous social
(province of Limburg, Belgium)
consequences, given that 3000 employees will lose their jobs. Job losses in firms supplying components
are put at many thousands. This represents a further severe blow to the economic and social fabric of the
province of Limburg.

In the past, the Commission recognised the province of Limburg as an Objective 2 region (involving three
priorities and nine measures) and approved a development programme for the province for the period
2000-2006 funded in the amount of EUR 214 million. Measures and projects can be implemented on the
basis of financial support from the European Regional Development Funds (ERDF) and the European Social
Fund (ESF).

Can the Commission state what scope there is for releasing additional financial resources with a view
to tackling more promptly the structural, economic and social problems facing the province of Limburg?
Has the Commission received a request to that effect from the Flemish Government? Does the Commission
itself intend to take such a step?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 2003)

On 28 June 2001 the Commission approved the single programming document for the province of
Limburg under Objective 2 for 2000-2006 covering a total cost of EUR 240 482 000. The municipality of
Genk is covered by this programme.

The Structural Fund contribution is EUR 92 696 000, i.e. 38 % of total programme expenditure.

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/261

The first priority under the programme (‘Initiatives to promote the economy and employment’), for
example, accounts for more than 50 % of total expenditure, which should enable the region’s restructuring
problems to be addressed. However, in line with the principle of subsidiarity, the managing authority for
the programme (in this case the Ministry of the Flemish Community) has sole responsibility for selecting
those projects which it wishes to approve, taking account of the purpose of the measures and budget
availability.

It should also be pointed out that the region is also eligible for part of the ESF funding granted under the
Objective 3 programme for the Flemish Region. This programme includes measures for the reintegration
and training of those seeking employment and training for those already in work. The ESF contribution for
this is EUR 376,2 million out of a total budget of EUR 894 million over the period 2000-2006.

As regards the possibility of releasing additional Community financial resources, there is a performance
reserve of 4 % of the commitment appropriations provided for in each national allocation. The reserve is
assigned to programmes on the basis of an assessment of their performance in terms of their impact on
the ground using indicators reflecting effectiveness, management and financial implementation.

(2004/C 65 E/275)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3034/03

by Marianne Thyssen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Term of patents for computer-implemented inventions

(17 October 2003)

At the sitting of 24 September 2003 Parliament voted at first reading on the proposal for a directive on
the patentability of computer-implemented inventions.

Pursuant to Article 8(b) of the proposal, as amended by Parliament, the Commission is required to submit
to Parliament and the Council a report on the issue of whether the rules governing the term of patents and
the determination of patentability requirements, and more specifically novelty,
inventive step and the
proper scope of claims, are adequate.

Can the Commission state whether it regards the standard patent term (20 years) as suitable for software-
related inventions? Does the Commission not regard a shorter period as desirable for this kind of high-
technology invention? Does the Commission not
foster
competition on the European market in software-related inventions?

take the view that such a decision might

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2003)

It is a long-standing feature of patent law that the term of protection is the same for all inventions, in all
fields of technology. This principle has been enshrined as a firm legal obligation at the international level
in the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. The only deviation from this rule
currently practised is to allow for an increased term of protection for certain products which are subject to
lengthy regulatory approval procedures and which would therefore be subject, in the absence of such a
provision, to a relatively short period of effective protection in the marketplace.

Nevertheless, the Commission is aware of arguments to the effect that the standard term of protection of
20 years is not appropriate for all fields of technology, and for this reason has agreed, in its response to
the amendments made at first reading to the proposal, to examine the question. This examination would
naturally take account of the need to encourage innovation and competition.
It must, however, be
appreciated that there would be considerable legal and technical challenges involved in making any change