WRITTEN QUESTION E-1042/04 by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE)and Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Pensions: discrimination against private pensions.
Date: 2004-04-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: anti-discriminatory measure, equal treatment, gender equality, goods and services, pension scheme, private insurance, social security

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/935

From the point of view of the functioning of the market, how does the Commission assess the

4.
conditions imposed on customers, such as long waiting periods, the charging of costs, etc.?

Does the Commission share my view that such conditions must be kept to a minimum in order to

5.
ensure that a genuine market can operate?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

Directive 2002/22/EC (Universal Service Directive) mandates mobile number portability in its

1.
Article 30. This Directive has been applicable since 25 July 2003.

As of 1 March 2004, mobile number portability has been implemented in all Member States except
Austria.

As far as Accession Countries are concerned, information available to the Commission shows that mobile
number portability is included in the draft national legislations transposing the Community framework on
electronic communications. In practice however, it will be available some time after the accession date on
1 May 2004, except in Lithuania and Hungary, where it should already be implemented.

The Universal Service Directive states that national regulatory authorities (NRAs) should ensure that
2.
direct charges to subscribers should not act as a disincentive towards number portability.
In the
9th Implementation Report, published in December 2003 (1) the Commission had noted that the success of
number portability seemed to be linked to the charge imposed by the operator for porting the number.
As of 1 August 2003, 6 million mobile numbers had been ported. The Commission is not aware of
specific problems in the Member States in relation to mobile number portability, except in Austria, as
mentioned above.

3.

The Commission is currently considering the appropriate action to be taken against Austria.

4.
The Commission is, as mentioned, not aware of specific problems in Member States. NRAs in the
Member States have defined the conditions to be applied for mobile number portability, when the
operators were not able to reach an agreement.

The Commission believes constraints on consumers should be kept to a minimum in order to

5.
increase competition.

(1) COM 2003(715) final.

(2004/C 84 E/1033)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1042/04

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE)
and Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 April 2004)

Subject: Pensions: discrimination against private pensions

Can the Commission clarify why third pillar pensions (personal pensions, group personal pensions and
stakeholder pensions) are to be included within the scope of the proposed directive on equal treatment
between women and men in access to and supply of goods and services (1) when second pillar pensions
(occupational pensions) are not? Will the Commission accept that this is discrimination against the private
sector?

(1) COM(2003) 0657 final (cid:1) C5-0654/2003.

C 84 E/936

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

The Commission’s 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.

Council Directive 86/378/EEC of 27 July 1986 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment
for men and women in occupational social security schemes (1) (as amended by Council Directive 96/97/EC
of 20 December 1996 (2)) permits the use of sex-based actuarial factors in occupational (second pillar)
pension schemes. These Directives are based on Article 141 of the EC Treaty, because they relate to
matters of employment and occupation.

The proposal for a Council Directive based on Article 13 of the EC Treaty does not apply to second pillar
pensions, because these are a matter for legislation adopted under Article 141 of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1986.
(2) OJ L 46, 17.2.1997.

(2004/C 84 E/1034)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1057/04

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(5 April 2004)

Subject: Implications for the Community textile sector of certain trade practices on the part of China

The Spanish Intertextile Council has formally requested the World Trade Organisation to establish a
three-year extension to prevent the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing from coming into force until
2007; this Agreement will remove all quotas, and will bring about the total liberalisation of the sector. The
main reason for the Spanish request is the existence of certain ‘unfair’ trading practices on the part of
various countries involved in the Agreement, such as China.

Other countries,
Declaration’, stating their fear that China will globally dominate the textile and clothes sector,
continues with these practices, deemed illegal by the international community.

including the USA, Turkey and Mexico, have joined Spain in signing the ‘Istanbul
if it

Does the Commission have further information concerning these facts?

What measures does the Commission intend to take to defend the European textiles sector against China’s
‘unfair’ trading practices?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The Commission is aware of the contents of the so-called ‘Istanbul Declaration’ whereby United States,
Mexican and Turkish industry associations called for an extension of the validity of the Agreement on
Textiles of Clothing (ATC) for a further period of two years beyond its expiry date at the end of 2004.
On 4 May 2003 a letter in this sense was forwarded to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Director
General. Furthermore,
it is also known that the Italian and Spanish industry are supportive of this
initiative. Some developing countries, notably sub-Saharan, also appear to be supportive of an extension of
the validity of the ATC.