WRITTEN QUESTION P-0207/04 by Harald Ettl (PSE) to the Commission. Further action by the Commission on the portability of supplementary pension rights.
Date: 2004-01-23
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: pension scheme, social partners, supplementary pension, transfer of pension rights, worker (EU)

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/941

The Directive does not contain provisions aimed at harmonising the conditions of use of recreational craft
after they have been placed on the market and put into service. Its Article 2(2) explicitly specifies that the
provisions of the Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting, in compliance with the EC
Treaty, provisions concerning navigation on certain waters for the purpose of protection of
the
environment, the fabric of waterways, and ensuring the safety of waterways, providing that this does not
require modification to craft conforming to the Directive.

Assessment of the Ordinance No 19/2002 issued by the Commissioner of the Governement delegated for
the maritime traffic in the lagoon of Venice (ordinanza no 19/2002 emanata dal Commissario del Governo
Delegato al Traffico Acqueo nella Laguna di Venezia) has led the Commission to conclude that the
imposition of identification marks on the sides of recreational craft as a condition for their operation in
the lagoon of Venice does not require the modification of the design or construction of craft conforming
with the Directive and therefore respects the conditions of Article 2(2) of the Directive.

(1) Directive 94/25/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 16 June 1996 on the approximation of

laws,

regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to recreational craft.

(2004/C 78 E/0995)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0207/04

by Harald Ettl (PSE) to the Commission

(23 January 2004)

Subject: Further action by the Commission on the portability of supplementary pension rights

On 12 June 2002, the Commission initiated the first-stage consultation of social partners on the portability
of supplementary pension rights, which identified the following problems: conditions governing the
acquisition of occupational pension rights, the preservation of acquired rights, the transferability of rights,
rights to information and the taxation of cross-border benefits.

Unfortunately, the second-stage consultation of social partners on measures to improve the portability of
occupational pension rights, which was launched on 15 September 2003, did not produce any results
either.

The Commission invited the social partners to inform it, where appropriate, of their resolve to undertake
negotiations and whether they wish to adopt a global approach or concentrate on certain aspects of
portability. The ETUC stated at a meeting of its Executive Committee on 16/17 October 2003 that it was
prepared to undertake negotiations with its European partners. On 19 November 2003, the UNICE
rejected the Commission’s proposals and made it clear that it was not willing to negotiate on the issues
proposed by the Commission (1).

What further action does the Commission intend to take on this issue, which is of relevance to all workers
who have had jobs in several Member States during their working life?

Will a proposal for a directive be drafted or will the matter be shelved?

(1) UNICE, 19.11.2003.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 2004)

The Commission regrets that the social partners will not hold negotiations with a view to limiting the loss
of supplementary pension rights as a result of occupational mobility within the same country or different
countries. In the Member States the social partners have the possibility of adapting the rules of their
supplementary schemes so as to provide better protection for the rights of persons who change jobs and
hence supplementary pension schemes. However, the social partners do not necessarily make use of this
possibility, and the Member States in which supplementary schemes are the most common have
introduced minimum requirements in order to protect workers who change jobs. These requirements
cover the eligibility conditions for schemes, qualifying periods, revaluing of dormant rights (rights of
persons who have left a scheme but not yet reached retirement age) and procedures for the transfer of
rights.

C 78 E/942

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

The Commission is in the process of examining the potential benefits of adopting a binding act
introducing similar minimum requirements at Community level. It will take account of Member States’
experience, drawing on the expertise of the Pensions Forum.

Furthermore, the adoption of Directive 2003/41/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of
3 June 2002 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision (1) will
allow supplementary pension schemes to be established at the level of European groups of undertakings,
which will facilitate occupational mobility within such groups.

Certain Member States have tax rules which affect pension funds and restrict the freedom to provide
services and freedom of movement for workers. The Commission has started infringement proceedings
against several Member States, for example against Belgium in respect of various issues, including the
specific tax on transfers of capital to foreign pension funds (2).

(1) OJ L 235, 23.9.2003.
(2)

IP/03/1756.

(2004/C 78 E/0996)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0208/04

by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 January 2004)

Subject: Practical problems with town-twinning scheme

In keeping with the spirit of the Commission’s White Paper on Governance, the town-twinning scheme
forms part of the EU’s endeavours to enhance European awareness through dialogue with its citizens with
a view to their active participation in developments in Europe.

However, at a time when there is increasing emphasis on the importance of this process, particularly at
this historic moment ahead of enlargement of the Union when there is a need to heighten the public’s
awareness of the significance of a European identity, the town-twinning scheme is running into problems.
In breach of the procedure for the payment of subsidies in this connection, the programmes which were
approved and carried out
in March 2003 remain unsubsidised without any official notification or
justification on the part of the responsible Commission department. Not only does this state of affairs
negate the very objectives of the scheme, it also puts the local authorities in a very difficult position as
they have borne the financial brunt of organising the scheme and are, obviously, accountable to their
citizens.

Will the Commission state the reasons for the delays in paying the subsidies? What will it do henceforth to
ensure that the twinning scheme operates as it should?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

The Commission attaches great importance to the town-twinning scheme and to the need for funding to
be organised in a manner which is acceptable to beneficiaries.

With this in mind, the grant award system has been made as simple as possible. Calculations are based on
flat rates, new simplified forms have been designed, and a user’s guide has been produced for beneficiaries.

However, several factors influence the implementation of the scheme’s funding arrangements.

For example, the new Financial Regulation has significant repercussions in terms of the award and
payment procedures.