ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3542/97 by James Moorhouse (PPE) to the Commission (12 November 1997)

Subject: Transexual citizens in the European Union

In the light of the Council of Europe Recommendation 1117 and the great disparity in the legal status and treatment of transexual European citizens in the various Member States, are there any plans to introduce proposals to improve civil rights for this group of disadvantaged and discriminated against citizens?

Is the Commission aware of the extent of discrimination in employment, passport rights, rights in prison, rights concerning adoption and marriage and how these differences are having a serious detrimental effect on the well-being, economic prosperity and happiness of many European Union citizens?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (5 December 1997)

The Commission is aware of the whole range of serious problems that transsexuals encounter and of their feeling of helplessness in the face of the prejudices against them that still exist in our society.

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that there are no specific provisions in Community law governing the situation of transsexuals. However, the Community Directives adopted on equal treatment for men and women are universally applicable and therefore apply also to transsexuals.

This has been confirmed in the case-law of the Court of Justice, which in a recent judgement ((Judgement of the Court of Justice of 30 April 1996 in Case C-13/94 P. V. S. and Cornwall County Council. )) considered that Article 5(1) of Council Directive 76/207/EEC of 9 February 1976 on the implementation of the principle of equal treatment for men and women as regards access to employment, vocational training and promotion, and working conditions ((OJ L 39 of 14.2.1976. )) precludes dismissal of a transsexual for a reason related to a gender reassignment.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3527/97 by Kirsi Piha (PPE) to the Commission (12 November 1997)

Subject: Leaking of information about the Commission's Agenda 2000 programme before its official publication

Commissioner Van den Broek's answer of 1 October 1997 to my written question E-2669/97 ((OJ C 102, 3.4.1998, p. 86. )) was unsatisfactory because it totally failed to deal with the central point of my question, namely the problem of information leaks. The Commissioner himself was present at the EPP Group meeting last July, the evening before the publication of the Agenda 2000 document, at which he categorically refused to comment on the substance of the document on the grounds of its confidentiality. However, very detailed information had already been transmitted the same day in all the mass media, e.g. on which countries were at the top of the Commission's list.

In view of the above I should like to put a follow-up question (in fact the same question to which I did not receive an answer the first time):

What action does the Commission propose to take to clarify how and why detailed information on the substance of the opinions on individual countries has leaked prior to publication?

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (11 December 1997)

The Commission set out in Reply to the Honourable Member's previous question the efforts it made to ensure that Parliament was informed first about Agenda 2000, right after the Commission formally presented the individual opinions to the ambassadors of the candidate countries.

Unfortunately leaks cannot always be avoided, despite the Commission's best efforts. Such leaks are damaging, not only to the Commission but also to other interested parties and the Commission regrets possible embarrassment which was caused.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3199/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (16 October 1997)

Subject: Recognition of the Italian 'emergency surgeon' specialist qualification

Directive 93/16/EEC ((OJ L 165, 7.7.1993, p.1 )) lays down the rules designed to guarantee free movement of doctors and the mutual recognition of their qualifications between Member States. The Directive specifies, in particular, which diplomas and certificates the Member States should recognized in their territory and lays down (Article 9) the rules governing recognition of qualifications in specialized medicine that do not exist in at least two Member States.

In Italy there exists an 'emergency surgeon' qualification, the course of study for which was altered following the entry into force of the Directive to bring it into line with the relevant provisions.

Despite this, it appears that the Italian legal system has not provided for legislation to guarantee that emergency surgeons' qualifications are recognized in the other Member States.

1. Can the Commission confirm that Italy has failed to fully transpose Directive 93/16/EEC, at least as far as 'emergency surgeons' are concerned?

2. If so, what action does the Commission intend to take?

3. Can the recent amendment of Directive 93/16/EEC, adopted on 28 July 1997, in any way alter the current situation?

4. Does the Commission agree, on the basis of the above, that Italy is also contravening Article 59 of the Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (25 November 1997)

1. and 2. No. Since emergency surgery is not covered by Directive 93/16/EEC, the question of transposal does not arise. Where a doctor specialised in emergency surgery wishes to practise in another Member State, his rights must be examined in accordance with Article 8 of the Directive. This means that the host Member State must compare the training he has received in his Member State of origin or the Member State from which he comes with its own training conditions for the same speciality. Where necessary, additional training may be required.

