WRITTEN QUESTION E-0237/04 by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Fees at the European Schools.
Date: 2004-02-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European school, education costs, school fees

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/339

The Commission regards non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil society as essential partners in
the search for a lasting negotiated solution in Colombia and has stated so publicly and repeatedly (1). What
is more, historically, some 50 % of all Community programmes have been implemented via NGOs.

In addition, the Commission provides specific support for the defenders of human rights and displaced
persons. Colombia is one of the target countries and main beneficiaries of the ‘European Initiative for
Democracy and Human Rights’ (Budget Article 19 04 03). A total of 19 projects is under way, involving
over EUR 15 million, 19 local NGOs, 7 European NGOs, 2 universities and the Colombian Office of the
UN High Commissioner for Human Rights. Displaced persons benefit
from both the emergency
humanitarian aid provided by ECHO, the European Humanitarian Aid Office (EUR 8 million in 2003,
spread over 13 European NGOs, Budget Chapter 23 02), and from the instrument specifically for displaced
persons (Budget Article 19 09 03, which provided just under EUR 10 million in 2003).

Recently, the conclusions of the Foreign Relations Council of 26 January 2004 also showed that the
human rights situation,
like the humanitarian situation, are an integral part of the European Union’s
foreign and security policy.

Concerning the particular question raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission is monitoring the
situation of the Cacarica communities in Colombia very closely, in particular through the human rights
office of its Delegation in Colombia.

(1) http://www.delcol.cec.eu.int/es/novedades/boletin_61.htm

(2004/C 84 E/0398)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0237/04

by Miet Smet (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 February 2004)

Subject: Fees at the European Schools

Some weeks ago, the European Commission wrote a letter to the Board of Governors of the European
Schools proposing a drastic increase in the level of school fees for pupils at the European Schools. There is
even talk of raising the annual fee to EUR 12 500 per pupil. Can further clarification be provided regarding
the Commission’s proposal and the reasons for this drastic increase?

Pupils at the European Schools are divided into three categories. Each category pays a different amount in
fees. Can further clarity be provided on the division of pupils into categories, the respective level of fees for
pupils of different categories, and future trends?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Article 1 of the Convention defining the Statute of the European Schools specifies that the prime purpose
of the Schools is ‘to educate together children of the staff of the European Communities’. Those pupils are
defined as category 1 pupils and no fees are paid by their parents because approximately 60 % of the
European Schools’ funding is provided from the EU budget. Articles 28 and 29 of the same Convention
allow for Participation Agreements to be drawn up with other organisations governed by public or private
law so that the children of their staff may attend the European Schools. These are defined as category
2 pupils, and the bodies with which the agreements are concluded pay fees which cover 100 % of the
calculated cost of their education in each European School. In addition to the children referred to above,
the Convention also allows for ‘other children’ to attend the European Schools, ‘within the limits set by the
Board of Governors’. These are defined as category 3 pupils and, because of the EU Budget subsidies paid

C 84 E/340

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

to the Schools, the fees paid are much lower than the relevant costs. Charges are currently EUR 2 680 per
place for primary school and EUR 3 657 per place for secondary school annually. These charges plainly do
not meet the average annual cost per pupil across the European Schools of almost EUR 11 000, reaching
as much as EUR 16 500 per year in the European School in Bergen, EUR 16 000 in Mol and EUR 13 700
in Culham.

The necessarily increased budgetary requirements of the Schools as a consequence of enlargement, the
budgetary restrictions of the EU budget, and the difficulty in justifying large subsidies for the education of
pupils whose parents are not connected with the EU Institutions combine to make necessary increases in
fees towards levels which relate more directly to real costs. In its capacity as a Member of the Board of
Governors of the European Schools (which is otherwise drawn from all Member States), and fulfilling its
duties of preparing submissions to the EU budgetary authorities and executing the approved budget, the
Commission has recently proposed that the fees for category 3 pupils be increased gradually over the next
five years. The proposal differentiates between a) new category 3 pupils for whom the increase would, by
2010, mean annual fees of EUR 9 400 for new primary and EUR 12 500 for new secondary pupils and b)
existing category 3 pupils for whom the increase would, by 2010, mean annual fees of EUR 5 800 for
primary, and EUR 8 000 for secondary pupils.

The proposal has yet to be adopted by the Board of Governors.

The attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the fact that the parents of many existing category 3
pupils already benefit from a system of substantial exoneration of fees and that will continue until the end
of their children’s studies.

(2004/C 84 E/0399)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0239/04

by Olivier Dupuis (NI) to the Commission

(2 February 2004)

Subject: Persecution of Christians and Buddhists in the Lao People’s Democratic Republic

The authorities of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic recently ordered the arrest of 11 Lao Christians.
According to statements made to the Vientiane Times by Mr Yong Chanthalangy, a spokesman for the
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, those arrested are accused of ‘possessing poisons’. In the same interview,
Mr Yong stressed that his country recognises complete freedom of religion, and he rejected the accusations
made by various organisations campaigning for the respect of fundamental rights in Laos, according to
which the Christians had been arrested for having attended a Christmas mass. The Paris-based Lao
Movement for Human Rights had reported the arrest of 11 Christians, most of whom belonged to the
Khmu and Oey ethnic minorities, on 28-29 December in the province of Attapeu. At the same time, the
movement criticised once again the persecution to which many Christians and Buddhists are subjected, and
emphasised that declarations made by the Vientiane authorities advocating freedom of religion are aimed
primarily at donor countries and organisations. In reality, religious freedom is viewed as a threat to the
regime in power. The spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated that the persons in question
‘had not been charged but were arrested for questioning on charges of possession of poisons’. Mr Yong
also denied reports by Radio Free Asia and other foreign news agencies that 10 Christians had been
arrested in the southern province of Savannakhet because they were organising a demonstration against
the arrests of Christians in Attepeu.

What information does the Commission have on the arrests of Lao Christians in the provinces of Attapeu
and Savannakhet? Does the Commission not believe that arrests of Lao citizens without any charges being
made are a manifest violation of democratic principles, the rule of law and fundamental rights, which are
the foundations of the EU-Lao PDR Cooperation Agreement? Does the Commission still believe that the
Cooperation Agreement should be upheld, despite systematic and extremely serious violations by the
Vientiane authorities? Did the Commission raise these issues during the last meeting of the EU-Lao PDR
Joint Committee on 7 January 2004? If so, what outcome was achieved?