WRITTEN QUESTION P-3618/03 by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Building cooperatives in Greece.
Date: 2003-12-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, acquisition of property, consumer protection, cooperative, jurisdiction, real property

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/303

Does the Commission feel that such imports, which from 1 May 2004 will be directed principally

3.
towards the new Member States, are desirable?

Does the Commission share the view that the problem outlined above could be solved by setting

4.
import quotas on such products?

5.
Does the Commission share the view that the problem of the circumvention of rules of origin, which
has occured with regard to the Balkans and which, it is feared, may occur in the case of the ‘Everything
But Arms’ group of countries, could also be solved by setting import quotas?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2004)

Under the 1972 Agreement the preferential treatment granted to Switzerland includes customs duty
exemption for her exports to the Community of certain processed products, such as soft drinks, that may
contain sugar.

Whether European sugar or sugar bought on the world market is used when these products are made in
Switzerland is of no real importance. This is so for both the cost price of the sugar used and the origin of
the finished product.

We are well aware of the impact on the Community sugar market that can be made by imports from
various countries of sugar and products containing relatively high proportions of sugar.

Importation taking advantage of preferential rights granted by the Community is of course encouraged by
the existence of a Community sugar price that is generally three times higher than the world price.

These issues are one aspect of a situation that has resulted in a Commission Communication to the
Council and Parliament (1) setting out three policy options for the sugar organisation. The first is retention
of quotas, the second achievement of market balance through lower prices and the third liberalisation of
the market. Once discussion of the Communication is over the Commission will submit a proposal on the
future organisation for sugar.

(1) COM(2003) 554 final.

(2004/C 78 E/0305)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3618/03

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 December 2003)

Subject: Building cooperatives in Greece

Commissioner Byrne gave me a polite reply to my question No E-2850/03 (1), indicating that the issue it
touched on was a ‘private matter’, and at the same time providing a brief analysis of timeshare leases
which, however, have no connection with the issue which I raised in my question.

I would like to return to the subject I initially raised, which affects at least 500 000 Greek citizens (as many
the following totally
leading Greek newspapers have been pointing out) and which consists of
unacceptable situation: there are building cooperatives in Greece which were founded up to 38 years ago
(such as the Medical Staff Summer Property Cooperative situated in Athens which owns land in Saronida,
Attica, and many other plots), whose members have been paying their annual and additional contributions
for decades, but nobody is giving them any information on when they will receive the plots to which they
are entitled.

C 78 E/304

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The Greek press has reported that associations of cooperative members are already making moves in the
direction of an appeal to the Court of Justice of the European Communities. Is it consistent with EU
legislation that thousands of Greek nationals (EU citizens) have been paying subscriptions (cid:1) for decades!
(cid:1) without so far receiving any assets? Which provision in EU legislation might they invoke in support of
their claims?

(1) See page 179.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 2004)

On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member, it does not appear that the situation
described is covered by a specific consumer protection Community legislation.

For the rest, and although it sympathises with the predicaments of the people affected by such a difficult
situation, the Commission is not empowered to take action in the case of private disputes between
companies/professionals and consumers.

This matter, being an internal issue and taking into account the principle of subsidiarity, appears to be
solely for the national authorities concerned and in particular the national jurisdictions. If, at a later stage,
a national
jurisdiction considers that the case raises a question of Community law and encounters
problems of interpretation, it can make use of the preliminary ruling procedure and bring its questions
before the Court of justice.

(2004/C 78 E/0306)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3637/03

by Torben Lund (PSE) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Working environment for employees handling preservatives

The EU has in many areas helped secure a better working environment
in European companies.
Unfortunately, problems still exist because the rules are not obeyed, are inadequate or because there is a
lack of knowledge about
in industries producing foodstuffs and
preservatives.

in particular

sectors, e.g.

risks

In this connection, can the Commission disclose its knowledge of health hazards in the workplace for
employees working with preservatives and does it have knowledge of incidents where the employer has
not implemented existing safety provisions in this sector? Does it have knowledge of surveys of this area
or does it have plans to carry out new surveys of the working environment in this sector? Lastly, can it
state when it plans to submit new proposals for improving the working environment for the benefit of the
health of employees?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(15 January 2004)

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member on the importance of preventing possible
occupational hazards in the food industry. In this line, Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 17 June 1989
on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work (1)
imposes on the employer the obligation to be in possession of an assessment of the risks to safety and
health at work. In carrying out this obligation, the employer shall take the measures necessary for the
safety and health protection of workers,
including prevention of occupational risks and provision of
information and training, as well as provision of the necessary organisation and means.