ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3290/00

by Mary Banotti (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 October 2000)

Subject: Childcare and au pairs

A voluntary agreement was first put together in 1969 to establish basic rules and conditions for au pairs concerning the hours and type of work which an au pair should be doing. This was followed up by a European Parliament report (1-0797/83)(1) expressing further concern at the lack of regulation in this field. Since that time, nothing further has been done, and the situation for au pairs has become more and more precarious.

Young people aged between 16 and 20 years are expected to take on long hours of childcare and, more and more often, prepare meals and cope with household chores. This is clearly beyond the duties of an au pair, and more and more young people are becoming victims of the lack of European rules governing au pairs.

Given that more and more families are seeking affordable childcare and that young au pairs are being more and more frequently used to fill the gap in childcare facilities, is the Commission prepared to look again at the situation of au pairs and prepare a regulatory framework or even a directive to protect young people from the worst excesses and abuses which take place at present so that there is a return to the original concept of the au pair which was one of helping with children while learning the language and culture of the country of placement?

(1) OJ C 342, 19.12.1983, p. 64.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(15 November 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the Commission Recommendation (85/64/EEC) of 20 December 1984 concerning a European Agreement on au pair placement sponsored by the Council of Europe(1).

Through this act, the Commission recommended that the Member States sign and ratify, as soon as possible, the European agreement of the Council of Europe of 24 November 1969 on au pair placement. This agreement lays down rules governing living and working conditions, education, social security and the rights and duties of the host family, in addition to setting up national consultation and information facilities.

The Commission has, at present, no plans to make legislative proposals in this area.

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.1985.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2332/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(11 July 2000)

Subject: Failure of social centres to comply with the law on the protection of copyright and performing rights

In Rome, as in many other Italian and European cities, social centres have been set up, often on squatted premises, where organisations with extreme-Left connections organise, all year round, dozens of music events, parties, concerts and showings of films (including foreign films), and operate bars and restaurants. The local authorities and the police are aware of all these events, which are regularly advertised via posters and in the press, and of the non-payment particularly to the SIAE, the Italian Society of Authors and Publishers of the copyright or performing right fees prescribed by law. Furthermore, the showing of foreign films clearly infringes international law.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Do these recurring events not infringe the rules of the market and constitute unfair competition in relation to the operators of authorised premises, who are obliged to pass on to the public the cost of paying royalties in respect of copyright and performing rights and the other charges prescribed by law?

2. Does the situation described not constitute an infringement of intellectual property rights?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2000)

In accordance with their international obligations under Articles 11, 14 and 14bis of the Berne Convention and Article 9 of the trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPs) Agreement, Member States grant to authors of musical works and authors or other owners of the copyright in a cinematographic work the exclusive right of authorising the public performance of their works. In accordance with Article 12 of the Rome Convention, performers and producers of phonograms are to be paid an equitable remuneration for the public communication of their phonograms. As regards Community law, Article 8(2) of the Council Directive 92/100/EEC(1) of 19 November 1992, on rental right and lending right and on certain rights related to copyright in the field of intellectual property provides for a similar remuneration right.

Thus, activities as described by the Honourable Member may of course infringe intellectual property rights, if they have not been duly authorised by the rightholder of the exclusive rights concerned or if no remuneration has been paid. However, it will be up to the rightholders concerned to take advantage of the remedies as provided by the Italian legislation and to take legal action against those responsible before the Italian courts.

(1) OJ L 346, 27.11.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2311/00

by Marco Cappato (TDI) to the Council

(11 July 2000)

Subject: The European Union's Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

Speaking to the European Parliament's Committee on Citizens' Rights and Freedoms on 21 June 2000 Mrs Beate Winkler, Director of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna, talked about the atmosphere of insecurity and intimidation in which she and the staff of the Observatory have to work, and said that staff had been the victims of theft both in their offices and at home.

Can the Council give the European Parliament more information about this, stating what thefts have occurred, who were the victims, when and where they occurred and what possessions or information were stolen? Furthermore, can it say whether and in which cases the thefts were reported to the Austrian authorities? Finally, can it assess the security situation with regard to the European Monitoring Centre and its staff?

