Question Time (Council)
The next item is Question Time (B6-0231/2009).
The following questions have been submitted to the Council.
Mr Kohout is here representing the Council. I should like to take this opportunity to welcome the decision made today by the Czech Senate, which gives us high hopes of the future ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon.
Subject: Protection of European creative works
Given that European creative works are being undermined by the growing plethora of pirated copies, what measures does the Council propose in order to afford real protection?
President-in-Office of the Council. - Mr President, thank you for your kind words addressed to the Czech Republic and to the Senate. We are also very pleased that the green light for the Lisbon Treaty is now much stronger than it was a few hours before.
In response to the first question, I would like to say that the Council shares the concerns expressed by the honourable Member relating to the need to comprehensively address the problem of piracy of protected works. This issue has been identified as a policy priority by both the European Parliament and the Council in the context of the overall effort to protect and foster innovation of European creators and consequently the competitiveness of the European economy.
The European Parliament and the Council have adopted Directive 2004/48/EC, which puts in place a Community framework for the enforcement of intellectual property rights and are currently working on a proposal for a directive on criminal measures, aimed at ensuring enforcement of such rights.
The legislative framework already in force provides for a solid base for the Member States to pursue effective protection of intellectual property rights, including by fighting piracy. Moreover, the European Community and the Member States are participating in ongoing negotiations, such as the draft anti-counterfeiting trade agreement, in order to render the protection of intellectual property rights more effective at international level.
On 25 September 2008, the Council adopted a resolution setting down concrete actions to be taken by the Member States and the Commission in the context of a comprehensive European anti-counterfeiting and anti-piracy plan. Moreover, the Council adopted in November 2008 a set of conclusions in response to the Commission communication of January 2008 on creative content online in the single market, highlighting, amongst other things, the need to promote and facilitate legitimate online offers of copyright-protected material as an important means of effectively fighting piracy.
In the customs field, the Council has adopted Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 concerning customs action against goods suspected of infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights. This regulation sets out the conditions under which the customs authorities may intervene in cases where goods are suspected of infringing intellectual property rights and the steps to be taken by the authorities when goods are found to be illegal.
In particular, the Community has concluded a series of customs cooperation agreements, like the agreement recently concluded with China, in order to improve and facilitate cooperation with the customs authorities of third countries, inter alia for the fight against counterfeited and pirated goods. These agreements are practical means and methods of cooperation between the European Community and the customs authorities of partner countries. These agreements are constantly implemented and updated in the framework of the Joint Customs Cooperation Committees established under these agreements.
At multilateral level, the Council actively contributes to the work undertaken under the auspices of the World Customs Organisation.
Lastly, on 16 March 2009, the Council adopted a resolution on the EU customs action plan to combat intellectual property rights infringements for the years 2009-2012, following on from the abovementioned Council resolution of 25 September 2008.
The Council remains open to examining any future initiatives that would aim at reinforcing the fight against counterfeiting and piracy so as to provide more comprehensive protection to right holders. The Council appreciates all similar efforts by the European Parliament to the same end.
(ES) Thank you very much for your answer, Mr President. I believe that, in fact, the Council does understand what the problem is, but I would like to insist on this point and to ask you, President-in-Office of the Council, if the Council is aware that at the moment European cultural production is below minimum levels.
European Union law on the protection of creative works is that of an underdeveloped country and, as a result, our cultural production is falling to the levels seen in underdeveloped countries. This is especially apparent in the audiovisual sector, where at the moment the majority of production is taking place outside Europe, mainly in the United States, because that country protects creative works. If Europe does not protect creative works, we will not have them. Is the Council aware of the responsibility that it bears at this time?
(DE) My question concerns the following: Mrs Trautmann was outvoted today here in Parliament with her compromise amendment on the telecommunications package. This means, therefore, that she has put President Sarkozy in a good position with his 'three strikes - out' solution. How does the Czech Presidency assess today's vote in Parliament with regard to the European creative artists who want to protect their rights on the Internet?
Mr President, I would just like to assure the honourable Member that the Council is well aware that this is a significant activity and a real threat to the cultural wealth of Europeans and the European Union. I think it is evident from the list of measures that the Council has undertaken in previous months and previous years that these issues have been and continue to be a priority, even within the framework of the comprehensive European plan which has set specific action goals, such as the establishment of the European Counterfeiting and Piracy Observatory. I believe it should be stated in this context that the Council realises its responsibility, is aware of the serious nature of the problem at hand, and is resolved to take specific action in this matter. As for the telecommunications package, both the previous presidency and our presidency have invested much energy in this matter. We are disappointed that the complete compromise, including this anti-piracy provision, has not been approved. I would like to voice the hope that the agreed telecommunications package will eventually be passed, following further procedures. Nevertheless, I am disappointed that, for the reasons mentioned by the honourable Member, the package has not been passed today.
Subject: Climate change
Given the well-known sceptical opinion of the Czech President Václav Klaus on climate change, how is the Council ensuring that the views of the vast majority of EU Member States and citizens endorsing the scientific veracity of man-made climate change are being respected, specifically in relation to preparations for the Copenhagen Climate Summit and the forthcoming Swedish Presidency?
President-in-Office of the Council. - Last March the Council and the spring European Council further refined a new position for the international climate change negotiations, in particular in view of the Copenhagen Conference.
At this meeting of 19-20 March 2009, the Council stressed its conviction that the economic crisis and the policy measures in response to it provide an opportunity to achieve the necessary economic reforms and at the same time speed up reforms towards a safe and sustainable low-carbon resource-efficient economy.
The Presidency conclusions of the European Council of March this year stated that the European Union remained committed to playing a leading role and bringing about the global and comprehensive climate agreement in Copenhagen in December this year, designed to limit global warming to below 2° Celsius.
To this end the European Council recalled the EU's commitment to a 30% emission reduction as its contribution to such an agreement, provided that other developed countries commit themselves to comparable emission reductions and that advanced developing countries contribute adequately according to their responsibilities and respective capabilities. The European Council will further discuss these issues at its June meeting.
deputising for the author. - I would like to thank the Czech Presidency for the chairing of the committee and their views on this.
As I asked one of your colleagues before, could I have assurances now, as we approach the critical meeting that will be the UNFCC COP-15 in Copenhagen this December, that we will have the enthusiastic support of the Czech Government for an adequate and fully equitable global agreement to reduce carbon emissions worldwide?
You started your Presidency with the reputation of being climate-sceptics. Can you confirm now that you are converts and that you fully agree with the legislative climate and energy package that was passed overwhelmingly last December by this Parliament?
