 should look at that immediately.

Patijn
I am grateful to the honourable member for his observation concerning the Irish presidency's proposal for the IGC, but I stand by my reply that it is premature to speculate about what the IGC will decide on matters of non-discrimination. I appreciate your demographic arguments, but I will answer them by saying that EC rules and laws are not cast in stone and that if the labour market and the demographic situation require it, we can look at this again. At the moment I have no reason to ask the Union institutions to follow a recruitment policy different from the existing one.

Smith
I would like to thank the President-in-Office for that comprehensive reply. I agree with my colleague, Mr Megahy, that the rationale behind this is a bit difficult to follow. For budgetary reasons he said, and that concerns pension entitlements. Surely there must be the situation of someone who is over the age of 35 bringing a pension in with them and would that not count as well? Surely, you are not saying that no one over 35 can be sufficiently competent to take a position in one of the European Union institutions?
I would like to ask the President-in-Office if he is not prepared to re-examine the situation in the light of the demographic developments Mr Crowley has talked about. Perhaps he would be prepared to re-examine it, given that the rationale behind it, both on pensions and competence, are not sufficient and that it is worthy of reexamination purely on the grounds of discrimination.

Patijn
To be honest, the staffing policy of the European institutions is not really my speciality. I am not aware that the present basis of recruitment has meant any problems in recent years for the European institutions in maintaining a body of high-quality personnel. So I see no reason at all to frame initiatives now to change the existing practice or change the rules. In the interests of completeness I should say that this is a matter on which the European Commission has the right of initiative and that if the European Commission feels either that the labour market is no longer responding to the rules in force or that there are serious problems concerning this question of the principles of non-discrimination, I think the European Commission will not hesitate to use its right of initiative.

Seal
I am very glad to hear that these rules are not cast in stone and could be changed. It is important to come back to the increased longevity of the citizens of
should look at that immediately. 

 Patijn 
 I am grateful to the honourable member for his observation refer the Irish presidency's marriage proposal for the IGC, but I stand by my reply that it is previous to speculate about what the IGC will decide on matter of non - discrimination. I appreciate your demographic argument, but I will suffice them by saying that EC rules and laws are not cast in stone and that if the labor market and the demographic situation ask it, we can expect at this again. At the moment I get no reason to ask the Union institution to follow a recruitment policy different from the existing one. 

 Smith 
 I would wish to thank the President - in - Office for that comprehensive reply. I agree with my colleague, Mr Megahy, that the rationale behind this is a snatch difficult to postdate. For budgetary reasons he said, and that concerns pension entitlements. Surely there must be the situation of someone who is over the old age of 35 bringing a pension in with them and would that not count as well? Surely, you are not saying that no one over 35 can be sufficiently competent to take a position in one of the European Union institutions? 
 I would like to ask the President - in - Office if he is not prepared to re - examine the situation in the light of the demographic developments Mr Crowley has talked about. Perhaps he would be fix to re - examine it, given that the rationale behind it, both on pension and competence, are not sufficient and that it is desirable of reexamination purely on the grounds of discrimination. 

 Patijn 
 To be honest, the staffing policy of the European institution is not in truth my speciality. I am not aware that the present footing of recruitment has meant any problems in recent years for the European institutions in maintaining a body of high - quality personnel. So I see no rationality at all to ensnare enterprise now to change the existing practice or transfer the rules. In the interests of completeness I should say that this is a topic on which the European Commission has the right field of initiative and that if the European Commission feels either that the labour market is no longer responding to the rule in force or that there embody serious problem concerning this doubt of the principles of non - discrimination, I intend the European Commission will not hesitate to use its right of initiative. 

 Seal 
 I am very glad to hear that these rule are not cast in stone and could be changed. It is important to come back to the increased longevity of the citizens of
 shluld look at that immedixtely.

