ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0168/99

by Ludivina García Arias (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Established right of undertakings and implications as regards compensation arising from the amendment of legislation in the European Union

Does the Commission take the view that the amendment of legislation or the introduction by the European Union of a new binding legal framework based on the interests of the internal market may give rise to established rights from the point of view of compensation for the undertakings affected?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

The Court of First Instance ruled on the question raised by the Honourable Member in its judgment of 29 January 1998 (in Case T-113/96 Dubois ECR II-125)(1), in which it summarised the applicable Community case-law.

The Court found that the Community's non-contractual liability extends, under the terms of the second paragraph of Article 215 of the EC Treaty, to the damage caused by its institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties. The Treaties establishing the European Communities and the agreements which supplemented or amended those Treaties thus constitute neither an act of the institutions nor an act of the servants of the Community and cannot, therefore, give rise to non-contractual liability on the part of the Community.

With regard to the acts of the institutions or of their servants, in order for the Community to incur non-contractual liability, the applicant must prove the unlawfulness of the alleged conduct of the Community institution concerned, actual damage and the existence of a causal link between that conduct and the alleged damage. In that connection, if the unlawful act complained of concerns a legislative measure, the liability of the Community can be incurred only if there has been a breach of a higher-ranking rule of law for the protection of individuals. Moreover, if the institution has adopted the measure in the exercise of a broad discretion, the Community cannot be rendered liable unless the breach is clear, that is to say, if it is of a manifest and serious nature. Those criteria also apply in the case of a wrongful omission.

Asked for its opinion on the consequences of an amendment to Community legislation required by the implementation of the Single European Act, the Court reiterated that, in cases where the Community authorities have a broad discretion, traders cannot claim a vested right in the maintenance of an advantage which they obtained from the Community rules in issue and which they enjoyed at a given time.

However, the possibility cannot be excluded that an obligation to provide compensation might arise under the domestic law of the Member State on whose territory the businesses affected by the implementation of the single market are located.

(1) An appeal against this judgment has been brought before the Court of Justice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0486/99

by Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Recurrent reports of dangerous incidents at the nuclear power station in Fessenheim in the Alsace (Upper Rhine, France)

After the shut-down of the two reactors at the nuclear power station in Fessenheim in the Alsace in August 1998 and on 11 December 1998, various organisations and media sources have once again reported two serious developments:

1. The amount of borated water found in the security systems of reactors one and two did not comply with the relevant regulations. This water is used to prevent a nuclear reaction in the event of an accident.

2. Radioactive tritium had leaked into the ground water. Tritium levels of 60 Bq per litre of water were registered.

What is the Commission's opinion of the nature, extent and consequences of the most recent incidents at the Fessenheim nuclear power station, particularly the pollution of ground water by radioactive tritium? Does the Commission now consider that it is necessary to set up a committee of independent experts? Does the Commission consider that it is necessary to take measures to protect the environment and public health?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 1999)

Operational aspects concerning the amount of borated water available at Fessenheim nuclear power plant are outside the scope of the responsibilities of the Commission. The overall Community competence in the nuclear safety field is laid down in the Euratom Treaty and covers mainly radiological protection. The French safety authorities are responsible for the licensing of nuclear power installations and the respect of safety practices in France.

The Commission has not yet received official information with regard to leakage of tritium into the environment. The activity concentration of 60 becquerel per litre (Bq/l) is below the indicator parameter value laid down in Annex I part C of Council Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption(1). The protracted intake of drinking water at this level of tritium activity would cause a radiation exposure of about 0.1 % of the annual limit for members of the public established in Council Directive 96/26/Euratom laying down basic safety standards for the protection of the health of workers and the general public against the dangers arising from ionizing radiation(2). Hence there is no need for the Commission to take further action.

(1) OJ L 330, 5.12.1998.