President-in-Office of the Council. - (CS) Mr President, in response to the question I would like to say firstly that we - in the sense of the Czech Government and the Czech Republic - have never been sceptical about climate change. I do not think that what I said in my speech about certain conclusions being adopted by the March European Council, about certain measures being adopted by previous European Councils attended by the Czech Government and about the government agreeing with those conclusions, can indicate in any way that either the outgoing government or the new government which comes into office on Friday have changed their opinions on this matter in any way. In this sense we can say that we will follow the course submitted or outlined by previous Councils, and our ambition is for the EU to do its utmost at the upcoming June EU summit to move forward, despite all the associated problems and difficulties, on the preparation of the mandate of the European Council and the negotiating framework for Copenhagen. I sensed in the question an allusion to the Czech President but I can tell you categorically and honestly that two days ago a summit with Japan was held in Prague, chaired on behalf of the EU by President Klaus and if you spotted anything out of line there with the unified EU view on the climate, kindly let me know, although I know that but nothing of that kind took place. Seen in this light, I view these concerns as understandable, but not entirely justified in principle, and I hope I have managed to dispel them.
Subject: Lisbon Treaty and the Czech Presidency
Could the Council please comment on a possible timetable for ratification by the Czech Republic of the Lisbon Treaty?
President-in-Office of the Council. - (CS) Mr President, in your introduction to my speech today you made an announcement in which you congratulated the Czech Republic over the fact that its Senate today approved the Lisbon Treaty with a clear majority of votes. I believe that - at this moment - this is the best reply to the question in hand.
Thank you to the Czech Minister and congratulations through him to the leader and all the members of the Czech Senate. Now both the upper and lower houses have voted to approve the ratification.
You may look at me as an Irish Member of this House and say: is this the pot calling the kettle black? We have a job yet to do in Ireland. The Poles and the Germans also have a bit of tidying up to do.
But can I ask you to indicate when and if your President Klaus is likely to accept the wishes of the upper and lower Houses and approve - or sign off, if you like - the full ratification of the Treaty? Again, thank you. I am delighted with today's result in your Senate.
(DE) Mr President, I congratulate the Czech Presidency on the decision in the Senate. Nonetheless, I have to say that we in Europe are naturally dissatisfied with many areas of the interplay between the institutions of the European Union and that is why we have negotiated this reform treaty over the last eight months. Would it perhaps be possible for a debate to be conducted in the Czech Republic regarding what in fact they find troubling about this treaty and what alternatives President Klaus could offer the people of Europe to quell the current dissatisfaction, to which he indeed vociferously refers, and what solutions he would envision? At present, all that is known is that he wants to prevent the reform but is putting forward no positive proposals.
(DE) Mr President, with President Klaus having damaged the national renown of his country out of sheer egocentricity I too would like to congratulate the Czech Presidency and say that it was a first-class presidency. I am happy that it has ended with the ratification of the treaty as far as parliamentary procedure is concerned.
Mr President, I would like to thank you for your words of appreciation, and your congratulations on the approval of the Lisbon Treaty by our Senate. President Klaus has his own views and we in the Czech Republic respect his opinions, which are part of the democratic spectrum of opinion. As for the debate on the Lisbon Treaty, it proved to be very intense, and that is why the Senate has not approved the Lisbon Treaty until now, following long discussions on the subject. The large majority of votes - 54 senators out of the 80 present - cast in favour of the treaty included senators from the Civil Democratic Party (ODS) (the party President Klaus once founded), which shows that there is 'Eurorealism' in the Czech Republic, that there is a very strong feeling of co-responsibility for Europe and for the EU, as well as a will to continue the process of European integration and to take an active part in it. As regards the constitutional arrangement for approval by both chambers of the Czech Parliament, it is really a precondition for ratification, which then culminates with the signature of the President. In this respect, the constitution does not set any deadlines, and I would not like to speculate at this moment about the date by which the Treaty will be signed by the President. The situation for us is now quite new, even in the Czech Republic itself. This is a great load off our minds and we are naturally overjoyed. We will of course hold further consultations and talks aimed at finalising ratification within the shortest possible period of time.
Subject: Croatia, Macedonia and Southeast Europe
How does the Council judge the likelihood of concluding accession negotiations with Croatia and giving a deadline for negotiations with Macedonia before the end of the year and fleshing out the prospects for EU accession of southeast European states, including Kosovo, lying between Croatia and Macedonia?
President-in-Office of the Council. - Mr President, the negotiations with Croatia have entered an important and demanding phase. Since the start of these negotiations, 22 chapters have been opened, of which seven have been provisionally closed. Forecasts of the conclusion of the negotiating process cannot be made. As you know, the advancement of the negotiations is mainly guided by Croatia's progress in preparing for accession in addressing opening and closing benchmarks, as well as in meeting the requirements of the negotiating framework and fulfilling Croatia's obligations under the Stabilisation and Association Agreement.
The implementation of the revised Accession Partnership is also important to prepare for further integration with the European Union. Full cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, including access to documents, remains essential in line with the negotiating framework. In this context, it is worth recalling that the Council has repeatedly stated that, in accordance with the negotiating framework and the Accession Partnership, efforts towards good neighbourly relations must be continued - in particular work on finding solutions to bilateral issues with neighbouring countries, especially border issues.
The Presidency regrets that the border issue with Slovenia is affecting the pace of Croatia's accession negotiations and the progress on the ground does not match the former progress registered. As you know, the Presidency, together with the former and incoming Presidencies and the Commission, has made significant facilitation efforts to make progress on this issue. Furthermore, the April General Affairs and External Relations Council held a useful discussion to take stock of the situation.
Concerning the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, I would like to recall the decision of the European Council of December 2005 to grant it the status of candidate country, taking into account in particular the requirements of the stabilisation and association process and criteria for membership and implementation of the priorities in the Partnership, the substantial progress made in completing the legislative framework related to the Ohrid Framework Agreement, as well as its track record in implementing the Stabilisation and Association Agreement, including its trade-related provisions since 2001.
According to the European Council of June 2008, further steps by the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in its progress towards the EU will be possible, provided that the conditions set out in the December 2005 European Council conclusions, the Copenhagen political criteria and the outstanding key priorities of the Accession Partnership are fulfilled. Maintaining good neighbourly relations, including a negotiated and mutually acceptable solution on the main issue, remains essential. Holding free and fair elections is crucial. According to the preliminary assessment of the OSCE/ODIHR election observation mission, elections held on 22 March and 5 April were organised thoroughly and met most international commitments and standards.
This is an important step forward for democracy in the country. We encourage the new President and the Government in their efforts to achieve progress in their country, to the benefit of all citizens, and the Government for concentrating on the reform agenda, such as the strengthening of the rule of law, economic progress and the fight against corruption and organised crime.
Concerning other countries of the Western Balkans, very considerable progress has been made towards EU membership over recent years but this has also been uneven and huge challenges remain. The Council is willing to support efforts to meet these challenges, in particular by implementing the Stabilisation and Association Agreements and by granting considerable financial support. The Stabilisation and Association Process remains the overall framework for the European perspective of the Western Balkans. By making solid progress in economic and political reform and by fulfilling the necessary conditions and requirements, the remaining potential candidates in the Western Balkans should achieve candidate status according to their own merits, with EU membership as the ultimate goal.
In December 2008 Montenegro filed its membership application. On 23 April this year the Council asked the Commission to prepare its opinion on the application so that the Council can then take further decisions. On 28 April Albania applied for EU membership. Applications from other countries might be received at a later stage.
