ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3428/02

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(2 December 2002)

Subject: Utilisation by the Municipality of Fiumicino of appropriations from EQUAL, the ESF and the IVth Action Programme on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men

In September 2002 the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry of Finance published a statement showing expenditure of funds provided by the EU.

The outcome of the survey gave particular cause for concern regarding the slowness and inefficiency of local authorities in selecting projects with funds earmarked for the year 2000 amounting to only 2 % of total CSF appropriations.

The Commission also has repeatedly expressed serious concern regarding the inadequate take-up of European funds by local authorities.

Given that it is particularly important for certain local authorities, for example, the Municipality of Fiumicino, to utilise Community funding for professional training and employment, equal opportunities and social integration, can the Commission provide the following information:

1. Has the Municipality of Fiumicino submitted projects under the Equal Programme, the ESF and the IVth Action Programme on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men?

2. Was the Municipality of Fiumicino awarded funding for these projects?

3. Were the funds in question utilised?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2003)

Within the framework of the Structural Funds for the period 2000-2006, the Commission approved the Objective 3 Operational Programme for the Lazio Region on 21 September 2000. The budget available is EUR 884 million (45 % European Social Fund, 44 % national resources and 11 % regional resources), of which EUR 90 million (10,3 %) are earmarked for equal opportunities.

Few projects have been selected at this early stage of the programming period, which explains the low rate of completion. Nevertheless, during the 2000-2001 period, 740 projects were submitted under the equal opportunities heading, of which 188 were approved and funded.

The EQUAL initiative, which is also financed by the European Social Fund, enables experimentation with new approaches to tackling the discrimination and inequality suffered by employed persons and jobseekers alike. EQUAL comprises nine thematic fields, one of which is equal opportunities for women and men. The Municipality of Fiumicino is acting as a partner in the project entitled Study and testing of integrated models of territorial social and health services, presented to the Lazio Region by a geographical development partnership.

The total cost of intervention is EUR 1 115 035. The activities related to action 2 of the EQUAL initiative have just been launched and the data in question are not yet available.

The Municipality of Fiumicino has not received any funding under the Fourth Action Programme on Equal Opportunities for Women and Men.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2689/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(26 September 2002)

Subject: Definition of terms in the EU Code of Conduct for Arms Exports

In 1998 the Council approved the EU Code of Conduct for Arms Exports. In this Code of Conduct the EU Member States declare themselves to be determined (sic) to prevent the export of equipment which might be used for internal repression or international aggression, or contribute to regional instability.

Criterion 3 refers to the internal situation in the country of final destination: Member States will not allow exports which would provoke or prolong armed conflicts or aggravate existing tensions or conflicts in the country of final destination.

Can the Council tell me exactly what the signatories understood armed conflicts and existing tensions or conflicts to mean?

Can the Council tell me exactly what the signatories had in mind when they spoke of provoking and prolonging a conflict? And what actions were the signatories referring to when they spoke of these possibly aggravating existing tensions or conflicts?

Reply

(18 February 2003)

The Council informs the Honourable Parliamentarian that the day to day interpretation and application of the Code's principles is carried out by each Member State individually, when taking a decision on whether to grant an export licence. It does not lie in the Council's purview to exercise a review of such decisions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3232/02

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 November 2002)

Subject: Riding motorcycles with a Class B driving licence

Unlike in the other EU countries, in Germany it is possible to ride a motorcycle up to 125 cc with a Class B driving licence (passenger vehicles) only if the driver was in possession of the old-style Class 3 licence before 1 April 1980.

1. Can the Commission provide information on the regulations relating to motorcycles up to 125 cc in the Member States of the European Union?

2. Does the Commission consider that it will be necessary or possible to act on this issue at European level in the foreseeable future?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2002)

1. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its interpretative communication on Community driver licensing which contains the information requested(1). This communication indicates that Belgium, Spain, France, Italy and Austria grant the entitlement to drive light motorcycles with a B licence, as well as the specific conditions under which such entitlement is granted. It should be noted that, since the publication of the communication in question, Belgium withdrew this entitlement on 1 September 2002 for new holders of a B licence.