3. The recent amendment of the Directive introduced a committee procedure for amending the lists of medical specialities given in Articles 5 and 7 and the corresponding minimum lengths of training stipulated in Articles 26 and 27. The committee procedure is a streamlined version of the legislative procedure which replaces the ordinary procedure and will enable the above-mentioned lists of specialities and lengths of training to be regularly and quickly updated. It is quite possible that the present situation may be altered through this procedure.

4. For the reasons given above, and in the light of the information currently in its possession, the Commission takes the view that the situation in Italy does not contravene Article 59 of the Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3295/97 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission (20 October 1997)

Subject: Measures in favour of radio operators

The post of merchant navy radio operator is being definitively dropped as an integral part of the crew of merchant vessels in the Member States from 1 February 1999, owing to a switch in technology. This will cause huge employment problems for a whole category of workers, in particular unemployed elderly workers without any other professional skills who cannot be included in new training programmes on account of their age and health problems.

Will the Commission say:

1. What social protection measures have been taken by the Member States in favour of radio operators?

2. What programmes are to be used to help radio operators overcome the serious problems facing them, and notably social exclusion?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (5 December 1997)

Apart from measures aimed at achieving equal treatment for men and women in the field of social security and measures to protect persons moving within the Community, the Commission's activities in the field of social protection are restricted to the promotion of cooperation between the Member States, the latter being responsible for all the actual decisions in respect of specific measures.

In conjunction with the Community information system on social protection and the report on social protection in Europe, the Commission has developed databases on the Member States' social protection systems. These databases only contain information of a general nature. As far as specific occupational groups are concerned, such as radio operators, the Commission neither receives nor has at its disposal any information.

No general Reply can be given to the question of whether aid measures could be incorporated into the Community's regional and structural policy instruments. A case-by-case examination would be necessary in this connection.

The Structural Funds' Objective 4 is designed to facilitate the adaptation of workers to industrial change and to changes in production systems. Such changes may be linked to technological progress or to work organisation and production management.

Objective 4 focuses primarily on workers who, owing to their age, their low level of education or their vocational background, are threatened with unemployment because they have difficulty in adjusting to the new requirements. The aim is to consolidate the employment of such workers, especially through the provision of advice and through training and retraining.

The provision of guidance and advice is intended to define abilities (vocational and personal skills), and to determine the workers' motivation and capacity for work which they might be able to perform after undergoing training. Such training may cover not only the technical skills required for a specific job or task but also the acquisition of general knowledge.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3589/97 by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (PPE) to the Council (17 November 1997)

Subject: Effective distribution of products confiscated for fraud in the Community

The implementation of the regulation governing trademark protection and intellectual property rights has brought in its wake checks via the customs machinery which have resulted in the detection of over 1500 cases of breach of the law, in virtually all the Member States.

After a product has been confiscated, its future destiny remains in a vacuum. As things stand, such products are systematically destroyed; this is a costly and inefficient solution. Among other disturbing examples, confiscated textiles are destroyed, with all the economic and environmental costs which that entails.

The EU has a precedent for positive use in the case of agricultural products withdrawn from the market, which are distributed free of charge to voluntary organizations, provided they have signed a cooperation agreement with the EAGGF.

Does the Council believe it is possible to introduce a similar system for making good use of products confiscated on grounds of fraud? In the case of Spain, where thousands of textile products have been confiscated, is there any possibility of imaginative use being made of them, by donating them to voluntary or humanitarian organizations such as Caritas or the Red Cross, subject to those organizations signing agreements similar to those existing with the EAGGF?

Answer (26 January 1998)

The Council would refer the Honourable Member to the replies it gave to Written Questions Nos 0065/97, 0845/97 and 3560/97 on the same subject.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3708/97 by Ulf Holm (V) to the Council (19 November 1997)

Subject: UN climate meeting in Kyoto

Ahead of the main UN climate meeting in Kyoto in December, the EU is now acting as a single body in the work on the convention. Many, not only within the EU but also in countries outside such as Australia, consider this to be problematic as it implies that the Member States are now negotiating as a legal person.

Who within the EU is actually responsible for the EU's views? Is it the Commission, the Member States or something in-between?

Does the Council consider that the present Treaty is sufficient to enable the EU to be described as a legal person? Will the new Amsterdam Treaty clarify this point further?

Answer (19 January 1998)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that the subject matter of a possible Kyoto Protocol falls in part within the competence of the European Community and in part within that of the Member States.

