WRITTEN QUESTION E-0318/04 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. People with mental disabilities in Russia.
Date: 2004-02-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Russia, cooperation policy, discrimination based on disability, integration of people with disabilities, mentally disabled person, right to justice, social policy

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/495

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2004)

The Commission has no information on the weapons, ammunition or intervention techniques used by
armed sky marshals. In view of the nature of these duties, such information is confidential. The methods
used by the police forces of an individual Member State are a matter for that State, which is bound by the
European Convention on Human Rights.

In view of US demands on the airlines of several Member States to deploy armed sky marshals on certain
high-risk flights it will be necessary in future to establish a common response enabling cooperation with
the US authorities to be organised on a more balanced basis. The Commission regards sky marshals as just
one aspect of the broader issue of the need to adopt optimum security measures for transatlantic or
domestic flights. The Commission is about to launch a wide-ranging debate on this subject with the
Member States which takes the existing divergences of opinion into account.

(2004/C 88 E/0507)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0318/04

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject: People with mental disabilities in Russia

Is the Commission aware of the lack of legal protection for people with mental disabilities in Russia?

Would the Commission identify and clarify what action is being taken on behalf of these people and
whether the matter has been raised at the highest possible level with the authorities?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 2004)

According to information at the disposal of the Commission, the Russian Constitution does not directly
address the issue of discrimination against persons with disabilities. In addition, although laws to prohibit
discrimination do exist, it appears that these are not always adequately enforced.

The Commission has been working for several years via the Tacis programme to improve the treatment of
the disabled in Russia. Examples of projects include: ‘Partnership in health, education and social assistance’,
implemented as part of the 1999 Tacis Action Programme for Russia in cooperation with the Ministry of
Education, which has promoted the early detection of disabilities and the better treatment of Russian
children in several regions of Russia.

Further projects (cid:1) to be implemented with Russian institutions including the Russian Ministry of Labour
and Social Development (cid:1) are currently being prepared.

These projects aim, inter alia, to:

(cid:1) improve existing legislation;

(cid:1) develop mechanisms of cooperation between different departments/agencies and organisations dealing

with disabled children;

(cid:1) develop programmes for the social inclusion of children with disabilities and provide support to their

families;

C 88 E/496

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

(cid:1) better train social workers, medical staff and teachers;

(cid:1) raise awareness of the rights of disabled children and their families,

the problems which they

experience and their contribution as valued members of society.

The Commission has also provided support to a number of non-governmental organisations (NGOs),
charities, parents’ associations and religious organizations via its Civil Society Programme, with the aim of
promoting better understanding and treatment of the disabled and in particular disabled children.

(2004/C 88 E/0508)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0341/04

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(4 February 2004)

Subject: Introduction of a ‘Made in the EU’ label

According to reports, the Commission is contemplating the idea of introducing a ‘Made in the EU’ label.

Is this information correct? If so, when will a concrete proposal be issued?

What added value does a European label give over and above the Member States’ national labels?

Have representatives of industry already been consulted on this? If so, what were their reactions?

Will it be possible to combine the European label with a national label?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 2004)

In the light of renewed interest shown by some industry sectors and Member States in the development of
a Community Regulation on origin marking, the Commission opted to prepare a working document
submitted to the 133 Committee on 19 December 2003, setting out the implications of such a scheme, in
order to launch the debate. At this stage, the Commission is not presenting any concrete proposals, but
has instead invited Member States to consult domestically on the subject.

The paper (cid:1) available on the Commission’s External Trade website (cid:1) gives an overview on the pros and
cons of a ‘made in the EU’ origin marking and indicates the options to be considered, namely:

(cid:1) the option of origin marking both for imports and domestic market products on a purely voluntary

basis;

(cid:1) the approach of a mixed system with a compulsory origin marking for imports and a voluntary

scheme for domestic products;

(cid:1) and the third option of a compulsory origin marking both for imports and for domestic products.

The document does not specifically address the question of national origin marking schemes and it is
worth underlining that no proposal has been made to question the continued use of them. It is for all
interested parties at the national and EU level to determine their interests in the issue of developing a
Community Regulation on origin marking, including the value added of implementing a ‘made in the EU’
origin claim and, if they favour change, the nature and scope of any possible regulation.

The Commission has already contacted different representatives of the industry and consumers and is
receiving their comments and suggestions. Considering the current stage of consultations, the Commission
could submit to the Council and to the Parliament the results of these consultations at the end of March
2004, though a longer period could be necessary.