(2) OJ L 159, 29.6.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0399/99

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Fire safety

Will the Commission list the countries which have responded to the study drawn up by the French company CETEN-APAVE relating to the implementation of the 1986 EU recommendations on fire safety?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1999)

For the part of the 1996 study on fire safety in hotels, which was based on a survey, CETEN - APAVE had received replies to the questionnaires from eight Member States (Belgium, Greece, France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom).
Although, for administrative reasons, the scheme has been entered in the register of non-notified aid
measures, the Spanish authorities have been informed that such entry does not necessarily mean that thescheme will be classified as state aid or deemed incompatible with the EC Treaty.
Given the lack of an existing framework for the scrutiny of state aid in this field and bearing in mind that
this is a complex issue and that talks are still in progress with the Spanish authorities, the Commissiondoes not plan at this stage to order the suspension of the scheme under Article 11(1) of CouncilRegulation (EC) 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93of the EC Treaty.
(2000/C 27 E/134) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1525/99
by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission
(1 September 1999)
Subject: Possible difficulties hindering the entry of new undertakings to the Spanish generating market
The Spanish Parliaments decision to amend the substance of the Sixth Transitional Provision of Law
54/1997 on the Electricity Sector (adopted by Law 50/1998) and to quantify the costs of transition tocompetition (CTCs) arising for Spanish electricity undertakings by assessing the rate to be paid byconsumers at 4,5 % represents additional income in excess of a billion pesetas for the undertakingscurrently present on the market.
This step, which bears no relation to market trends nor to the actual costs, may provide electricity
companies with advantages over the competition  to the detriment of Spanish consumers  and increasethe obstacles hindering the entry of new undertakings to the generating market.
Does the Commission consider that this quantification of CTCs for Spanish undertakings may hinder the
entry of new undertakings onto the Spanish generating market?
Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission
(11 October 1999)
The issue of the charge of 4,5 %, which has been included in the Spanish electricity tariffs in order to
recover the payments under the title costs of transition to competition (CTC), has to be seen in thecontext of the Commissions overall examination of the Spanish stranded cost regime pursuant to state aid
rules.
In particular, the question whether the introduction of the 4,5 % charge constitutes an additional income in
the context of the overall CTC payments, and the question whether this quantification of CTCs for Spanishundertakings may hinder the entry of new undertakings onto the Spanish generating market, are issuesbeing considered in this examination under state aid rules.
The Commissions examination of the scheme is continuing, but until a final decision is adopted it is not
possible to comment on specific details of the CTC regime.
(2000/C 27 E/135) WRITTEN QUESTION E-1526/99
by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission
(1 September 1999)
Subject: Ecological disaster in the Pego-Oliva marsh
Throughout the previous parliamentary term we have complained about the environmental damage being
done to the Pego-Oliva marsh and park in Valencia, one of the most important wetlands in Spain, which is29.1.2000 EN C 27 E/109 Official Journal of the European Communities
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0154/99

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Lindane

Further to my Questions E-2417/98(1) and E-2860/97(2), has the Commission yet received the report from Austria on lindane?

If so, when is it likely to be able to make its results available? If not, when does it expect to receive that report?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 1999)

The draft monograph on Lindane, which was prepared in the framework of the first review programme undertaken under Commission Regulation (EEC) 3600/92 of 11 December 1992 laying down the detailed rules for the implementation of the first stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Council Directive 91/414/EEC concerning the placing of plant protection products on the market(3) was submitted by the rapporteur Member State, Austria, on 17 December 1998 to the Commission and the Member States.

According to the usual procedures provided in Regulation (EEC) 3600/92 the draft report was immediately forwarded for an expert consultation (peer review) with specialised experts from five Member States to examine in detail the monograph in all areas of human health and environmental safety (physico-chemical properties, toxicology, residues, ecotoxicology, fate and behaviour in the environment).

Final results from this review are expected by November 1999. The results of this review will then be discussed within the scientific committee on plants, as well as with all Member States in the framework of the standing committee on plant health.

However, the Commission has also informed the Member States in the framework of the standing committee on plant health about the content of the Austrian documentation.

(1) OJ C 118, 29.4.1999, p. 73.

(2) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 84.

(3) OJ L 366, 15.12.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0620/99

by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Air links

Regional airports often have difficulty in obtaining viable slots at major airports because major airports prefer larger, more lucrative aircraft coming from other major airports. This prevents the development of regional airports and increases pressure on large ones.

