WRITTEN QUESTION E-0652/04 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Commission against elementary rules of safety at sea.
Date: 2004-03-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, application of EU law, crew, free movement of workers, freedom to provide services, linguistic discrimination, maritime cabotage, maritime safety, professional qualifications

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/649

Moving to a material based approach for the promotion of recycling is one of the options put forward in
the communication towards the Thematic Strategy on the prevention and recycling of waste (3). As the
question suggests, it could indeed promote greater coherence in the handling of certain waste.

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.
(2) OJ L 47, 18.2.2004.
(3) COM(2003) 301 final.

(2004/C 84 E/0730)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0651/04

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(8 March 2004)

Subject: Position of the French language in the European institutions

According to press reports, the Commission is apparently earmarking some EUR 20 million in order to
make French ‘the’ official language in the institutions. The relevant decision was apparently taken after it
became clear that the vast majority of future officials from the ten new Member States had English as their
second language. Still according to press reports, the aim is, apparently, to teach French to 5 000 officials
by 2008. (The French Government itself is also making an effort to promote the French language in the
future Member States).

Is this information correct?

While nobody would deny the desirability of promoting a knowledge of languages other than the mother
tongue, primarily in the European institutions as well, it would seem that the learning of one specific
language (namely French) is being promoted as a reaction to the perceived dominance of another language.
Were similar measures set up in the past with the same view in mind? Which languages were then
involved?

Is not the Commission giving the impression that it is trying to regulate the relationship between
languages in the European Union for the benefit of one specific language and to the detriment of others?
Should not the Commission be adopting an impartial stance?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 2004)

The Commission would refer
Mr Seppänen. (1)

(1) See page 358.

the Honourable Member

to its answer

to written E-0308/04 by

(2004/C 84 E/0731)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0652/04

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Commission against elementary rules of safety at sea

According to document IP/04/159, the Commission believes that the Greek authorities’ requirement that
cabotage vessel crews on domestic routes must pass a Greek language proficiency test is illegal.

C 84 E/650

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The principle whereby it is obligatory for crews on cabotage routes to know the language of the countries
served is elementary common sense;
linking
Norway with its North Sea and Baltic neighbours.

it applies to the Norwegian cabotage lines, for example,

Can the Commission confirm that IP/04/159 is even correct?

Will it provide me with the results of the enquiry which it undoubtedly carried out before proceeding
legally to dispute in any way the application of the principle whereby it is obligatory for crews of cabotage
vessels working off the coast of Europe to know the local language?

Can it explain how it intends to assume its responsibilities if there is an accident caused by failure to
respect this basic rule of safety at sea?

Can it explain how it reconciles this profoundly irresponsible attitude with its guarantees that it is
committed to ensuring safety at sea?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 2004)

The Commission believes that imposing a knowledge of Greek on all crew members, including those who
are not responsible for assisting passengers in emergency situations, is unacceptable.

The Commission would recall that the Community legislation, in particular Directive 2001/25/EC of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the minimum level of training of seafarers (1),
lays down rules regarding on-board communication, among other things. Article 17 of the Directive
requires the Member States to ensure that crew members on passenger ships who are responsible for
assisting passengers in emergency situations have sufficient skills to communicate with them. A knowledge
of the languages appropriate to the principle nationalities of the passengers carried on a particular route is
one of the requirements which may be demanded.

With regard to the Honourable Member’s reference to the rules which apply on Norwegian ships, the
Commission will gather the necessary information from the Surveillance Authority of the European Free
Trade Association (EFTA).

(1) OJ L 136, 18.5.2001.

(2004/C 84 E/0732)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0659/04

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: NGO and civil society funding (cid:1) European Convention

Can the Commission please tell me specifically which NGOs and/or civil society representatives/
organisations received funding, grants or expenses of any kind for their participation in the European
Convention?

Can they further tell me how much each specific organisation, individual or NGO received, on what date
and for what purpose any monies were paid?