The Council recalls the European Union's willingness to assist the economic and political development of Kosovo through a clear European perspective, in line with the European perspective of the region. The Council welcomes the Commission's intention to present, in autumn 2009, a study examining means to further Kosovo's political and socioeconomic development. The Council is committed to strengthening people-to-people contacts, such as lifting the visa requirements when the benchmarks defined in the visa liberalisation road maps are met, as well as further promoting student and young professional exchanges.
While strengthening the ownership principle, the EU stresses the importance of regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations among the Western Balkan countries. Regional cooperation and the European agenda are linked. The more Western Balkan countries cooperate with each other, the more they integrate within European structures. This is because regional cooperation contributes to a shared understanding in the region and to finding solutions for issues of common interest, such as in the fields of energy, transport, trade, the fight against organised crime and corruption, refugee return and border control.
(DE) Many thanks for that very good and very exhaustive reply.
I have three very short supplementary questions:
First, do you believe it is conceivable that the Czech Presidency will open a new chapter with Croatia?
Second, will you name a date for Macedonia this year?
Third, what is the timeframe for relaxing visa restrictions?
President-in-Office of the Council. - (CS) Mr President, with respect to the first question concerning the unblocking of the negotiation process, as I previously stated in my opening speech, one of the agenda items of the last meeting of the Council for General Affairs and External Relations was devoted precisely to these issues. We firmly believe that progress in this matter will be achieved during the current presidency, as well as an agreement to facilitate the conclusion of the negotiating chapters that have been prepared for closing. It has been one of the main goals of this presidency since the outset to unblock this situation. A solution is taking shape and we hope it will be acceptable to all parties involved, making it possible to achieve progress in the negotiations.
As for the question concerning the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM), it should be noted that at this moment we do not expect a date to be fixed or other specifics to be finalised during this presidency. We do not envisage visa liberalisation in the first session of this year, but do believe that by the end of this year or early next year citizens from a number of Western Balkan countries that are close to meeting or have already met the benchmarks, could travel visa-free from some of the Western Balkans countries to the European Union. It has been emphasised here on several occasions that one of the priorities of our presidency is to bring the countries of the Western Balkans and the European Union closer together. We have been devoting considerable efforts to this end, and we want to devote equal, if not greater, efforts to this priority in the two months remaining to us.
Subject: Protecting the most vulnerable in the economic crisis
In the conclusions of its meeting on 19 and 20 March, the European Council stated that in tackling the social impact of the current economic crisis, 'particular attention should be given to the most vulnerable and to new risks of exclusion'.
In what ways is the Council focusing on protecting the most vulnerable, such as new migrants, older people, settled ethnic minorities, people with disabilities and the homeless, from being pushed to the margins of society?
President-in-Office of the Council. - As the honourable parliamentarian has said very well the joint report on social protection and social inclusion, which was submitted to the European Council meeting on 19-20 March, stresses the need for appropriate social policies, not only to mitigate the adverse social impact on the most vulnerable but also to cushion the impact of the crisis on the economy as a whole.
This implies adjusting benefits, where needed, to safeguard appropriate support for recipients. In particular comprehensive active inclusion strategies that combine and balance measures and inclusive labour market access to quality services and adequate minimum incomes need to be implemented.
A boost must be given to Member States' efforts to implement comprehensive strategies against poverty and social exclusion of children, including accessible and affordable quality childcare.
Sustained work is required to tackle homelessness as an extremely serious form of exclusion, to promote the social inclusion of migrants and to address, for example, the multiple disadvantages the Roma people are facing and their vulnerability to social exclusion.
Vigilance is also needed as new risk groups, among them young workers and labour market entrants, as well as new risks, may emerge.
As regards the specific situation of older people, ethnic minorities and persons with disabilities, the Council has already adopted legislation aiming to protect these and other vulnerable groups from discrimination. Council Directive 2000/78/EC establishes a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation and prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation as regards employment and occupation. Council Directive 2000/43/EC implements the principle of equal treatment between persons, irrespective of racial or ethnic origin, in a wide number of areas including employment, self-employment, vocational training, social security, education and access to goods and services, including housing.
In addition, the Council is currently examining a new Commission proposal that aims to extend the protection against discrimination even further. The proposal for a Council directive on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation would extend the protection against discrimination based on religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation to areas beyond employment. On 2 April 2009 the European Parliament voted in favour of the Commission's proposal under the consultation procedure, and discussions on the draft directive are ongoing in the Council.
Allow me also to recall that last spring the Council and Parliament successfully negotiated a first-reading agreement on the Commission's proposal to establish a European Year for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion in 2010. At the time, few of us could have guessed the scale of the coming economic crisis. However, with the benefit of hindsight, it is clear that the Commission, Council and Parliament were absolutely right to focus on the problems of poverty and social exclusion.
Finally the Council is also examining a set of draft conclusions on equal opportunities for women and men of the age 50-plus generation, tabled by the Czech Presidency. It is expected that these conclusions will be adopted by the Council in June. This will be another opportunity for the Council to reaffirm its commitment to ensuring that our older citizens can live active lives and age with dignity.
Within the framework of the current EU Presidency, the Conference on Social Services entitled 'Social services: a tool for mobilising the workforce and strengthening social cohesion' was held in Prague in April this year. The conference stressed the importance of social services for active inclusion of people endangered by social exclusion and excluded from the labour market.
The social services sector, due to economic and demographic changes on the one hand, becomes the important field of new job opportunities, in particular for women and older workers and, on the other hand, it helps the social services users themselves to hold down their jobs.
The conference introduced basic starting points for further all-European discussions on the role of social services in society. Although the ways of providing social services, sharing competences and the conception of financial sustainability are different in EU Member States, there was a good deal of consensus among the speakers at the conference on the role and goals of social services.
In the conference conclusions, which will be further elaborated and then negotiated with the aim of adoption by the EPSCO Council in June, the role of social services as an essential instrument for social policies is stressed.
The necessity of the integrated manner in conceiving and delivering social services and taking into account individual needs of clients is underlined as well. The important role of public authorities in guaranteeing quality, access and sustainability of social services is mentioned and it is stated that investing in social services, in particular during the present financial and economic crisis, pays and can strengthen the growth potential and the cohesion of economies and societies. The importance of informal care is pointed out and so-called 'shared care', a combination of both formal and informal care, seems to be optimum and most effective.
In the conference conclusions, the importance of the promotion of a system of lifelong training and capacity-building for assuring the quality of services is mentioned. Last but not least, the protection of rights, dignity and special needs of social services users is emphasised.
deputising for the author. - (NL) Mr President, I would like to thank the Czech Presidency warmly for answering my question. I was pleased to hear that the issue of extending the Directive on anti-discrimination to goods and services was given a prominent place in your answers to questions on the fight against growing poverty and social exclusion amongst the most vulnerable groups. Allow me to tell you how much I appreciate this.