2. The Commission is not planning to take any action in this area in the foreseeable future.

(1) OJ C 77, 28.3.2002, Part I, B.3, 4th indent.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2904/02

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(16 October 2002)

Subject: Breton

Not long ago, European Languages Day was held. That day, a report was presented concerning Breton, the only Celtic language which still survives in mainland Europe, which is in danger of extinction.

Of the four million inhabitants of Brittany, only 300 000 now understand Breton. Nineteen years ago the figure was twice that. More than 80 % of those who still understand Breton are aged over 60. It is a race against time, because if things continue as they are now, Breton stands no chance of survival. The Bretons are critical of Paris, which does not officially recognise their language.

There are no subsidies for the 3 000 children who take Breton at school, because apparently no legal basis for them exists. This is an untenable situation.

Will the Commission take the initiative to create a legal basis, acting on its powers and responsibilities in the field of education?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 2002)

In the area of education, Article 149 of the EC Treaty states very clearly that the content of teaching and the organisation of education systems are the responsibility of the Member States.

The Community acts within the limits of its powers under the Treaties to safeguard the diversity of languages used in Europe, particularly in the areas of culture and education. Past action in the area of regional and minority languages put the focus namely on education in an attempt to preserve language vitality. In keeping with Article 151(4), which states that cultural aspects must be taken into account in all activities of the Union, many projects involving regional and minority languages have been financed under a variety of Community programmes in such policy areas as regional and rural development, information society and social policy.

Following Council Resolution of 14 February 2002 on the promotion of linguistic diversity and language learning in the framework of the implementation of the European Year of Languages(1), the Commission will undertake a wide-ranging consultation based upon a Discussion Document, which will be published later on in 2002. The outcome of this process will be a Communication to the Parliament and the Council in mid-2003 on an Action Plan to promote language learning and linguistic diversity based on actions using resources available in existing Community programmes and activities in which regional and minority languages will be included too.

(1) OJ C 50, 23.2.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2907/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(16 October 2002)

Subject: Siege of President Arafat's Palestinian headquarters by Ariel Sharon's Israeli army

The siege of President Arafat's Palestinian headquarters by the Israeli army is a cruel and violent act of extreme political and moral gravity, given the climate of violence now prevailing in Palestine and Israel in the wake of the colonial occupation of the West Bank and Gaza by the Israeli state and its probable genocidal implications under Ariel Sharon.

All European citizens who believe in justice and peace and wish to see the end of all suffering caused by the domination of one people by another will agree that this attack by the Israeli army on an unarmed President is a shameful and craven act, which must be firmly and combatively condemned by the EU institutions. We must not refrain from such a response or allow ourselves perpetually to toe the blindly pro-Israeli line of the US.

What action has the Council taken, and what action does it intend to take, in the face of these acts of aggression by Ariel Sharon's army which are an affront to the whole of humanity?

Reply

(3 March 2003)

The Council does not believe that actions like the recent siege of President Arafat's headquarters by the Israeli army can help to solve the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. Therefore, the Council welcomed (on 30 September 2002) the adoption of UNSCR 1435 and urged both parties to show maximum restraint and to comply fully with this resolution. Noting that Israeli forces had begun to withdraw from the compound of the President of the Palestinian Authority, the Council reiterated that restricting freedom of movement of the Palestinians and their leadership and destroying their infrastructure does not contribute to fighting terror, or to solve Israel's legitimate security concerns. More than ever, Israelis and Palestinians must return to the negotiating table. The Council will continue to work towards this goal, in particular through the Quartet.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2471/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 September 2002)

Subject: Pension rights

Will the Commission state what EU law covers the jurisdiction, recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial cases and whether this covers the determination of the settlement of property in another EU jurisdiction, with particular regard to accrued pension rights?

