WRITTEN QUESTION E-0693/04 by Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (ELDR), Ieke van den Burg (PSE)and Joke Swiebel (PSE) to the Commission. Proposal COM(2003) 657 and Directive 86/378/EEC.
Date: 2004-03-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European social policy, application of EU law, application of the law, equal treatment, gender equality, pension scheme, social security, supplementary pension

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/845

(2004/C 84 E/0938)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0693/04

by Johanna Boogerd-Quaak (ELDR), Ieke van den Burg (PSE)
and Joke Swiebel (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Proposal COM(2003) 657 and Directive 86/378/EEC

Commission proposal for a Council directive implementing the principle of equal treatment between
women and men in the access to and supply of goods and services (COM(2003) 657) refers to the use of
sex-based actuarial factors. As the Commission rightly points out in the explanatory memorandum and in
recital 13 of the proposal, the use of sex-based actuarial factors is widespread in the provision of insurance
services, even when such differences do not necessarily reflect objective differences.
It is, therefore,
appropriate to prohibit the use of these factors (see Article 4 of the proposal). We wholeheartedly applaud
this and will support the Commission on this proposal.

At the same time, we would like to remind the Commission that, in the fourth Equal Treatment Directive
(Council Directive 86/378/EEC (1) of 24 July 1986 on the implementation of the principle of equal
treatment for men and women in occupational social security schemes), the use of actuarial calculation
factors which differ according to sex may be maintained, pursuant to Article 6(1)(h).

This situation can cause confusion when it comes to deciding whether supplementary pension rules come
under the second or third pillar, and thus whether they must be treated under Directive 86/378/EEC or
under the new directive.

On the assumption that the above-mentioned Commission proposal will soon be approved by Parliament
and the Council, we ask the Commission the following question: Is the Commission prepared to propose
to Parliament and the Council a revised version of Directive 86/378/EEC, so that the use of sex-based
actuarial factors may be forbidden also in the business and sectoral rules on social security?

(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1986, p. 40.

Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2004)

The Commission proposal for a Council directive based on Article 13 of the EC Treaty implementing the
principle of equal treatment between women and men in the access to and supply of goods and services
prohibits the use of sex-based actuarial factors in insurance services and private (third pillar) pension
schemes. This reflects the Commission’s view that the use of sex-based actuarial factors in insurance
services and third pillar pension schemes is not compatible with the principle of equal treatment, and
should be prohibited.

Council Directive 86/378/EEC on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and
women in occupational social security schemes (as amended by Directive 96/97/EC (1)) permits the use of
sex-based actuarial factors in occupational (second pillar) pension schemes. Accordingly, once the Directive
based on Article 13 of the EC Treaty is adopted, there will be different regimes as regards the use of
sex-based actuarial factors in second and third pillar pension schemes.

The Commission does not consider that the application of different regimes for second and third pillar
pensions would cause confusion. The case law of the Court of Justice has laid down clear criteria in the
context of Article 141 of the EC Treaty which determine whether a pension scheme falls under the second
pillar. The essential question the Court of Justice has asked is whether the pension is paid to the worker by
reason of the employment relationship between the worker and her former employer (for example, see
C-7/93 Beune).

C 84 E/846

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

The Commission is approaching use of sex-based actuarial factors in second and third pillar pension
schemes on a step-by-step basis. The question of the use of sex-based actuarial factors in second pillar
pension schemes was considered by the Commission, Parliament and Council in 1986 in the context of
Directive 86/378/EEC, and again in 1996 in the context of Directive 96/97/EC. On each occasion,
the outcome has been that the use of such factors should continue to be permitted. At present, the
Commission is continuing with the discussions in the Council in relation to third pillar pensions covered
by its proposal based on Article 13 EC. Therefore, the Commission does not consider it would be
appropriate to propose a revised version of Directive 86/378/EEC addressing second pillar pensions at this
stage while those discussions in relation to third pillar pensions are continuing.

(1) OJ L 46, 17.2.1997.

(2004/C 84 E/0939)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0694/04

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Auditing the Commission’s external activity

Point 61 of EP report A5-0040/2004 calls on the Internal Audit Service (IAS) to make an assessment of
the legality and regularity of contracts made and subsidies granted by these [sic] services.

Can the Commission confirm whether funding carried out by the EDF is included in the contracts which
are going to be audited by the IAS under this point?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 2004)

The Internal Audit Service (IAS) is currently finalising its audit of the Europe Aid and Co-operation Office
(AIDCO) Directorate-General in line with the objectives of the Reform White Paper.

One of the objectives of the audit was the examination of the AIDCO financial circuits for commitments
and payments for European Development Funds (EDF) resources, made after the entry into force of the
new 9th EDF Financial Regulation and within the effective devolution framework. The non-devolved
delegations were not specifically addressed and the parameters were also set so as to avoid duplication
with the ongoing separate but parallel evaluation of the devolution process.

(2004/C 84 E/0940)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0697/04

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: State aid to credit unions

Can the Commission confirm what are the State aid regulations for small credit unions serving identified
local areas?