My question to you is, does this also mean that the text which this House approved in April enjoys the full support of the Czech Presidency, and what practical steps have you, as President-in-Office, taken in order to ensure that this directive is also adopted as soon as possible by the Member States and the Council? Many thanks.
(LT) I too would like to thank you for your comprehensive reply. The problem of social exclusion is very widespread and multi-faceted, because, in my opinion, now many people simply face problems of survival. Is the Council prepared to increase food aid? Food aid is also a very important matter now, as this crisis rages, and it seems to me that we should devote more attention to this.
President-in-Office of the Council. - (CS) I would like to thank you for applauding my previous reply and my efforts to give a truly exhaustive answer to the question posed. As regards the additional question, it must be said that I am not in a position to give a perfectly clear answer at this point in time. Nevertheless, it should also be noted that all of the issues relating to social exclusion, as well as those concerning the fight against poverty in this time of crisis, are quite naturally on the agenda and are being discussed intensely in the Council's working groups, including the directive that you mentioned. As for food aid, I may have misunderstood the aim of the question, but at the Council we have been discussing food aid primarily for developing countries, in other words the countries worst affected by the economic and financial crisis, as well as by the previous food crisis. As far as the situation in the European Union is concerned, no such topic is being discussed. Nevertheless, we are aware of the responsibility of the European Union regarding the least successful or those who need far more assistance in the current situation, and this subject will also figure on the agenda of a meeting of the ministers for development co-operation.
Subject: European Employment Pact
How does the Council view the proposal to adopt a European Employment Pact which could be an important tool in preserving social cohesion and promoting the growth and economic recovery of the EU which is suffering from the effects of the global crisis?
President-in-Office of the Council. - The Council has not received any proposal from the Commission for a European employment tax. Therefore the Council is not in a position to answer the specific points raised by the honourable Member on this issue. However, the Council shares the concerns expressed by the honourable Member in her question and considers that it is important to preserve social cohesion and to promote the growth and economic recovery of the European Union, which is suffering from the effects of the global crisis.
In this framework, the Presidency would like to recall that Member States remain, in the first instance, responsible for designing and implementing the employment policies. Nevertheless, the Council pays special attention to these employment policies, especially now that Europe is facing a financial economic crisis and adopts new early employment guidelines in accordance with the Treaty.
In this sense, the Presidency would like to recall that in December last year the European Council decided an overall European economic recovery plan to address, inter alia, employment issues resulting from the financial crisis. The plan consists of immediate budgetary measures amounting to EUR 200 billion comprising, on the one hand, Community measures amounting to EUR 30 billion and, on the other hand, national measures that would amount to EUR 170 billion.
The European Council also supported the idea of rapid action by the European Social Fund in support of employment, especially for the benefit of the most vulnerable groups in the population, such as supporting flexicurity policies and policies easing job transition periods, and giving Member States the opportunity, where necessary, for reprogramming European Social Fund expenditures in order to strengthen their employment strategies.
It is also to be recalled that, in addition to the European Social Fund, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund also provides Community assistance to complement national actions, including actions at regional and local levels. This fund, created by the Council in 2007, addresses specific European-scale crises caused by globalisation and provides one-off, time-limited individual support geared directly to redundant workers.
A revision of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund is under way and the European Council of March 2009 called for a swift agreement to be reached. The Council welcomes the agreement for a first-reading adoption of this revision and goes by today's vote in plenary.
The European Council of March also agreed upon some additional measures such as the following: removing barriers while preventing the creation of new ones and achieving a fully operational internal market; further reducing administrative burdens; improving framework conditions for industry in order to maintain a strong industrial base and for businesses with a special focus on SMEs and innovation; encouraging partnership between business, research, education and training; and stepping up and improving the quality of investment in research, knowledge, and education.
Finally the Presidency would like to recall that the initiative of the current Presidency, an Employment Summit, will be organised on 7 May in Prague. Yesterday the Czech Deputy Prime Minister for European Affairs, Mr Vondra, had the opportunity to speak at this plenary on this issue on behalf of the Presidency.
(EL) Mr President, I thank the President-in-Office of the Council for his reply. My question was on exactly the same wavelength. Should all the means programmed from time to time - especially as a result of the crisis - not be coordinated under one umbrella, what I call an 'agreement on employment', so that they bear fruit for the European citizens, who hear about millions of euros - you mentioned the sum of 200 billion - but do not see this money being translated into effective action which will give them a way out of unemployment and poverty?
President-in-Office of the Council. - (CS) Mr President, I must say I am wholly sympathetic to what has been said here, and I am convinced that the forthcoming summit, the'employment summit' in Prague, will be another occasion for creating and putting forward initiatives which the June European Council will be able to return to and which will be focused precisely on the topics we have been discussing here, in other words issues relating to the impact of the economic crisis on employment.
Subject: Health care abroad
The new patient mobility directive, scheduled to be debated by Parliament in April, will lay down common provisions on the reimbursement of health care received abroad. Members of the European Parliament are seeking to ensure that patients from EU countries have every opportunity to receive treatment abroad (such as through the reimbursement in advance of expensive health-care services so that they are not only available to the wealthy), while the Council is proposing that such rights be limited and that the Member States themselves decide what health care received by their citizens abroad would qualify for reimbursement.
In the Council's view, how can these opposing positions of Parliament and the Council be reconciled? What possible compromise proposals does the Council envisage?
President-in-Office of the Council. - Mr President, the Presidency, building on the work carried out by the French Presidency, is pursuing actively discussions on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the application of patients' rights in cross-border health care.
The Presidency's objective is to find solutions that will strike the right balance between the rights of the patients in cross-border health care and the responsibilities of the Member States for the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care.
As the Presidency stated during the plenary debate of 23 April 2009, patients travelling to other Member States should receive full information and high-quality health care. But it is also important to make sure that the directive fulfils the principles of clarity, legal certainty and subsidiarity. Discussions are still ongoing in the Council, so it is impossible to predict whether a political agreement can be reached under the current Czech Presidency. However, the current discussions in the Council suggest that a system of prior authorisation is likely to be limited to specific types of health care. It will be an option for Member States, which they may or may not use. This possibility was recognised by the European Court of Justice under certain conditions.
The Council is also considering accompanying any system of prior authorisation with measures aimed at transparency and full information of the patients about their rights related to receiving cross-border health care.
On the other hand, the directive sets a minimum level of what the Member States have to guarantee to their patients as regards the reimbursement of the costs of cross-border health care. It is the same amount which would be incurred for the same treatment in their home Member State. Nothing prevents Member States from providing their patients who receive cross-border health care with a more advantageous form of reimbursement, even in advance. However, it depends on the Member States' national policy.
Nevertheless, in cases where the person really needs to receive planned treatment in another Member State and there are objective medical reasons for that, there is already in existence Regulation (EC) 883/2004, under which the patient will receive health care without actually bearing costs himself.
According to the report voted in Parliament's plenary on 24 April 2009, the European Parliament has also recognised the prior authorisation system as a planning and management tool if it is transparent, predictable, non-discriminatory and subject to clear information for patients.
