WRITTEN QUESTION E-0310/04 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Further reduction of educational facilities for the long-established Sorbian-speaking community in Lausitz, eastern Germany.
Date: 2004-02-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Brandenburg, European citizenship, Saxony, language teaching, minority language, multilingualism, organisation of teaching, rights of minorities

C 78 E/950

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

27.3.2004

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2004)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2004/C 78 E/1005)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0310/04

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject: Further reduction of educational facilities for the long-established Sorbian-speaking community in

Lausitz, eastern Germany

1.
Is the Commission aware that in Lausitz, the Sorbian-speaking part of the east German Länder of
Brandenburg and Saxony, a fresh conflict is brewing over educational facilities available to the Sorbian
community, who belong to the Slavonic language group and who have lived in the region for centuries, as
a result of the planned closure of the school in the village of Most (Heinersbrück) to the north-east of
in Chróscˇicy (Crostwitz) to the west of Budisˇin (Bautzen) was
Chos´ebuz (Cottbus), after the school
threatened with closure last year, and that problems have arisen because of a lack of teaching staff able to
give lessons in Sorbian at Chos´ebuz secondary school?

Does the Commission recall the justified efforts made by the EU to safeguard the use of Albanian,
in the north-west of the

2.
a language discriminated against and placed under threat by the authorities,
(former Yugoslav) Republic of Macedonia?

3.
How does the Commission view the fact that inhabitants of EU Member States, who are not
immigrants but live on the territory historically inhabited by their ancestors, are being forced to change
their choice of language because they are compelled by official policy to use a language other than their
own for their education, participation in the political process, information or employment?

4.
Does the Commission view the guaranteeing of linguistic and cultural diversity in Europe as one of
its central tasks, thereby preventing ethnic divisions, possible outbreaks of violence and the creation of
second-class citizens deprived of education and administration in their own language?

5.
How is the Commission encouraging Member States to resolve this kind of problem, bearing in mind
Member States’ own powers and in keeping with Articles 49 and 151 of the EC Treaty, the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union and the European Convention for the Protection of Human
Rights and Fundamental Freedoms? Is the Commission calling for a raising of awareness of the diversity of
peoples, languages and cultures in order to create a Europe permanently free of ethnic conflict?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2004)

The Commission has taken note of the information on the situation involving Slavonic-speaking

1.
Sorbians based in Lausitz.

2.
The use of Albanian as an official language in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia has been
one of the core components of the negotiation of the Framework Agreement signed in Ohrid in August
2001 to settle peace and guarantee the unity and multi-ethnic dimension of the country. Minority
languages are recognised as official languages in addition to the Macedonian language, for those minorities
reaching 20 % of the population.

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78 E/951

In the area of education, Article 149 of the EC Treaty provides that the content of teaching and the

3.
organisation of education systems are the responsibility of the Member States.

4.
In order to safeguard cultural and linguistic diversity, which is recognised as an integral part of the
European cultural heritage, the Community acts within the limits of the powers conferred on it by the
Treaties. In application of Article 151(4) of the EC Treaty, which provides that cultural aspects must be
taken into account in all Community action, projects to promote and safeguard regional and minority
languages have been financed under existing Community actions and programmes such as Socrates and
Interreg.

5.
The rights of minorities are among the principles common to the Member States, which are listed in
Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union. These principles have been solemnly reaffirmed by the Charter
of fundamental rights of the European Union (1). Article 22 calls for cultural, religious and linguistic
diversity to be respected. It should also be noted, however, that Article 51 of the Charter provides that its
provisions are addressed to the institutions and bodies of the Union with due regard for the principle of
subsidiarity and to the Member States only when they are implementing Union law.

‘Promoting Language Learning and Linguistic Diversity’ (2), the Commission proposes
In its action plan,
measures to be taken at EU level from 2004 to 2006 in order to create a language-friendly environment.

(1) OJ C 364, 18.12.2000.
(2) COM(2003) 449 final.

(2004/C 78 E/1006)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0314/04

by Ulpu Iivari (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 2004)

Subject: Effect of EU support on the shift of jobs within the EU

Wärtsila Oyj, a public limited company, is transferring its engine production from Turku in Finland to
Trieste in Italy. What is happening in this case is that production and jobs are shifting from one Member
State to another. Under certain circumstances support channelled via the EU Structural Funds can also lead
to a situation in which companies are tempted to relocate production based in one EU country to another
enjoying more attractive levels of support. The overall impact of such relocation can be very considerable
in the country losing production and jobs.

1. What kind of action does the Commission believe to be necessary to ensure that, instead of causing
jobs to shift from one part of the EU to another, Structural Fund and other forms of EU support serve to
create new jobs?

2. What steps will the Commission take to harmonise protection against dismissal for employees and
the dismissal costs incurred by employers within the EU area?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2004)

1.
Job shifts from one part of the EU to another should not be seen as related to Structural Fund
interventions. Such shifts are rather linked to globalisation and differences in national policies (eg. labour
and tax legislation) and practices.

The Structural Funds aim to strengthen economic and social cohesion across the EU. In this respect,
support for job creation is an essential tool within the wide scope of financed interventions. In particular,
the European Social Fund (ESF) finances employment aids (according to Article 3.2.b of Regulation (EC)
No 1784/1999 of the Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the European Social Fund (1)).