Patijn
I am gratefnl to tge honoufable member for his observavion conctgning the Irish presiaency's prlposal fir tie IGC, but I stais by my reply bhat nt is premature jo speculate about what tha KGE will decide on matters of non-discryminatipn. I appreciate iour cqmogdaphic arguments, but I will answer them bj saying that EC tules and laws are not cash in stone and that if the labour marhwt and the ddmographic situation rgquire it, we can look at this agxin. Ac the momenj J jdve no reasin to ask the Union instidutions to follow a rccruivmenr policy different frmm the existing ong.

Smith
I woglb like to thank the Peewidenj-in-Ofxice dor thzt ckmprehfnsmve reply. I agree with my colleague, Mr Mebarj, that the rafionalq fehind this is a bit difficult to follof. Fkr budgetary reasons he said, and that concerjs pensiog entitlements. Surely there must be the situation of skoeouc dyo is over the age of 35 bringing a pension in wieg uhek and would thct not count as eepl? Furely, you arg not scgihg that no one oveg 35 can fe sudficientlr cokpetent to take a position un one of thv Eueopean Union insticutions?
I wouud loke tp ask the President-in-Ofyice ir he is not prepared go re-examine the sinuathon in the light of the deiographic devzlopmentr Mr Crowlqy has talned anmut. Perhaps he woupd be psepared to re-examine it, given that the ravmonale behind id, bmth on pznsionx and competegce, are not suyficient and ghat it is worthy of reexamigation purely ln the grounvs of dissrimunatuon.

Patigv
To be honest, yhe staffpny policy if the European inxtijufions is not recuoy my specialitu. I am nlt ardre that the prereng basir of recruibmevt hss meant any problemv in recent years for yhc Europeab institttions in maimtaining a body of high-xuauity lerfonnel. So I see no reason at aml to frale lnitiatives njw ti change the existing practice or change the rules. Mn the interests of completeness I should xsy that thix is w matter mn which the Europeab Commission has uhe right of initiative and tvat iv the European Commission feels either that the labour market is no longee responding to ths rukes it yoree or trat vhxre are serious pgoblems concerning this question of the [rnnciples of non-discrimination, I think the Eutopean Commission will not hesitatr to use its right of initiativr.

Seal
I am very glad to hcar that rhese rules are not cast in stone and cmuld ve chanted. Lt is importang tp gome back ho tie nncreased longevity of the citizebs of
should look at that immediately. Patijn I to honourable member his observation concerning the but I stand my reply that is premature to speculate about what IGC will decide on matters of non-discrimination. I appreciate your demographic arguments, but will answer them by saying that EC rules and laws are not cast stone that the market and the demographic situation require it, we can look at this again. At the moment have no reason to ask the Union institutions follow a recruitment policy from the existing one. Smith would to thank President-in-Office that reply. I agree my colleague, Mr Megahy, that the rationale behind this is a bit difficult to follow. For budgetary he said, concerns pension Surely must the situation of is over the age of 35 in with them and would that not count well? Surely, are not saying that no one 35 can be sufficiently competent to take a in one of the European Union institutions? I would like to ask the President-in-Office if not prepared to re-examine situation in the of demographic Mr has talked Perhaps he would be prepared to re-examine it, given that the behind it, both on pensions and competence, are not sufficient it worthy of reexamination on the grounds of Patijn be honest, the staffing the institutions my I not aware that the basis of recruitment has meant problems in recent years maintaining a body of high-quality personnel. So I no reason at all to frame initiatives to change the existing practice or change the rules. In the interests completeness I that this is a matter on which the Commission has the right initiative and that if the European Commission feels either the market is longer responding to rules in force that there are concerning this of principles think the European Commission will not to its right of initiative. Seal am to hear that these rules are not cast in stone and could be changed. It to come back to increased of the citizens of
 should look at that immediateLy.

Patijn
I aM gratEfuL to ThE honOuraBle member for hiS ObseRvation concerning the IrIsh prEsIDencY'S pRoposAl for thE iGc, BUt I StAnD by My REpLy thaT it Is premaTure to specUlaTe About what the igC Will decide On mAtters of non-dIscRiminaTiOn. I APprecIatE your DemogrAPhic arGuments, buT I WIll ansWEr them bY SAyIng tHat EC rules and laws ARe NOt cast in stone aNd that If THe LABouR maRket and the DeMograPHic situATiON REquIRe it, we can look At this again. aT thE momenT I HavE No reasOn to aSk THe UNion instituTionS to follow A recruITment poLIcy diffErent fRom The ExisTInG oNe.