The Honourable Member is doubtless aware of the fact that both the Community and its Member States are contracting parties to the United Nations framework Convention on Climate Change. The reference to the European Union in the negotiation process for the Kyoto Protocol reflects the obligation to ensure close cooperation between the Member States and the Community institutions as it flows from the requirement of unity in the international representation of the Community (see, for example, Opinion 1/94 of the Court of Justice of 15 November 1994, 1994 Court Reports, page I-5267, point 108).

As for the position of the European Community in the Kyoto negotiations, this is defined by the Council in accordance with Article 228(1) of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3113/97 by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission (13 October 1997)

Subject: Contract for providing canteen meals to railway workers in Le Marche and the district of Pescara

Recently the Ferrovie dello Stato spa (FS) issued a public invitation to tender for the catering service for railway employees in Le Marche and the Pescara district. Although when the offers were examined the most advantageous was that submitted by the Centro Ternano di Ristorazione (CTR) catering company, the FS, in accordance with widespread practice, granted a right of pre-emption to the Dopolavoro Ferroviari (DLF), an organization set up by the trade unions. So the contract for the provision of 150 000 meals per year was awarded, for the same price as that asked by the CTR, to the Ancona DLF, which made use of its above-mentioned pre-emptive right.

In view of the foregoing:

1. Did the public invitation to tender issued by the FS comply with the provisions of Directives 93/38/EEC ((OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 84.)) and 92/50/EEC ((OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.)) on the award of contracts, both with regard to procedures and with regard to the rules on advertising such contracts?

2. Did the award of a right of pre-emption to the Ancona DLF not constitute a breach of the rules on free competition and, in particular, the above-mentioned directives?

3. Can the outcome of the invitation to tender be regarded as lawful?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (19 November 1997)

1. Canteen services come under Category No 17 (hotel and restaurant services) of Annex I B to Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts and Annex XVI B to Council Directive 93/38/EEC of 14 June 1993 coordinating the procurement procedures of entities operating in the water, energy, transport and telecommunications sectors. The awarding of the contract is therefore subject only to compliance with the provisions on technical specifications (Article 14 of Directive 92/50/EEC and Article 18 of Directive 93/38/EEC) and to the obligation to send a notice of the results of the procedure to the Commission within two months of the date the contract was awarded (Article 16 of Directive 92/50/EEC and Article 24 of Directive 93/38/EEC).

2. and 3. On the question of the pre-emptive right, the Commission will decide whether this constitutes a discriminatory national measure in breach of the EC Treaty. The answer to the third question will depend on what is decided.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4071/97 by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Nutritional labelling

Given the high percentage of pre-packed foods on sale in some countries, does the Commission accept that if consumers wish to choose a healthy diet, full nutritional labelling is essential for all pre-packed foods and that labels should include information on at least: energy, protein, carbohydrate, sugars, fat, saturates, fibre and sodium?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission (30 January 1998)

Under current Community legislation on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs ((OJ L 276, 6.10.1990. )) laid down in Directive 90/496/EEC, information on the eight elements mentioned can be given voluntarily and is compulsory in certain circumstances stipulated therein.

The Commission had raised the subject and invited comments on the revision of the nutrition labelling directive in its green paper on food law published in May 1997 ((COM(97) 176 final. )). The Commission is currently evaluating these comments but has not yet reached any conclusions on the specific issue raised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3284/97 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council (21 October 1997)

Subject: Threat to the Okavango delta in Botswana

1. Is the Council aware of Namibia's intention, given the serious drought, to pump water out of the Okavango river in Botswana?

2. Is the Council aware that this is being carried out with financial aid from China, in exchange for which Namibia is granting China fishing rights off the Namibian coast?

3. Given the unspoilt nature of the flora and fauna peculiar to the Okavango delta,is the Council prepared to consult the governments of Namibia and Botswana on ways of using financial aid from the European Union to find an alterative to Namibia's water shortage?

4. Is the Council prepared to use specialist knowledge on water supplies in Europe, and in particular the British Wetlands Institute, which has offices in the Netherlands, to find a solution to this problem?

Answer (16 February 1998)

The Council has no information on Namibia's alleged intention to pump water out of the Okavango river in Botswana. Moreover, it has no direct jurisdiction to intervene in this matter.

