WRITTEN QUESTION E-3544/03 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Eurobarometer survey on threats to peace.
Date: 2003-11-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU relations, European Commission, Israel, administration of the Institutions, antisemitism, international security, opinion poll

C 78 E/580

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

(2004/C 78 E/0613)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3543/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(28 November 2003)

Subject: Free movement of Bulgarians

Could the Commission please explain what the policy is on freedom of movement for Bulgarian citizens
and Bulgarians with refugee status in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2004)

As the Honourable Member knows, Bulgaria will be a Candidate Country until their planned accession in
2007. Until 2007, provided accession takes place that year, Bulgarian nationals will be considered as third
country nationals. Bulgarian nationals can enter the Union and move freely within the Schengen area for a
period of up to three months.

As regards movement of Bulgarian workers, applications for residence and work permits are subject to the
conditions and modalities in each Member State. There is however a provision in the Europe Agreement
according to which the existing facilities for access to employment for Bulgarian workers accorded by
Member States under bilateral agreements ought to be preserved and if possible improved. As to the
establishment of Bulgarian companies and nationals in the territory of a Member State, Bulgarian nationals
have a right under the Europe agreement to a treatment no less favourable than that accorded to the
Member State’s own nationals. The scope of the latter provision has been clarified in European Court of
Justice case law.

The Honourable Member may be aware that on 25 November 2003 the Council adopted the Directive
concerning the status of third country nationals who are long-term residents in a Member State (1). In
accordance with Chapter III of that Directive, third country nationals (including Bulgarian citizens) who
have been legally resident in a Member State for five years or more can benefit under certain conditions
from a consolidated status on which basis they can enjoy the right to reside and work in other Member
States. This Directive will have to be transposed by Member States into national legislation by November
2005 at the latest.

However, that Directive does not apply to those third country nationals who are refugees. The rights of
refugees are set out in the 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the status of refugees of which all Member
States are signatories. At this stage there is no Community law governing the freedom of movement of
refugees in the Union.

(1) Council Directive 2003/109/EC of 25 November 2003, OJ L 16, 23.1.2004, p. 44.

(2004/C 78 E/0614)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3544/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(28 November 2003)

Subject: Eurobarometer survey on threats to peace

The findings of the most recent of the Eurobarometer surveys carried out at the Commission’s behest on a
regular basis, which sought the European public’s opinion on which countries were a threat to world
peace, have given rise to widespread indignation.

The final result, in which 60 % of Europe’s population placed Israel at the top of the list of most dangerous
countries, gave rise to indignation among the world’s Jewish community and consternation among the
general public and drew a shocked response from the Commission President, Romano Prodi, who said he
was disturbed and surprised by what have been interpreted as new anti-Semitic leanings in Europe. Since
then, however, no attempt has been made to look further into the matter and there has been no self-
criticism and no discussion of the reasons why Europeans consider Israel to be the leading threat to peace.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/581

In view of the outcome, there would appear to be good reason to question both the political advisability of
the survey and the manner in which it was conducted, given that Mr Prodi himself has criticised both the
way in which it was drawn up and the fact that respondents were presented with a non-exhaustive list of
countries from which to choose. One is also entitled to doubt the effectiveness and general usefulness of
Eurobarometer surveys given that if a survey’s findings do not serve any useful purpose, even if only to
foster discussion and enquiry, it is nothing more than a waste of public money.

Given the above, would the Commission say:

1. Why the survey was commissioned?

2. Whether it intends to make constructive use of the findings by exploring the reasons for the fears they
reflect and attempting to counter any tendencies which, if taken to the extreme, can give rise to anti-
Semitic attitudes?

3. How much the invitation to tender both for this survey and for Eurobarometer surveys in general cost

the Union?

4. Whether, as Mr Prodi claims, technical mistakes were made in drafting the questionnaire, and how any

such mistakes could have escaped the Commission’s notice and supervision?

5. How it is possible for the President of the Commission to be unaware of and thus surprised by the

findings of a survey instigated by the Commission itself?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 2004)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer it gave to Written Question No P-
3334/03 by Ms Muscardini (1).

to that answer,

As a supplement
it
commissioned the survey in question and that the questionnaire was drawn up jointly by the Press and
Communication DG and its contractor, TNS Sofres. It is aware of the limits to the question concerning
countries that are a threat to world peace. Nevertheless, it considers that the replies obtained are indicative
of worrying prejudices.

the Commission would inform the Honourable Member that

(1) See page 263.

(2004/C 78 E/0615)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3546/03

by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 November 2003)

Subject: Using intelligent speed adaptation in road vehicles

Every year, 40 000 people are killed and 1 700 000 injured on Europe’s roads. In order to improve road
safety in Europe, the European Commission proposes greater use of information and communication
technologies. Innovations in terms of the burgeoning technical possibilities in this area are still, however,
largely focused on drivers and passengers.

Intelligent speed adaptation (ISA) is not among the Commission’s proposals. ISA prevents drivers from
driving faster than the permitted maximum speed. According to a study by the European Transport Safety
Council, this technology guarantees better protection not only for vehicle occupants but also for vulnerable
road users, namely pedestrians and cyclists.

Does the Commission intend to promote and endorse ISA at European level? If not, what measures is the
Commission taking to improve the safety of vulnerable road users?