Reply

(7 November 2000)

The Council has no information on the questions raised by the Honourable Member nor has it competence to deal with these questions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2642/00

by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: Transport

The Commission is to improve the rights of passengers from the European Union vis-à-vis airlines as from 1 January 2001.

Among other measures, the plans relate to refunds where flights are delayed, accommodation expenses, announcements and the provision of food and drink in the event of serious delays.

Can the Commission say what measures are to be taken against companies which fail to comply with these rules?

Will European consumers enjoy the same rights in the case of non-Community airlines and journeys to third countries where they have purchased their ticket on Union territory?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 2000)

The Commission attaches great importance to reinforcing the protection of air passengers so that they benefit to the full from Community policy on air transport. This can best be done primarily through a combination of Community legislation to extend passengers' rights and of voluntary commitments by airlines and airports to raise their quality of service.

In its communication Protection of air pasengers in the European Union(1) the Commission stated its intention to propose in 2001 legislation that would enable delayed passengers to continue their journeys under good conditions, by giving them the right to a choice between refund of the relevant part of the ticket or an alternative flight to the destination at the earliest opportunity. Moreover, it will consider how best to ensure proper assistance for delayed passengers, mainly in the form of meals, lodging for the night and communications, which can be achieved through legislation or through voluntary commitments by airlines.

To ensure the full protection of passengers, the legislation would apply to contracts for flights to, from and within the Community, irrespective of the state where the carrier was established or of the nationality of the passenger. Thus, its scope would be analogous to that of the regulation on compensation for denied boarding (Regulation (EEC)295/91 of 4 February 1991 establishing common rules for a denied-boarding compensation system in scheduled air transport(2)).

Paragraphs 51 to 53 of the above mentioned communication sets out the Commission's views on the envisaged procedures for complaints by passengers. In respect

of the enforcement of existing and future Community law, it is responsibility of Member States to ensure that air carriers comply with the relevant Community legislation. In the event that Member States fail to fulfil their obligations the Commission may initiate infringement procedures under Article 226 (ex-Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

(1) COM(2000) 365 final.

(2) OJ L 36, 8.2.1991.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2889/00

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 September 2000)

Subject: Concern at the proposed transfer of Mr Ciavarini Azzi from the Commission's Interdepartmental Working Party to the Directorate-General for regional policy

The chair of the Commission's Interdepartmental Working Party, Mr Giuseppe Ciavarini Azzi, is shortly to be transferred to the Directorate-General for Regional Policy as advisor on ultraperipheral regions, a decision which follows the departure of the Working Party's coordinator, Rafaela Lodice, and her assistant.

Given that the ongoing dismemberment of the Interdepartmental Working Party in the space of a few months could lead to its being devalued, which would be to fly in the face of the undertakings to reconstitute and strengthen the group, given by President Prodi in the conclusions of the 14 March report on the ultraperipheral regions, what are the Commission's reasons for transferring Mr Ciavarini Azzi?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-2754/00 and E-2889/00 given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 2000)

As can be seen from the initiatives it has taken, the Commission attaches great importance to the question of the most remote regions and the implementation of Article 299(2) (formerly Article 227(2)) of the EC Treaty. In this context, it is aware of the key role played by the Group on the most remote regions and anxious to ensure that it functions smoothly.

As the Honourable Member is aware, the Commission has embarked on a far-reaching plan to modernise its administration in order to increase its effectiveness in serving the Community. Rationalisation of working arrangements and better use of resources are among the essential strands of the reform policy launched by the Commission and receive its constant attention.

The Honourable Member can rest assured that, in the decisions it takes under its autonomous powers of internal organisation, the Commission will see to it that the Group on the most remote regions continues to function smoothly.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3305/00

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) to the Commission

(25 October 2000)

Subject: Lido Pizzo

Does the Commission intend to take immediate action to ascertain the compatibility of the building projects (for holiday homes) in the area known as Lido Pizzo near Gallipoli (Apulia, Italy) which the Italian government has authorised and even (according to press reports) granted funding to under the Sviluppo Italia national development scheme?

