You are on page 1of 2

C 137 E/178 Official Journal of the European Union EN 12.6.

2003

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2002)

No specific agreements have been made in the context of the European Union enlargement on Joint
Implementation projects under Article 6 of the Kyoto Protocol. However, the Commission has launched a
study to identify specific capacity building needs and priorities in Central and Eastern European countries
for the establishment of national Joint Implementation programmes. This study will be completed early
2003 and will provide a sound basis for making recommendations for further technical assistance to
facilitate the development of Joint Implementation projects.

Emission reduction units generated by Joint Implementation projects will not be available before 2008 in
accordance with the implementing provisions of the Kyoto Protocol. Therefore, the recognition of Joint
Implementation credits for their use in the initial phase of the forthcoming Union emissions trading
scheme (2005-2007) is not practicable. The modalities for linking credits from the Kyoto Protocol’s project
based mechanisms (Joint Implementation and the Clean Development Mechanism) will be laid down in a
proposal for a Directive to be made in 2003, as outlined in the Commission’s Work Programme for 2003.

The Commission has undertaken no modelling exercise on the potential volume of Joint Implementation
projects or on the extent to which the availability of Joint Implementation credits would affect the price of
allowances. It is assumed, however, that the availability of credits will reduce the price of allowances.

(2003/C 137 E/202) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3238/02


by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 November 2002)

Subject: Identity cards

1. Does any EU Member State require that employers are shown an identity card before an employee
can be hired?

2. Do any EU Member States require that such a card is nationally-issued so that a foreign but EU
citizen has to apply first for a national identity card before availing themselves of the provisions for
freedom of movement?

3. In the Commission’s view, is such a procedure consistent with EU rules?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 2002)

The Honourable Member asks two questions:

 whether any Member State requires a person to show an identity card before he can be hired,

 whether any Member State requires a person to apply for a national identity card before they can
exercise their right to freedom of movement.

Article 18 of the EC Treaty lays down the principle of the right of citizens of the Union to move and reside
freely within the territory of the Member States. However, this right is subject to the limitations and
conditions laid down in the EC Treaty, and to the measures adopted to give it effect.

According to Article 2 of Council Directive 68/360/EEC of 15 October 1968 on the abolition of


restrictions on movement and residence within the Community for workers of the Member States and
their families (1), Union citizens can leave the territory of a Member State in order to enter another
Member State on simple production of a valid identity card or passport.
12.6.2003 EN Official Journal of the European Union C 137 E/179

The same article states that Member States shall, acting in accordance with their laws, issue to their own
nationals an identity card (or passport), which shall state in particular the holder’s nationality. As identity
cards are a proof on nationality, Member States can only issue such documents to their own nationals.

Directive 68/360/EEC also provides that Member States shall grant a right of residence to migrant workers,
and that as proof of the right of residence, a residence card shall be issued (articles 3 & 4). The Member
State must issue a residence permit to a migrant worker upon production of the document with which he
entered the Member State (identity card or passport) and proof of employment. Article 5 of Directive 68/
360/EEC specifically provides that the completion of the formalities for obtaining a residence permit shall
not prevent the immediate beginning of employment.

It is in the above context, of obtaining a residence permit, that Member States may ask for the identity
card of a migrant worker. The Commission would recall that the Community rules on the free movement
of workers only apply to nationals of the Member States, and their family members. An identity card is
usually a proof of nationality, and in some circumstances it might not be unreasonable for an employer or
the national authorities of a Member State to ask for proof of nationality. The Commission is not aware of
any standard practice in any Member State of requiring a person to show an identity card before he can
start work. If such a practice did exist it would have to be proportionate and based on the circumstances
of each individual case.

(1) OJ L 257, 19.10.1968.

(2003/C 137 E/203) WRITTEN QUESTION E-3246/02


by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 November 2002)

Subject: The erection of mobile telephone masts

Concern has been expressed by a number of my London constituents over plans to erect a mobile
telephone mast at the junction of Mead Way and Pickhurst Lane, Beckenham, which is a residential area.
The Bromley Local Authority representing the residents of the Borough opposed the development of an
8-metre ‘streetworks’ monopole mast with associated antenna, equipment cabinet and development
ancillary to the construction, but an appeal by the mobile telephone operator One 2 One against the
Bromley Local Authority’s decision was upheld by the U.K. Planning Inspectorate. Strong concerns on the
part of a number of local residents were expressed over the possible health effects of the proposed
development. These concerns centred on the proximity of the proposed development to houses, the
proximity of a nearby school and the fact that children walking to it would pass the site and be exposed to
electromagnetic high field strength. Similar concerns have been expressed in other parts of the United
Kingdom and in other parts of the European Union.

The Planning Inspector noted that although some countries have introduced legislation specifying that
telecommunications masts should be located at least 500 metres away from schools and residential areas,
U.K. Government Guidance in Planning Policy Guidance Note 8: Telecommunications (PPG8) states that ‘if
a proposed mobile ’phone base station meets the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines for public exposure it should not be necessary for a local planning authority
to consider further the health aspects and concerns about them’. The Inspector also notes that the
Guidance Note further advises that ‘local planning authorities should not impose a ban or moratorium on
new telecommunications development or insist on minimum distances between new telecommunications
development and existing development’.

Can the Commission indicate whether or not whether there is any European Union legislation governing
the erection of such masts and, if so, whether the U.K. guidelines are consistent with such legislation?
What discretion is afforded to Member States over the erection procedures, and are any of the countries
which insist on masts being located at least 500 metres away from schools and residential areas European
Union Member States?