The Council will study all the amendments with care and will consider how to take account of them in its common position in order to reach an agreement in second reading.
(LT) Once again thank you for your comprehensive and, I would say, hopeful reply. It is very good that the conditions for obtaining medical assistance, both at home and abroad, are being harmonised. However, it is clearly wrong that a lot will depend on a patient's ability to pay. Those patients who are unable to make up the difference between costs at home and abroad will not be able to take advantage of this.
The Czech Republic, which took over the presidency from France, is still a young country and I would like to ask: were there differences in the way the new and old Member States assessed this problem?
President-in-Office of the Council. - (CS) Mr President, I would like to express my thanks for the additional comment by the honourable Member. We are bearing this in mind and we will take account of it. I think he has identified a major problem, but at this moment the question cannot be resolved in a clear-cut and simple manner. I view this as a problem that should be addressed by the Council in its further discussions on these issues.
Questions which have not been answered for lack of time will be answered in writing (see Annex).


6. Presentation of the Commission work programme for 2011 (
- Before the vote on Amendment 7:
(DE) Mr President, I would like the end of this amendment to be reworded. The wording is very negative and I would like it to read as follows:
The initiative "Youth on the Move” underlines the importance of the above mentioned programmes.
Mr President, I just want to say that we are withdrawing Amendment 14.
(DE) Mr President, this is about the Union for the Mediterranean. We know that it has currently come to a standstill and that we want to revive it. The wording does not express this clearly enough, so we would like to insert the following text:
The current stalemate of the Union for the Mediterranean.
(DE) I know that there is a contradiction here. Perhaps another wording would be possible, but the wording we are proposing is:
The current stalemate of the Union for the Mediterranean.


Composition of Parliament : see Minutes


Facing oil challenges (short presentation)
The next item is a brief presentation of the report by Herbert Reul, on behalf of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, on 'Possible solutions to the challenges in relation to oil supply'.
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in this report on oil supply I make a plea - and this was also agreed in committee - for emphasis to be placed on the importance of oil in the European energy supply of the future. Oil will clearly remain a very important source of primary energy in the EU even in the medium and long term.
We have been seeing a steep rise in demand caused by economic and population growth and also by the desire for individual mobility. In recent months and years we have been concerning ourselves in varying ways - the report also concentrates on this to a large extent - with the logical question that arises as to how to reduce consumption, how to reduce demand. How can we lower our consumption or cover it with other energy sources too?
This report seeks to look at the fact that we politicians should be thinking about whether and how the resources, the supply side, can be increased and what can be done in this regard. Three or four points are mentioned in this regard. Firstly, massive investment is needed to produce and exploit the available oil: USD 350 billion per annum is the figure always quoted in this connection.
Secondly, it must be pointed out that we need to be much more active in the field of technological innovations. We also need to think about how to exploit all the available reserves as efficiently as possible. This brings the focus not only to the issues of technology and the usability of land but also very quickly to foreign-policy considerations, of course. In this regard, too, in a number of points I cannot list exhaustively here, this report attempts to point out that we must step up our efforts to make unconventional oil resources commercially viable: so as to contribute to diversification, to answer the question as to how transport routes too can be changed, and to raise the question as to what contribution foreign policy can make in terms of strengthening relations and mutual dependency and reliability between the European Union and the oil-producing countries.
This report does not attempt to answer all the oil-related questions but rather seeks to examine a number of issues that have not been central up to now. It disregards all efficiency and energy saving issues, not because they are unimportant but because they are dealt with elsewhere. A number of new questions should be raised in this connection - we should even consider, for example, whether sufficient young blood is entering the technology field: young people who are prepared to get involved in this field and to seek new solutions.
That was a brief summary of the substance of this report.
Vice-President of the Commission. - (FR) Mr President, I wish, on behalf of the Commission, to thank Mr Reul for having prepared the report on the possible solutions to the challenges related to oil supplies I also wish to thank the members of the various committees that have put forward views on the issue for their valuable contributions to this important debate.
The economic conditions have greatly changed since the Commission communication of June 2008, entitled 'Facing oil challenges'. At the time, crude oil reached USD 140 a barrel, with major effects on the general economy and on private individuals in the European Union. Since then, the price of crude has fallen by a good USD 100 to below USD 40 a barrel.
However, the analysis carried out at the time by the Commission remains relevant to the structural conditions of the oil markets, world energy demand in the medium and long term and the importance of European Union policies on energy and climate change. All these factors will change our forms of production and consumption and our behaviour.
Many of these questions were discussed in detail in the second strategic analysis of energy policy adopted in November 2008, which has been the subject of debate on other occasions in Parliament. Furthermore, the adoption by the Council and the European Parliament, in December 2008, of the package of proposals on energy and climate change was a major step towards resolute action on our future energy needs, in particular with the setting of the objective for the use of 20% renewable energies in all energy consumed by 2020.
The Commission gives a favourable welcome to most of the points raised in Mr Reul's report. We note the support for new investments in replacement energy sources, such as renewable energies, and the priority given to energy-efficient goods and services. These features were put forward by the Commission in the European Economic Recovery Plan.
We, of course, welcome the importance given to the intensification of the dialogue with the producer countries to find pragmatic solutions to the problems faced. It is clear, given the growing connection between energy and foreign policies and the need to ensure energy security, that good relations with the producer countries must be promoted to make the operation of the international markets more predictable.
The question of transparency on oil reserves must be raised in this context. As for the transparency of oil stocks, this question was broached at the time of the second strategic analysis. On this issue, the option of a weekly publication of information on commercial stocks is currently being studied.
On the issues of energy savings and diversification of sources, we note the arguments put forward on the potential for energy savings in the building sector and we await with interest the conclusion of the debates on the revamp to the directive on the energy performance of buildings.
As for the parts relating to the need to diversify energy sources in the transport sector and exploit the potential of energy-efficient vehicles, I note that the recovery plan includes an initiative on green cars.
In conclusion, I would draw your attention to the Commission commitment further to develop the action on all the questions raised in relation to oil prices. These questions form part of the general policies on energy, climate and research.
We are pleased to continue our cooperation with the European Parliament in all these fields and I thank Mr Reul again for having provided some information and explanation, which will be a very valuable guide for our future energy policy.
The item is closed.
The vote will take place on Wednesday.
Written Statements (Rule 142)
Mr Reul's report is extremely important in the context of the current economic crisis and the challenges linked to climate change.
As a member of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, I have consistently supported the line that we must not play down the importance of investments in clean technologies and renewable energy as solutions for reducing the dependency on oil, cutting carbon emissions and, last but not least, as a solution for creating new jobs and stimulating economic growth.
I welcome the fact that this report too mentions biofuels as a resource which has not been sufficiently exploited, and I hope that the recommendation to facilitate market access for them will be taken into account by the European Commission. The use of biofuels offers a viable economic and social alternative for rural development and environmental protection.