Does the Commission have any plans to help regional airports and airlines, such as a mandatory minimum requirement on large airports to provide viable slots for regional airport/airline use?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(19 April 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-159/99 by Mr Watson during question time at Parliament's March 1999 part-session(1).

(1) Debates of the Parliament (March 1999).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0106/99

by Sirkka-Liisa Anttila (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 February 1999)

Subject: Extension of EU animal welfare requirements to imports from third countries

Council Directive 91/630/EEC laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs(1) and Council Directive 91/629/EEC laying down minimum standards for the protection of calves(2) contain an "Article 8" which has remained a dead letter because of its provisions concerning third countries. Article 15 of Council Directive 93/119/EC on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing(3) is a similar article concerning third countries and imports from them.

According to these articles, when animals (or meat) are imported into Community territory from third countries, they must be accompanied by a certificate issued by the authorities testifying that, in the third country, the animals have been kept and treated at least as well as the relevant Community provisions require.

When Council Directive 98/58/EC concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes(4) was under consideration, the third-country issue became a major problem. Under the WTO Agreement, the imposition of such a requirement on third countries could have been regarded as discriminatory, as an illegal barrier to trade and competition and hence as violating the Agreement.

Many EU Member States took the view that it was necessary by one means or another to secure guarantees that the welfare of farm animals in third countries was equivalent to that in the EU. In connection with the adoption of the farm animals welfare Directive, moreover, it was stated that it must be possible to influence international requirements concerning the welfare of farm animals through international organisations and agreements, i.e. in other ways than by creating barriers to imports.

What will the Commission do to resolve the third-country issue and bring animal welfare requirements up to EU standards?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 1999)

As the Commission has stated previously, the possibility of amending World trade organisation (WTO) rules in order to take account of welfare concerns will be addressed in the context of the determination of the Community negotiating objectives for the next stage of the WTO negotiations.

In addition, the Commission has initiated the procedure set out in Article 8 of Council Directive of 20 July 1998 concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes(5), by requesting all countries which export animals or animal products to the Community to communicate any legislation or other provisions which they apply concerning the welfare of animals kept on farms, during transport and at the time of slaughter.

Once this information has been received, it will be assessed in the light of both Article 8 of Directive 98/58/EC and WTO obligations.

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, p. 33.

(2) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, p. 28.

(3) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 21.

(4) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998, p. 23.

(5) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0084/99

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Environment aid granted to Indonesia

What environmental and social conditions does the Commission attach to bilateral aid granted to Indonesia?

How does the Commission monitor the use of such funds to ensure that they are not used for environmentally or socially damaging projects, such as the expansion of the commercial plantation sector?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 1999)

In Indonesia as in other partner countries the environmental and social impact of Community projects is fully examined in the preparation of the terms of reference. The Community gives special priority to the social consequences of the economic and financial crisis in Indonesia. The Commission representation in Jakarta monitors the environmental and social impact of Community projects and the Commission takes the necessary measures based upon the representation's reports, which are prepared in coordination with the Community Member States represented in Indonesia.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0382/99

by Nuala Ahern (V) to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: Implementation of Joule-Thermie Programme within the 4th Framework Research Programme

With reference to the Court of Auditors Special Report No 17/98 on Joule Thermie Research(1), will the Commission explain why the figures relating to expenditure on projects are more than 20 % less than those set out in Annex II to the Council Decision on the Specific Programme on Energy Research in the 4th Framework Programme (94/806/EC)(2) and, in particular, why allocations for SMUs are entered separately rather than being included in the project allocations, which would entail a 5 % participation by SMUs in the programmes.

Can the Commission also explain why, in the Joule expenditure until the end of 1997, there is a shortfall of ECU 70 million for renewables, although ECU 8,9 million and ECU 6,8 million were overspent for Rational use of energy and Fossil fuels respectively?

Is it possible under these circumstances for the ECU 70 million shortfall to be offset by the end of the Programme, so as to fulfill promises made to Parliament by Commissioner Cresson? If not, what action is to be taken?

(1) OJ C 356, 20.11.1998, p. 39.

(2) OJ L 334, 22.12.1994, p. 105.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0275/99

by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Situation of women with children in Italian prisons

At present 52 children below the age of three are being kept in Italian prisons while their mothers serve sentences of varying lengths.