The problem is that this area has been listed as an SCI (site of Community importance) and should therefore be the subject of environmental protection.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 2000)

The Commission is not aware of the case mentioned. The site mentioned does not appear under the list of sites of Community importance proposed by Italy.

Based on the information available, the Commission is not in a position to conclude there is a potential infringement of Community legislation.

Should the Honourable Member be in a position to forward detailed information on the location and the type of infringement, the Commission will assess it.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2883/00

by Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 September 2000)

Subject: High accident rates on the 1992 motorway (Spain)

A complaint lodged by the Association of Victims of the 92 Motorway, which links Seville to the province of Granada, states that this motorway is the most dangerous and accident-ridden in the whole of Europe.

Since this road was completed in 1996, it has been the theatre of 3 057 traffic accidents: 290 people have been killed, 1 554 seriously injured and 2 702 less seriously injured.

In the last year the accident count has risen even further, to 253 with 42 people killed and 346 injured.

The Commission has repeatedly expressed its concern over road safety, in particular in its communication Priorities in EU road safety Progress report and ranking of actions, while the construction of the motorway concerned by the Andalusian regional government received ERDF funding.

Is the Commission aware of the numerous defects existing in the construction, structures, signposting and maintenance of this motorway, which was financed with Community funding?

What measures does the Commission believe should be taken to normalise this state of affairs and bring this totally unacceptable accident rate under control?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

The Commission notes the data reported by the Honourable Member but must stress the multiplicity of possible factors in accidents occurring on the motorway in question.

It attaches great importance to the quality and user safety of construction work effected by the Member States, notably transport infrastructure, but must remind the Honourable Member that there are no legislative measures at Community level in this field and that all applicable standards are the province of Member States. It is of course ready to examine any proposal that would improve user safety on this motorway.

It has in fact included in the Community support framework for 2000-2006 for the Spanish Objective 1 regions an indicator to measure the reduction in loss of human life on Spanish roads.

As regards improvement of the A-92 motorway, the Commission has been informed that the Andalusian Regional Government intends to renew some parts of it.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2992/00

by Daniela Raschhofer (NI) to the Commission

(20 September 2000)

Subject: Directive 89/665/EEC on review procedures concerning the award of public contracts

1. Have the provisions of the Upper Austria Provincial Law on the Award of Contracts relating to the legal protection of individuals, governed by Directive 89/665/EEC(1) on the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts, been duly amended in transposition of the Directive?

2. If so, why? If not, why not?

3. How many sets of proceedings for Treaty violations have so far been initiated against Austria in connection with the directives on the award of public contracts?

(1) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 33.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 2000)

1. Council Directive 89/665/EEC of 21 December 1989 on the coordination of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the application of review procedures to the award of public supply and public works contracts was transposed by the Province of Upper Austria (Oberösterreich) by Law of 5 May 1994(1), as amended by Law of 23 January 1997(2). The Commission finds that the transposal by the Province of Upper Austria does comply with the Directive, subject to the point below.

2. In a judgment of 28 October 1999 relating to an Austrian case(3), the Court of Justice found that the Member States are required to ensure that the contracting authority's decision prior to the conclusion of the contract as to the bidder in a tender procedure with which it will conclude the contract is in all cases open to review in a procedure whereby an applicant may have that decision set aside if the relevant conditions are met, notwithstanding the possibility, once the contract has been concluded, of obtaining an award of damages. According to the Commission's interpretation, this judgment implies that Austria is required to change all its legislation in the field of public contracts, including the relevant law in Upper Austria. In this respect, the Commission has contacted the Austrian authorities with a view to monitoring the legislative procedure to ensure compliance.

3. As regards the public contracts directives in general, the Commission has so far initiated seven infringement proceedings against Austria: three proceedings for non-transposal and four for improper application.

(1) Oö. LGBl. 59/1994.

(2) Oö LGBl. 34/1997.

(3) C-81/98, not yet published in the reports.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2411/00

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Recovery plan for the Bonelli's eagle in La Rioja (Spain)

The Commission has granted the Government of La Rioja assistance to implement a recovery plan for the Bonelli's eagle under the LIFE programme.

