WRITTEN QUESTION E-0986/04 by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission. Blood diamonds.
Date: 2004-03-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, access to information, business policy, confidentiality, export monitoring, jewellery and goldsmith's articles, operation of the Institutions, precious stones, surveillance concerning imports

C 88 E/554

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Therefore, it is excluded to discriminate the suppliers of school milk on the basis of their nationality.

(2004/C 88 E/0565)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0955/04

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(29 March 2004)

Subject: Statements by Commissioner Verheugen concerning Turkey’s possible accession to the Union

According to the 24 February 2004 edition of the German newspaper ‘Die Welt’ Commissioner Günter
Verheugen informed the German Chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, two weeks before that date that in the
autumn the Commission will formally recommend to the Council that accession negotiations be opened
with Turkey.

Is this information correct?

If so, has the Commission made sufficient progress with its report on the issue of accession negotiations
with Turkey to be able to draw conclusions of this kind?

If not, has the Commission, or the Commissioner, formally denied the report in ‘Die Welt’? Why not (if
applicable)?

Does the Commission regard it as desirable that its Members or government leaders from the current
Member States should make public statements concerning the conclusions of a significant report which has
not yet been drawn up, let alone published?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

There is frequent speculation in the press as to whether the Commission will recommend the opening of
accession negotiations with Turkey later in 2004. The information mentioned in the article which the
Honourable Member refers to is inaccurate.

The task of the Commission, as set by the Copenhagen European Council in December 2002, is very clear
and has been stated on many occasions.
it will prepare a Regular Report and a
In autumn 2004,
recommendation as to whether Turkey meets the Copenhagen political criteria. This report will be based
on a fair and objective analysis.

(2004/C 88 E/0566)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0986/04

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(30 March 2004)

Subject: Blood diamonds

Does the DG Competition have access to the data held by the DG External Relations concerning the
Kimberley Agreement on tracing the sources and stocks of diamonds (in order to avoid ‘blood diamonds’
coming on to the market)?

Does the Commission consider that the data held for this purpose might also shed light on the trading
practices of companies in the diamond sector? Will it evaluate such data in the context of its consideration
of the De Beers ‘Supplier of Choice’ restrictive practices?

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/555

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

In reply to the Honourable Member’s written question, it may be useful to clarify the objectives of the
Kimberley Process and the role of the Commission within the Kimberley Process.

The Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS), a multilateral initiative put in place with the backing
of the United Nations to stem the flow of ‘conflict diamonds’, has developed a number of internal
instruments to promote the effective implementation of its requirements by all Participants in the Scheme,
including, notably, the regular reporting of statistics on the trade in, and production of, rough diamonds,
and a system of ‘peer review’ of Participants’
implementation of the Scheme. The Commission, and
specifically Directorate-General (DG) External Relations, representing the Community as a Participant in
the KPCS, has access to the information which is made available in this context to all Participants with a
view to ensuring and enhancing implementation of the Scheme. However, all the information in question
is made available by Participants within the Kimberley Process with the exclusive purpose of ensuring
implementation of the Scheme, and the Community, like all other Participants in the KPCS, is bound by
strict confidentiality provisions concerning the data to which it has access as a Participant.

The Commission, therefore, wishes to emphasize that as DG Competition is in no way concerned with the
implementation of the KPCS (the statistical and monitoring provisions of which concern only aggregated
production data and trade flows between countries as well as implementation of
the Scheme by
Participants, and not actions of particular undertakings), the statistical and other data on implementation
of the KPCS to which the Commission, representing the Community as a Participant in the KPCS, has
access are not made available to DG Competition. The Commission is of the view that using data made
available by Participants in the KPCS for any purpose other than enhancing implementation of the KPCS
would be incompatible with the provisions of the Scheme and undermine the effectiveness of the KPCS as
a crucial tool in the fight against conflict diamonds.

DG Competition is therefore not in a position to have access to or use the sensitive data gathered in this
context for the purposes of considering De Beers’ Supplier of Choice allegedly restrictive practices.
However, should DG Competition consider that the information relating to trading practices of certain
undertakings is necessary to its proper evaluation of the competitive situation in the diamond market, it
certainly can make use of
its investigatory powers in order to collect such information from the
undertakings or organisations concerned.

As already referred to in the Commission’s reply to the Honourable Member’s previous Oral Question
H-0637/03 during question time at Parliament’s November 2003 session (1), DG Competition, after having
authorised the implementation of the Supplier of Choice arrangements by De Beers in January 2003,
committed to look at the diamond market closely, should legal or factual elements come to its attention,
which would affect the view the Commission had taken of the Supplier of Choice arrangements.

Following allegations of a number of companies on the implementation of the Supplier of Choice
arrangements by De Beers, DG Competition has sent a number of requests for information to a variety of
market operators in order to be fully informed of the situation in the market and is in the process of
collecting answers to these requests. Once the answers have been analysed, the Commission will have to
consider the next steps, if any, to be taken.

(1) Oral Reply, 18.11.2003.

(2004/C 88 E/0567)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0990/04

by Jan Wiersma (PSE) to the Commission

(30 March 2004)

Subject: The recent clashes between Syrian Kurds and the Syrian authorities (March 2004)

Has the Commission sought information about the recent clashes between Syrian Kurds and the Syrian
army, and what is the Commission’s response to them?