At the same time, I am pleased with the increased attention being given to energy efficiency in buildings, which has been included as a priority in the European Economic Recovery Plan and mentioned in Mr Reul's report as a solution for reducing the demand for fossil energy resources. Energy efficiency has the benefit that it will also reduce the size of consumers' bills at a time when the economic crisis is having an increasingly adverse impact on them.
in writing. - (EL) Now, more than ever, the European Union needs a common European energy policy which will promote energy security and energy solidarity and, at the same time, support viable energy choices. Today, oil is the most important source of energy in Europe, mainly due to its widespread use in the transport sector. By way of illustration, it has been stated that in 2030 the EU's reliance on oil is expected to reach 95%. We cannot ignore the fact that imports basically come from countries in which political instability prevails and cannot therefore be considered secure.
Furthermore, today Europe faces three challenges, the financial, the energy and the environmental challenge, which inevitably limit our choices. Oil is an outdated source. Its cost has doubled since 2005, its price fluctuates constantly and it is linked to high CO2 emissions. The reorientation of energy policy is therefore the only way forward. Supporting nuclear energy or new mines in Africa is not the solution. The solution is to support European and national measures to promote energy efficiency and invest in projects which make use of renewable energy sources.


Community Customs Code (debate)
The next item is the recommendation for second reading, on behalf of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, on the Common Position adopted by the Council on 15 October 2007 with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Community Customs Code (Modernized Customs Code) (11272/6/2007 - C6-0354/2007 - (Rapporteur: Janelly Fourtou).
rapporteur. - (FR) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, now that we have come to the end of three years of hard work I am delighted at what has been achieved in respect of the key points in this document.
The customs union is one of the pillars of the European Union and an essential element in the functioning of the internal market. The present Community Customs Code, which was drawn up in the 1980s and adopted in the 1990s, is now outdated. Our customs services are faced with new challenges. In 2007 world trade totalled nearly 16 billion dollars, or 31% of global GDP, and the European Union alone accounted for 20% of the total volume of global imports and exports.
The customs services are therefore responsible for maintaining the smooth flow of trade and the controls that are needed to provide for this, while at the same time ensuring that the safety and security of EU citizens is protected. If a satisfactory balance is to be reached the control methods used have to be modernised and the level of cooperation strengthened between the different services and economic operators.
The Code also has to be adapted to other radical changes that have occurred in the international commercial environment, mainly resulting from the growing and irreversible recourse to IT and electronic data exchange technologies. This particular subject was also the focus of a report that was drawn up by my colleague Mr Heaton-Harris and adopted by Parliament last December.
The first reading of the modernised customs code was adopted on 12 December 2006 and the German Presidency managed to secure a political agreement on 25 June 2007. Parliament adopted 51 amendments to the proposal at first reading, 34 of which, mostly of a substantive nature, were taken over fully or in part in the Council common position.
The main subjects of disagreement were the status of authorised economic operator, the right to act as a customs representative, centralised customs clearance and comitology. The status of authorised economic operator, which is directly related to the events of 11 September, was introduced by the so-called 'security amendment' Regulation, whose aim was to offer greater facilities to operators and hence offset the new burdens they had to shoulder in order to cope with security-related aspects.
Your rapporteur is satisfied that the concept developed by Parliament at first reading has been taken over; this involves drawing a distinction between two types of authorisation, namely 'customs simplification', on one hand, and 'safety and security', on the other. This pragmatic solution allows for the different needs of the economic operators.
Turning to the subject of customs representatives, emotions have been running fairly high in those countries which have had a long history of this profession. While the Council has not adopted Parliament's proposals to the letter, it has nevertheless proceeded from the premise that customs representatives and authorised economic operators should interact along the lines we desired.
Your rapporteur believes that the Council has arrived at a good compromise. Moreover, this solution has been accepted by customs representatives associations, even though they have lost their monopoly in certain Member States.
As far as centralised customs clearance is concerned, we have another novelty in that the Council has introduced a new Article 106, taking the view that it is more logical and transparent for all of the provisions of the Code related to this concept to be encompassed within a single article.
Henceforth all economic operators may benefit from centralised clearance on the territory of any one Member State. In cases involving several Member States they have to satisfy the eligibility criteria for authorised economic operator status.
Finally, of all the areas in which this document has made significant progress we can also be very pleased that we have broadened out the comitology process to cover 44 provisions of the modernised customs code.
For this reason I am calling on Parliament to support the Council common position without amendment.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, after more than two years of active interinstitutional work, we are now very close to the completion of the codecision procedure on this proposal, thanks in particular to the commitment of Ms Fourtou and the support of the members of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection.
I am very pleased that the legal framework for a future-oriented reform of European customs will - hopefully - be in place this year, which marks the 40th anniversary of our Customs Union. That will provide encouraging impetus for the work that still lies ahead of us.
The customs union is usually presented as an 'old' pillar of the Community. It cannot, however, be reduced to a simple legacy of the past. It is in operation today - and not just to ensure the collection of own resources. More and more, customs administrations, legislation and procedures will secure the internal market, contribute to consumer protection, support the external aspects of common policies and, at the same time, contribute to the facilitation of our international trade. To this end, customs legislation will evolve to respond to major changes and challenges, inside and outside the Union, and resort to the most effective rules and efficient techniques.
What will modernisation of the Community Customs Code actually mean?
First, better customs regulations, including simpler and streamlined rules and procedures, clarifying the rights and obligations of economic operators and guaranteeing their more uniform treatment, while providing for an equivalent level of security and safety.
Second, a progressive computerisation of all customs formalities, with a view to a completely 'paperless' environment for customs and trade, whose development will be supported and framed by the e-customs Decision (No 70/2008/EC) of the Parliament and of the Council, adopted on 15 January 2008.
These changes include interoperability between national computerised customs systems. They will allow, in particular, customs clearance of goods at the place of establishment of the declarant, irrespective of the place of entry into, exit from or supply within the Community of those goods - so-called 'centralised clearance'. They will also permit an exchange of data elements, in real time, between customs authorities, in order to perform risk analysis and improve controls within the framework of common risk management.
By supporting the Commission's proposal at first reading, Parliament has acknowledged the essential contribution of this legislative initiative to the Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs. The Council common position of October 2007, which incorporates most of the amendments adopted by Parliament at first reading, is considered by the Commission to be a well balanced compromise.
The Commission therefore welcomes Ms Fourtou's report recommending approval of the common position without amendment.
on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. - Mr President, firstly I would like to thank Ms Fourtou. I am always in awe of her grasp of the detail in this very complex matter.
The Modernised Customs Code, as the Commissioner has heard me say before, is an amazingly boring but ever so important piece of law from the Commission. In 1975, when the United Kingdom voted in a referendum that we should actually be having now (a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty) - a referendum to come into this club - we thought we were voting to come into a free-trade area. What people got was, in fact, a customs union, and since I have been here I have been working hard on this particular report, because getting this Customs Code right and modernising it correctly is possibly the most important thing we can do until the whole thing is rejuvenated, as the Commissioner said, within the system of e-customs, making trade much more easy and duty collection much more simple across the Union.