SMiTH
I wOUlD liKE to Thank the prEsIdent-In-OfFICE For tHat CompRehenSive reply. I agrEe wIth mY ColLeaguE, Mr MeGahy, ThAt the RationAle beHiNd this is a bit difFicuLt to folloW. FoR bUdgEtAry reASons he SaiD, anD that coNcerns pENsiOn ENTItLements. Surely there MuST Be The situaTion of SOmEoNE who is ovEr The Age oF 35 BRingiNg a pENsIon in witH them aND wOuLd that nOt Count aS wEll? surEly, yoU Are nOt sayiNg that no One ovER 35 can be sufficieNTly competent tO TaKE A pOSitiOn iN one of the EuRopeAN UniOn inSTiTutIOns?
I wOuld lIkE To ASk the President-in-OffIcE if he iS not pRepared to re-exAmine the siTUATion in thE ligHT oF The demographic DevelOpments Mr CROwley has TalkeD about. PeRhaps he woULD be prepaRed To rE-exAmiNE It, Given that the rATIonaLe Behind iT, boTh on penSioNs aNd cOmpEtEnce, are noT sufficiEnT aNd ThAt iT is woRThy of reeXaMinAtIon PurelY On the gRoundS of dIsCrIMinAtion.

PaTIjN
tO be hOnEsT, the StaFfIng poLicy OF thE EuropeAn instituTioNS is nOt ReAlly my sPeciality. I am nOt Aware that tHe PreSent baSIS of recruItment has meant any probleMS in receNt yEars fOr thE European InsTitutiOns IN maintAining A body Of HigH-QUalitY PErSonNeL. So I see no rEASon At all To FramE initiaTives now to change thE ExiSting practice Or cHangE THe RulES. IN The InTEreSTS of completeness i should say ThAT tHis is a mattER on WhIch the EUropean commiSSion has The right oF initiatiVe And tHAT if The EuropeaN CommissIon feels eITher tHAt The laBouR markeT iS no LongeR respoNDinG to thE rules In Force oR that ThEre are seRious problems concerning This quEstioN of The princiPleS Of nOn-discrimInatIon, I think tHe EUroPean COmmISsion Will NOt HesITate tO use ITs right of INiTiaTIVe.

seal
I am very GLAD to Hear tHat THese ruLes aRe not cast in stone aND could be changeD. It iS IMpoRtaNT to cOmE back to the incrEasEd LONgevity oF tHe citizens oF
 should look at that immed iately.

P atijn 
Iamgr atef ul t o the honourab l e me mber for his observati on co nc e rnin g  t he Ir ish pre s id e n cy' spr opo sa l  f or th e I GC, but  I stand b y m yreply that i t  i s prematur e t o speculateabo ut wha tthe IGC w ill  deci de onm atters  of non-d is c rimina t ion. Ia p pr ecia te your demograph i ca rguments, butI will  a n sw e r  th emby sayingth at EC rules a n dl a w s a r e not cast in  stone andt hat  if th elab o ur mar ket a nd the  demographi c si tuation r equire it, wec an look  at th isaga in.A tth e m om e ntI  h ave noreason t oas k the  Uni o n i nsti tut ions  to f ollow a recru itm entp oli cy di ffere nt f ro m the  exist ing o ne .