One of the nesting sites of the three or four remaining pairs of Bonelli's eagles will be affected by the construction of a wind farm at Sierra la Hez, which lies between two special bird protection areas.

In the Commission's view, is this installation compatible with the LIFE programme, given the serious consequences it will have for the last remaining pairs of Bonelli's eagles in La Rioja?

What measures does it intend to adopt in order to preserve this protected species of great ecological value?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2411/00 and E-2412/00 given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 2000)

Bonelli's eagle is a species listed in Annex I of Council Directive 79/409/EEC, of 2 April 1979, on the conservation of wild birds(1). Pursuant to Article 4.1 of this Directive, Member States are obliged to take appropriate steps to ensure the protection of the species.

Two special protection areas (SPAs) are sited on the sides of the Sierra de Hez, where it is proposed to install a wind farm. As regards the first SPA, called Peñas de Iregua, Leza y Jubera Code ES64, at present there is an abandoned territory of Bonelli's eagle, which means no adults breed or live there now. Furthermore, the settlement of this eagle territory is at some distance (more than 10 kilometres) from the proposed wind farm. The other SPA, called Peñas de Arnedillo, Peña Isasa y Turruncún Code ES65, is an eagle territory, where a breeding couple is present. As the proposed wind farm is located high and faraway from this eagle territory, it is unlikely to affect it.

The eagle's range has been taken into account in deciding where to install the infrastructure for this wind farm (e.g. installation of an electric power line).

In this region (La Rioja), the Commission supports a Life project LIFE 1999NAT/E/6419 recovery of the Bonelli's eagle in La Rioja, Spain- under Council Regulation (EC) No 1404/96(2), of 15 July 1996 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1973/92 establishing a financial instrument for the environment (LIFE). The main objective of the Bonelli's eagle recovery project in this region of Spain is to promote the natural recovery of the species in the Iberian range, and to consolidate the La Rioja population. This Life project expended almost 25 000 repairing and changing three electric power lines to avoid eagle collision and electrocution.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(2) OJ L 181, 20.7.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2756/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Failure to transpose Directive 79/409/EC on the conservation of wild birds

The Commission has decided to deliver a reasoned opinion against Greece for not transposing into its legislation the provisions of Directive 79/409/EEC(1) on the conservation of wild birds.

Can the Commission set out the legal arguments which show that Greece is not fully implementing the above directive?

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 2000)

The Commission has delivered a reasoned opinion to Greece for non-respect of the hunting provisions of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(1). The Commission considers that Greek hunting legislation infringes the obligation to protect wild birds during their rearing season and the various stages of reproduction, and, in the case of migratory birds, during the period of return to rearing grounds. In particular, the Greek legislation allows the hunting season to extend to the 28 February, thereby overlapping with the protected period for 17 bird species included in Annex II of the Directive.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3050/00

by Jean-Claude Martinez (TDI) to the Commission

(28 September 2000)

Subject: Elephant hunting in Africa

The cruel and senseless practice of elephant hunting is still going on, unfortunately against a background of widespread indifference.

Given that the massacre of these mammals, one of the symbol's of our planet, is prompted by financial motives connected to the trade in ivory tusks, what steps will the Commission take to introduce a total Community-wide ban on this vile trade?

Will the Commission introduce a system of fines for states which continue to allow hunting of this kind within their territory, reminiscent as it is of the archaic and barbaric practices of former times?

Will it take measures against travel agencies and other organisations which organise these large-scale massacres under the guise of safaris or big-game hunting?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 2000)

Under Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996, on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein(1), which implements the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora in the Community, commercial trade in ivory is not allowed.

The Commission as well as the Member States are continuously committed to the conservation of the African elephant and are well aware of the sensitivity of the issues related thereto.

However, import of hunting trophies is allowed from some African countries where it has been established that this limited hunting is not detrimental to the populations concerned and export quotas have been adopted. The return from sport hunting is generally large, a part of which, in most of the countries concerned, is required by law to go back to local communities and conservation authorities which are committed to the conservation of the elephant.

Taking account of the above considerations, the Commission does not intend to stop the import of hunting trophies, accompanied by proper export and import documents, from African countries where the above conditions are in place.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.