This type of problem could be raised in the context of management of the Lomé Convention, which is primarily the responsibility of the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3511/97 by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) to the Council (14 November 1997)

Subject: Damage to small and medium-sized businesses as a result of the Netherlands and European postal authorities' abuse of their monopoly position

1. Small and medium-sized businesses face constant problems because of the postal authorities' abuse of their monopoly position. In several places in the Netherlands activities other than postal services covered by the monopoly, including foreign exchange operations and the issue of registration certificates, are carried out at the post office counters used for postal services. This is a serious problem for small and medium-sized businesses. Waiting times for a standard parcel may be more than 20 minutes during the peak period from 4 to 6 p.m. The manager of postal services in the Hague, W. van den Berg, does not consider this disturbing. However it means a considerable loss to small and medium-sized businesses. Is the Council prepared to ask to Commission to draw up guidelines to prohibit European postal authorities from abusing their monopoly position.

2. How can the monopoly of the European postal authorities be broken in the interests of small and medium-sized businesses and employment?

3. Is the Council prepared to ask to Commission to draw up guidelines to prohibit European postal authorities from combing commercial interests, including foreign exchange operations, which compete with commercial banks, and monopoly postal services, such as acceptance and dispatch of mail, at the same counters?

Answer (9 March 1998)

1. In response to the question of the Honourable Member of the European Parliament, the Council would recall that in conformity with the provisions of the Treaty, the issue of abuse of a dominant position falls within the competence of the Commission.

2. The Council would also remind the Honourable Member that the European Parliament and the Council recently adopted, on 15 December 1997, Directive 97/67/EC, which sets out common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service ((OJ L 15, 21.1.1998, p. 14. )).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4003/97 by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: EU budgetary revenue derived from the taxation of fishing vessels

According to information supplied by the associations of shipping vessel owners in the EU Member States, each owner wishing to acquire a fishing licence is required to pay a sum of money part of which is paid to the Community budget, while the rest goes to the Member States of the Union.

Will the Commission say where this revenue appears in the Community budget, how much it amounts to for 1997 and whether the Commission services are considering further increasing this tax on fishing vessels in the Union?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (12 February 1998)

Owners of Community vessels wishing to obtain a fishing licence under a fishing agreement concluded between the Community and a third country:

- pay no licence fee where reciprocal agreements are involved. Reciprocal agreements are agreements under which, in exchange for fishing opportunities granted to Community vessels in the waters of a third country, the Community grants fishing opportunities in its waters to that third country's vessels. Such agreements concern the North Sea, the Baltic and the North Atlantic;

- pay a licence fee in the case of agreements on access to an area in exchange for financial compensation. Agreements with financial compensation are those under which a third country grants fishing opportunities to Community vessels in exchange for financial compensation paid by the Commission and for a fee charged to the owner of the vessel requesting the licence. That fee is paid in its entirety by the vessel's owner to the third country. Such agreements have been concluded with South Atlantic and Indian Ocean countries and members of the group of African, Caribbean and Pacific States (ACP).

Thus, a vessel owner requesting a fishing licence for his vessel does not pay money to the Commission and no amount of that nature therefore appears in the Community budget.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3705/97 by Françoise Grossetête (PPE) to the Commission (19 November 1997)

Subject: Internal market - sales of ready-to-wear spectacles in the EU

Given the disparities between the Member States as regards the current conditions for the sale of ready-to-wear spectacles and in view of the fact that this type of product has an impact on consumer health, would the Commission state its intentions concerning the introduction of a Community regulation designed to harmonize sales conditions, with reference, in particular, to the qualifications of the retailers (opticians, pharmacies and others) of ready-to-wear spectacles in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (2 February 1998)

The Commission does not at present intend to propose any Community legislation on the conditions of sale of ready-to-wear spectacles.

As far as the qualifications of retailers of ready-to-wear spectacles are concerned, there are no Community rules coordinating their training or the taking-up or pursuit of this occupation. Specific rules of this type exist for only seven professions (doctors, dentists, nurses responsible for general care, veterinary surgeons, midwives, pharmacists and architects).

In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and since recognition of the qualifications of the practitioners involved in the retail sale of ready-to-wear spectacles (opticians, optometrists, etc.) is ensured by means of Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration ((OJ L 19, 24.1.1989. )) and Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC ((OJ L 209, 24.7.1992. )), the Commission does not intend to put forward proposals aimed at coordinating training and the conditions in which these professions may be taken up and pursued.

In the absence of specific Community rules, the Member States have sole authority to decide on the conditions of sale, the level and length of training offered in their territory and the conditions in which these professional activities can be taken up, provided that their national legislation complies with Community law, and in particular the principles of the free movement of goods and non-discrimination.