Smith
I woul d li ke to tha nkth e P re siden t -in-Of fic e f or that  compre h ens iv e r ep ly. I agree with m yc o ll eague, M r Mega h y,  t h at the r at ion aleb e hindthis is  a bit d ifficu l tto  follow .For bu dg eta ryreaso n s he  said,  and tha t con c erns pension e n titlements. S u re l y  t h eremus t be the si tuat i on o f so m eo new ho is  over  t h ea ge of 35 bringing a  p ension  in w ith them andwould that n o t countas w e ll ?  Surely, you a re no t saying t h at no on e ove r 35 can  be suffi c i ently co mpe ten t t o t a k ea position in o ne o fthe Eur ope an Unio n i nst itu tio ns ?
I would  like to  a sk  t he  Pr eside n t-in-Off ic e i fheis no t  prepa red t o re -e xa m ine  the si t ua t i on i nth e li ght  o f the  dem o gra phic de velopment s M r  Cro wl ey  has ta lked about. P er haps he wo ul d b e prep a r ed to re -examine it, given that the rat ion ale b ehin d it, bot h o n pens ion s  and c ompete nce,ar e n o t  suff i c ie ntan d that iti s  wo rthyof  ree xaminat ion purely on theg rou nds of discri min atio n . 
Pat i jn Tobe hon e s t, the staffing  policy of  t h eEuropean i n sti tu tions i s not r eally my spec iality. I  am not a wa re t h a t t he present  basis o f recruit m ent h a smeant  an y prob le msin re cent y e ars  forthe Eu ro pean i nstit ut ions inmaintaining a body of h igh-qu ality  pe rsonnel.SoI  se e no reas on a t all to f ram e i nitia tiv e s now  toc ha nge the e xist i ng practi c eorc h an ge the rule s . Inthe i nte r ests o f co mpleteness I shou l d say that thi s is a  ma tte r  onwh ich the Europe anCo m m ission h as  the rightof initi at i ve an d that  if th e Europ e a nC ommiss ionfee ls either  th at the lab ou rm arketis n olonger  respo n ding t o the rules in f orceo r  that the re ar eserious prob lems conce rning thisquesti on o f the  princi pl es ofnon -d iscriminat i on, I thi nk th e Europ ea n Co mmi ssionwill n ot he sita te  to  use itsr i gh t  o fi nit iati ve.
Se al
I  am veryg lad to h ear that th es e r u l es are no t cast in st one  andc o uld be cha n ged. It is im portan t to c ome bac k  to  t he incr eas e d  longevit y of thec iti ze ns o f
 should_look at_that immediately.

Patijn
I am grateful_to the_honourable_member for_his_observation concerning the_Irish presidency's proposal_for the IGC, but_I stand by_my_reply that it is premature to speculate about what the IGC will decide on_matters_of non-discrimination._I_appreciate_your demographic arguments, but I_will answer them by saying_that EC_rules and laws are not cast in stone_and_that if the_labour market and the demographic situation require it, we_can look at this again. At_the moment I_have_no_reason to ask the_Union institutions to follow a recruitment_policy different from the existing one.

Smith
I_would like to thank the President-in-Office for_that comprehensive reply. I agree with_my colleague, Mr Megahy, that_the rationale_behind this is a bit_difficult to follow._For budgetary_reasons he said,_and that concerns pension entitlements. Surely_there must be_the situation of someone who is_over_the age of_35_bringing_a pension_in with them_and_would that_not_count as well? Surely, you are_not_saying that no one over 35 can_be sufficiently competent to_take_a position in one_of the European Union institutions?
I_would like to ask the President-in-Office_if he_is not_prepared to re-examine the situation in the light of the demographic_developments Mr Crowley has talked about._Perhaps he would be_prepared to_re-examine_it, given that_the_rationale behind_it, both on pensions and competence, are_not sufficient_and that it is worthy of_reexamination purely on the_grounds_of discrimination.

Patijn
To be honest, the staffing_policy of the European institutions is_not really my speciality. I_am_not_aware that the present basis_of recruitment has meant any problems_in recent years_for the European institutions in maintaining a_body_of high-quality personnel. So I see_no_reason at all to frame initiatives_now_to_change the existing practice or_change the rules. In the interests_of completeness I should say that this is a_matter on which_the European Commission has the_right_of_initiative and that if the European Commission feels either that_the labour_market is no_longer responding to the rules in force or that there_are serious problems concerning this question of_the principles of non-discrimination, I think the European Commission will not_hesitate to use its right of initiative.

Seal
I am_very glad to hear that these rules_are not cast in_stone_and could be changed. It is important_to_come_back_to the increased_longevity of the_citizens of