However, as with all things European, we do not move forward as quickly as some of us would like - if we move forward at all. There are still barriers that are contained within this text. Some are pretty much built-in, until there is a complete wipe-clean of the slate and we start all over. What is an Authorised Economic Operator? What qualification should customs representatives - or AEOs, as they are known - have? Could these be used in the future as barriers to stop people coming into the business as start-ups, or indeed existing businesses running in Europe spreading across the rest of it?
This Modernised Customs Code is actually a very good document, on balance, but it could have been very much better as well. Alas, we have to compromise in this House a little too often, but I hope that, on balance, this will be good for the continent of Europe.
on behalf of the PSE Group. - (ES) Mr President, in my opinion, the Community Customs Code as presented by the Commission and debated by Parliament and the Council has proved an exemplary procedure. Our rapporteur, Mrs Fourtou, has put in an enormous amount of work on this and in the end, as is almost always the case, Parliament, the Council and the Commission have agreed on the final text we will be adopting.
I think that, as Mr Heaton-Harris has already mentioned, the European Union is above all a customs union, and so the customs code is an important component to allow it to function. However, the customs service as such does not function as a totally free operation: the authorities are involved to a great extent, since certain goods and values affect us all. What we are talking about here is smuggling and some of its more dangerous varieties, such as arms and drug smuggling, and controls of capital outflows.
It is therefore logical that the Community Customs Code should include the normal restrictions operated by each of the Member States, and make an attempt at harmonisation. I feel the points of debate we had here were satisfactorily resolved by the dual concept of customs representation rights and the Authorised Economic Operator: the idea of two concepts that are theoretically different but can find common ground for harmonisation. I think the solution adopted is quite a good and proper solution.
Commissioner Kovács insisted on the concept of centralised customs clearance insofar as the customs union constitutes a single unit. It does not, of course, make sense for there to be differences between the various customs facilities. I feel this is a good and practical solution that will allow us to operate in the appropriate fashion.
The last aspect to be mentioned is the comitology procedure. Both the Commission and the Council have now acknowledged the importance of Parliament's involvement in the procedure. The agreement reached means that the 28 provisions with respect to which this procedure was applied with the involvement of Parliament have now increased to 44, i.e. Parliament may intervene in an increasingly effective fashion in the creation of provisions for the customs code.
Finally, Mr President, I wish to thank Mrs Fourtou for her work and the Commissioner for his efforts to encompass the proposals of this House.
(DE) Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the European Union is undoubtedly much more than just a customs union. We will not reduce it to a customs union in today's debate and in the decision we take tomorrow. Nonetheless, the customs policy at the EU's external borders is an important element of the European Union's activities and a functioning internal market.
The ÖVP Europe Club in the European Parliament welcomes the proposal for a regulation on a modernised Community Customs Code. Why? Because it streamlines customs procedures, because it establishes the basis for simpler, speedier common customs procedures at the external borders, because it means that the radical changes in the international trade environment - for example, in relation to information technology, electronic data, etc. - will now be taken into account, and because customs representatives will now be subject to clearly defined common criteria, which will result in greater reliability and professionalism.
This regulation strengthens cooperation between the Member States and the European Union. It creates a stronger Community, which is also reflected in the fact that all the amendments tabled by Parliament have been taken over by the Council. From my perspective, it means simpler, speedier common customs clearance, and that is good for business and for the European Union as a whole.
(DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would also like to express my sincere thanks to the rapporteur and, of course, to our shadow rapporteur, both of whom have done valuable work on a highly technical dossier.
With the new customs code the aim is to replace the existing code and the related regulations with a modernised code, streamline current customs procedures and create the bases for accessible interoperable customs systems across the European Union. This is something which we greatly welcome, for it will mean that companies will benefit from the adaptation to current developments in information technology and faster and more secure processing of the increasing volumes of goods passing the EU's borders.
Business associations and chambers of trade have rightly warned from the outset about the excessive red tape being generated by the EU's security initiatives which have spilled over from the US. Through our deliberations in Parliament and intensive contact with the Commission's offices, we have finally achieved a relatively sound and unbureaucratic solution, for which I am grateful.
A key point for companies that is now being implemented is centralised customs clearance through a single point of contact. We have also been able to push through our demand - and I am very proud of this - for privileged status for those businesses which fulfil the requisite criteria.
As a Member from South Baden, I must point out, however, that the customs code could cause considerable problems at the EU's external borders with countries which are not EU Member States, unless precautionary measures are taken in time. I know that the Commission wishes to take these precautions - I am talking about Switzerland here - and I hope that the Member States in the EU-Swiss Joint Committee will also play their part.
Switzerland is one of the most important markets for EU goods. Switzerland's four immediate neighbours in the EU account for 41% of its total exports and 59% of its total imports, which is why there is a need for action here. We cannot allow kilometre-long queues to form at the Swiss borders as a result of the introduction of the customs code, simply because the Swiss system of customs clearance differs slightly from that of the EU.
Commissioner Kovács, I would ask you to look at this problem and draw it to the attention of the Member States concerned as a matter of urgency. We are talking about an economic centre in the heart of Europe which must not be cut off from the international flow of goods as a result of our activities.
(CS) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I trust that tomorrow we will approve at second reading the Council's common position on the customs code. It is a successful modernisation of European customs legislation. It is a true gateway to an electronic, centralised, interoperable and automated customs system. All EU bodies will be able to avail of a single management point - a one-stop-shop - for their operations, making the much-needed controls more effective. Thanks to a unified customs information portal - single window - entrepreneurs will be able to communicate with only one customs office in the EU at the place of their establishment. This rule simplifies and unifies terminology and definitions, as well as making them more user-friendly. It is a good example of the ability, even in an enlarged EU, to simplify bureaucracy and improve the legal environment for entrepreneurs and citizens. Moreover, the project will reportedly have paid for itself by 2010. I thank the rapporteurs, Mrs Fourtou and Mr Newton Dunn, the Commission and the Council for the excellent work carried out over the last three years.
Mr President, I would just like to make one comment in response to Mr Heaton-Harris saying that he thought that Britain in 1975 was joining a free-trade area. I am very worried about his memory, or perhaps it is his education. Britain was leaving a European free-trade area - it was called EFTA. We chose to leave it to join the European Community, and Mrs Thatcher, who was the Conservative leader at the time of the 1975 referendum in the UK, said that it was 'more than a free-trade area'. Very simple, very clear, on the record.
Now, since Mr Heaton-Harris wants a referendum today on the Lisbon Treaty in the UK, he is clearly confident that the British public would read all the documents to make up their minds how to vote. And that must have been true in 1975. The British public in 1975 will have read in the documents that this is about an ever closer union and not a free-trade area. The European Union is about an ever closer union. So please, Mr President, can we get a pill for Mr Heaton-Harris's memory?
Thank you, Mr Newton Dunn. How gloomy our evenings in the European Parliament would be without these interesting British discussions.
Mr President, I will resist the temptation to join in. I would like to thank the rapporteur for the detailed work on this report.