Being kept in prison will have far-reaching adverse effects on their upbringing and education.

In view of the relatively small numbers concerned, steps could be taken to allow their mothers to serve their sentence in a different way.

The practice of keeping children of a very young age in prison is clearly at odds with the human and civil rights guidelines adopted by the European Parliament.

Will the Commission make approaches to the Italian Government as a matter of urgency to persuade it to allow the mothers held in prison to look after and bring up their children outside a prison environment invoking the fundamental principles underlying European guidelines on freedom and respect for human and civil rights?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(31 March 1999)

The Commission underlines the need to respect human rights. In particular, the Commission supports the improvement of prison conditions in the Community in compliance with the European Convention for the protection of human rights, the prison standard rules for treatment of prisoners adopted by the Council of Europe in 1973.

However, prison conditions in the Member States fall under the responsibility of national authorities. This situation could change to some extent with the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty. New Article 31 of the Treaty on European Union provides for an approximation, where necessary, of rules relating not only to the constituent elements of criminal acts but also to penalties and for co-operation regarding proceedings, and especially in relation to the enforcement of decisions. Such measures are part of the instruments for the achievement of an area of freedom, security and justice and should aim at a high level of safety by means of preventing and combating crime.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0194/99

by Freddy Blak (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 1999)

Subject: Corruption and the Olympic Games

Following recent revelations concerning the dubious methods used to secure the Winter Olympics for Salt Lake City, with inducements including free sex, scholarships, travel and favourable property deals for IOC members, will the Commission say how much money the EU gives to support the Olympic Games generally and whether adequate checks are made to ensure that such money is used as intended?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 1999)

The Commission has never granted a financial contribution to the International Olympic Committee.

In 1992, the Commission made two direct contributions to the committees organising the Olympic Games in Barcelona (EUR 6 million) and Albertville (EUR 4 million) in order to give a Community dimension to the opening ceremonies. The Commission thus responded to an invitation from Parliament, among others. It should be recalled that the decision to hold the Games in the two Community cities was taken in 1987.

The Community's involvement in the 1992 Olympic Games was the subject of a Communication(1) to Parliament and the Council.

(1) COM(92) 575 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0661/99

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(26 March 1999)

Subject: Structural Funds

Regions whose per capita income is less than 75 % of the average Community per capita income are described as "Objective 1 regions" and they receive significant amounts of Community aid.

To determine whether or not this threshold has been exceeded, the draft Council Regulation COM(98) 131 final(1) laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds states that the figures corresponding to the last three years for which Eurostat has data available will be used.

At the moment the only figures available are those for the 1994, 1995 and 1996 financial years.

What are the figures for those years for the Balearic Islands?

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0805/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 April 1999)

Subject: UK funding of dam construction in Turkey

The UK authorities have approved funding for Turkish plans to build a series of dams on the rivers Tigris and Euphrates.

Given that:

(a) the joint management of water resources is highly important and that vital interests of the countries crossed by the two rivers are at stake,

(b) the construction of the dams will create a vast ecological disaster, thousands of the local population will be forced to abandon their homes, 15 towns and 52 villages with unique monuments will be submerged under water,

(c) Turkey is one of the few countries not to have signed the 1997 UN Convention on the settlement of border disputes between states sharing the same water resources,

(d) the Member States of the EU have signed the UN Convention on water resources and that, pursuant to Articles 130u(3) and 130v of the Treaty on European Union, the Community and the Member States must comply with the commitments and take account of the objectives they have approved in the context of the United Nations and other competent international organisations,

will the Commission say:

1. whether it considers that the manner in which Turkey is furthering this project fulfills the conditions laid down by the UN Convention on the joint management of water resources, regardless of the fact that Turkey has not signed the Convention, and

2. if not, what measures it will take, having due regard to the Articles of the Treaty on European Union, to prevent the UK from financing this project?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1999)

As the Honourable Member says, Turkey has not signed the 1997 UN Convention referred to in his written question. Turkey cannot therefore be required to conform with its provisions.

Apart from this, the Community budget is not contributing to the project referred to by the Honourable Member. This being the case, the issue of UK funding for the project is a matter for the UK authorities.