If a court in one Member State orders the division of pension rights accrued in a fund in another Member State, is there any legal impediment to its being split?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 2002)

It is covered by Council Regulation (EC) No 1347/2000 of 29 May 2000 on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgements in matrimonial matters and in matters of parental responsibility for children of both spouses(1) (hereafter the Brussels II Regulation). This Regulation provides for the mutual recognition in matters of divorce, legal separation or marriage annulment, as well as in matters of parental responsibility for the children of both spouses rendered on the occasion of the matrimonial proceedings. The Brussels II Regulation, which entered into force on 1 March 2001, does, however, not apply to the property consequences following a divorce.

On 3 May 2002, the Commission presented a proposal(2) bringing together the Brussels II Regulation with the Commission proposal on parental responsibility of 6 September 2001(3) and the French initiative on rights of access of 3 July 2002. The new proposal contains new provisions in the area of parental responsibility as compared to the Brussels II Regulation, but takes over the provisions on matrimonial matters from the Brussels II Regulation unchanged.

There are currently no Community rules in the area of the division of property situated in another Member State. The recognition and enforcement of a court decision ordering the division of pension rights accrued in a fund in another Member State would thus be governed by the applicable national law.

In this context, the Commission would like to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the Council Programme of measures for implementation of the principle of mutual recognition of decisions in civil and commercial matters(4). Area III of the Council program identifies property rights arising out of matrimonial relationships and out of the separation of unmarried couples as one of the areas where the objective is to apply the principle of mutual recognition. For this purpose, the Commission has recently launched a study concerning the legal situation in Member States' national law on this subject. Once the study is finished, it will assist the Commission in its future work in this area.

(1) OJ L 160, 30.6.2000.

(2) OJ C 203 E, 27.8.2002.

(3) OJ C 332 E, 27.11.2001.

(4) OJ C 12, 15.1.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2659/02

by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(20 September 2002)

Subject: Cooperation with non-cooperating countries or areas

On 21 June 2002, the FATF (Financial Action Task Force) published an updated list of countries or areas designated as non-cooperating jurisdictions. The list comprises the Cook Islands, Dominica, Egypt, Grenada, Guatemala, Indonesia, the Marshall Islands, Myanmar, Nauru, Nigeria, Niue, the Philippines, Russia, St Vincent and the Grenadines and Ukraine.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. What relations does the EU maintain with these countries?

2. What measures to combat money laundering is the Commission adopting in the context of these relations?

3. Are there any special measures in connection with the accession negotiations with Ukraine?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 2002)

1. and 2. The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-3497/01(1) by Mr Turco.

3. It is important to note that there are no accession negotiations taking place with Ukraine in the context of Enlargement. Relations with Ukraine are conducted within the framework of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Communities and their Member States, and Ukraine (PCA)(2). Within this framework Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)-issues have been singled out as a priority by both Ukraine and the Union. Consequently, when the Union Action Plan

on Justice and Home Affairs with Ukraine was agreed there were specific elements included on money laundering. Ukraine's efforts against money laundering will be supported by the Union in order for Ukraine to meet the standards of the Council of Europe 1990 Convention on money laundering, the FATF recommendations and the standards set by the Egmont Group. Furthermore, under the TACIS Assistance Programme the strengthening of that country's anti-money laundering system constitutes a priority.

(1) OJ C 277 E, 14.11.2002, p. 6.

(2) OJ L 49, 19.2.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2986/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Council

(23 October 2002)

Subject: Measures to reduce fisheries accidents

Paragraph 7 of the EP's resolution of 5 April 2001 on Fisheries: safety and causes of accidents(1) calls on the Council to entrust the Commission with the task of coordinating all efforts made both by the Commission and the Member States and by international organisations and to consult with the industry itself and Member States' training providers on means to promote and strengthen preventive and safety measures in relation to fishing.

Has the Council taken any steps in this connection?

Does the Council not believe that coordination by the Commission in this area would help reduce the number of fishery accidents?

(1) OJ C 21 E, 24.1.2002, p. 359.

Reply

(20 February 2003)

Safety in relation to fishing activities is one of the main concerns of Council legislation in the fisheries sector; in particular, Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in this sector provides for public aid for the modernisation of fishing vessels including i.a. improvements in safety on board.

In the framework of the proposals on the reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, the Commission has put forward a proposal amending Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 which includes measures for the continuation of aid for the modernisation of vessels, in particular safety on board, provided that these measures do not increase the fishing effort.