Let us be honest, this is not the stuff that people talk about in public houses and on social occasions. But getting our customs laws right is very important for business and for jobs, and that is why we are doing it. So the idea of centralised clearance makes good sense, if it works - and let us hope that it does, under these new rules.
Also, the idea of a single window has potential to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy. But can I make just one point: let us take feedback, when this all is up and running, from the economic operators, and be willing to adjust it where we see problems which have been identified by other speakers this evening.
Member of the Commission. - Mr President, my point of departure is that I am not only pleased but also very proud that we have reached this point, because I agree with all those speakers who consider it a very great achievement for the Union as a whole.
First of all, I would like to express my thanks for your support for the Modernised Customs Code and for your interest in future developments. As you have recalled, the adoption and subsequent entry into force of the Code will not be the end of the story, since its application will depend on the finalisation and application of its implementing provisions.
The new regulatory procedure with scrutiny will be used for the adoption of these provisions. It will give Parliament the possibility to check the way the Commission intends to implement in detail, with the assistance of the Customs Code Committee, the general provisions resulting from the Code.
Besides this procedural requirement, the Commission intends to keep Parliament, through its Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, properly informed about the state of preparation of the draft implementing measures and the time-schedule envisaged for the application of the Modernised Customs Code.
Concerning the problem of Switzerland and the European Union, which Mr Schwab raised, on 1 July 2009 the security amendment to the Community Customs Code will be fully implemented. This means that all goods entering or leaving the Community shall be the subject of a pre-arrival or pre-departure declaration. The Authorised Economic Operator will benefit from the facilitations envisaged in the Code.
As with other third countries, we are currently negotiating with Switzerland on the mutual recognition of control centres, the results of controls and the status of Authorised Economic Operator. The negotiations are ongoing, and we are looking for a mutually satisfactory solution to be in place by 1 July 2009.
Now let me finish by inviting you to join the celebrations of the 40th anniversary of the Customs Union on 1 July 2008. The Customs Union was the first cornerstone in building the internal market and remains one of its essential components. I am looking forward to continuing our discussion about the future role of customs in the context of the celebrations. Thank you very much, once again, for your support.
rapporteur. - (FR) Mr President, I would like to thank all those who have spoken and all those who have contributed to the drafting of this report.
Since Mr Medina Ortega has spoken about smuggling I cannot resist the urge to bring up the subject of counterfeiting. Between 1998 and 2004 the number of arrests for counterfeiting rose by 1 000%. This just goes to show that the controls currently in place need to be updated and a new approach adopted as far as the duties of customs officials are concerned.
I also wish to pay tribute to the professionals themselves, who have displayed a real openness of mind, and I would like to say to them that I still feel a debt of gratitude towards them. This will no doubt answer the concerns voiced by Mrs McGuinness. As far as the implementing measures are concerned, I will do my best to encourage dialogue between the customs authorities and the Community institutions, including the Commission, with which there has always been a good measure of close and productive cooperation.
I therefore call on you to support the common position and would conclude by thanking you all for your attention.
The debate is closed.
The vote will take place on 19 February 2008.


Approval of Minutes of previous sitting: see Minutes


1. Statistics on migration and international protection (vote)
- Before the vote:
rapporteur. - (DE) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, ever since 1999, this House has been debating legislative proposals relating to migration without any figures on which to base its decisions, while the scope of immigration policy has become considerably wider. What we need, then, is more and better information if we are to be able to effectively plan, implement, evaluate and monitor political measures. Led by Commissioner Frattini, the Commission has responded to pressure from this House and has submitted a draft regulation on the statistical monitoring of migratory movements, something that is made necessary by the Member States' failure to supply all the relevant statistical material, or indeed any at all, on the previously voluntary basis.
Data are also collected in different ways, with the consequence that they have, hitherto, not been comparable. This regulation obliges our Member States to provide any and all figures that may be required; it also brings about harmonisation and makes it possible to compare the figures. It was relatively difficult to get the Council to come round to this, whilst all the parties in this House agreed in principle on the need for the regulation.
The general agreement prevailing among the groups meant that this House was able to get its position accepted through the comitology procedure, and the outstanding cooperation of all the shadow rapporteurs, to whom I would like to take this opportunity of expressing my thanks, played a considerable part in enabling us to bring this dossier to a satisfactory conclusion, so thank you all, once more, for that.
Mr President, I beg the indulgence of the House. I wish to draw the attention of the House to the appalling situation in Zimbabwe. We look with horror and enormous frustration at the images of how a peaceful assembly is brutally dealt with in Mugabe's country. I understand the opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, has been released from detention, but he has a fractured skull. Grace Kwinjeh, the opposition representative in Brussels, has had part of her ear cut off while in custody.
I know that the President-in-Office of the Council has expressed condemnation of what has happened, but can we take more concrete action? In particular, I call upon the Presidency to use its influence to persuade the South African Government and the other SADC governments to take a more principled position and act to bring about urgent change for the better in Zimbabwe. Wringing our hands is not enough.
(Applause)
Thank you very much, Mr Van Orden, we take good note of your comments.


2. Indonesia, including attacks on minorities (
Madam President, I lived in Indonesia and I love Indonesia. I know well the extraordinary progress that Indonesia has made since the first free elections in 1999 in practising democracy and respect for human rights and civic and political freedoms.
I believe that in Europe we must appreciate - and I think we do in this resolution - how society in Indonesia, now the third largest democracy and the largest Muslim nation in the world, has firmly engraved in its fabric the values of diversity, pluralism, and tolerance, be it ethnic, linguistic, religious or political. It is that which makes Indonesia strong and appealing and inspiring throughout the world. I would say like Europe, the Europe that I want.
But in Indonesia, as in Europe, we see that extremists and fanatics are sowing bigotry, hatred and intolerance. This is shown in crimes like the ones against Ahmadiyya followers or people in Papua. In Indonesia some of these extremists may be used by terrorist organisations or incite people to undermine the democratic system.
This is one more reason why these extremists must be combated politically and ideologically and their crimes must receive exemplary punishment. I hope that the people in the Indonesian Government will read this resolution as an expression of concern for the victims and as a genuine expression of solidarity and encouragement for all those brave people in Indonesian civil society - in government, in parliament, in the judiciary and in the media - that are fighting against these criminals and for the end of their impunity.
I would like to recall a good friend who has been doing just that: Suciwati, the widow of the great human rights campaigner Munir who was murdered a couple of years ago. The perpetrators of his murder have not yet been fully brought to justice.


1. Guatemala (vote)
- Before the vote on recitals B and C
Mr President, a couple of small but important wording errors have managed to creep into the resolution. I propose to correct them as follows: in recital B, to replace the word 'authors' with the word 'perpetrators', and in recital C, to replace the words 'intellectual authors' with the word 'instigators'.
Are there any objections to the inclusion of these oral amendments?
(The oral amendments were accepted)


2. 66th Session of the United Nations General Assembly (


Signature of acts adopted under codecision: see Minutes