The Council is currently examining these proposals.

In the area of safety and health at the workplace, the new Community strategy on health and safety at work (2002-2006) plays an important role.

The Council adopted a Resolution on the new Community strategy in June 2002 in which it noted the need to promote health and safety at work in Community policies and to develop a coordinated approach covering, inter alia, the common fisheries policy.

Under Point II.7 of this Resolution the Council calls on the Commission to submit to it, by way of the Commission's right of initiative, any proposal needed for achieving the health and safety objectives set out in the new strategy and in particular those needed to consolidate, simplify and nationalise the existing legal framework, so that it can be better enforced.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2979/02

by Anders Wijkman (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 October 2002)

Subject: Large state subsidies to the German forestry industry

The forestry sector in Germany has expanded considerably over the last decade as a result of state aid being pumped into the industry. During the summer of 2002, Stendahl Pulp Mercer International decided to expand even further. The German government is contributing 715 million in loans and grants of the budget for this project,

which amounts to some 800 million. State subsidies of this magnitude have an extremely detrimental impact on the competitiveness of the rest of the forestry industry in the region. How does the Commission explain its approval of state aid on this scale when it runs counter to the basic principles on which the development and growth of the common market are based (an open market economy, trade and competition between the Member States)?

Ahead of the forthcoming enlargement of the EU, it has been said that investment aid to industry may compensate for lower farming subsidies in the applicant countries. Is this correct?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 2002)

In June 2002 the Commission authorised aid to Zellstoff Stendal for the construction of a new pulp mill(1). Investment costs amounted to some EUR 800 million. The aid amounts to around EUR 250 million.

The aid has been granted on basis of regional considerations to promote the economic development of one of the less-favoured regions in the Community by supporting investment and job creation. The project of Zellstoff Stendal has been approved on basis of the Multisectoral Framework on regional aid for large investment projects. The Commission authorised the aid because of the positive impact of this project on employment in the region and as it has found that the pulp sector does not suffer from over-capacities.

The application of the rules of the Multisectoral Framework for large investment projects has reduced the aid to the Stendal project compared to the aid intensity generally allowed in the region where it is located.

According rules apply already now in the candidate countries. Therefore, investment aid to industry does not compensate for possible lower farming subsidies in the candidate countries.

(1) See press release IP/02/888 of 19.6.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2587/02

by Ingo Schmitt (PPE-DE) to the Council

(11 September 2002)

Subject: Directed energy weapons

Is the Council aware of the continued existence of large numbers of directed energy and radio frequency weapons (from the Cold War period), many of them in private hands?

Will any checks be carried out in this connection?

Has the Council acted on Parliament's resolution A4-0005/1999, and if so, what action has it taken?

Reply

(4 March 2003)

The Council has never had occasion to consider the question raised by the Honourable Member regarding directed-energy weapons.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2905/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(16 October 2002)

Subject: US/UK pre-emptive strike against Iraq

In contravention of the standards of international law as embodied by the UN and the founding principles of international relations, and in circumstances in which the dictatorial nature of the existing regime in Iraq cannot serve as an excuse, George Bush has now announced that there will be a pre-emptive strike against Iraq by the US and the UK. This action is particularly disturbing considering that it is based on a quite explicitly imperialist view of the world which claims that the US has the self-conferred right to fight pre-emptive wars against anyone who disputes that country's global supremacy.

What is the EU's position on these imperialist war plans? What action will it take to stop them being carried out and ensure respect for international law? What action has it taken on the attitude of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, a country which is a Member State of the European Union?

Reply

(3 March 2003)

The Council considers that Iraq must comply with the United Nations resolutions relating to it, particularly those regarding weapons of mass destruction. It has always come out in favour of action in the framework of the United Nations and in compliance with international law. In this context, it greatly welcomed the United States' decision to work with its partners in this framework. It was therefore with great satisfaction that the Council noted the unanimous adoption of resolution 1441 on Iraq by the United Nations Security Council on 8 November 2002.

Iraq must now cooperate fully with the United Nations and discharge its obligations arising from the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council.