ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2647/00

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: List of dangerous chemicals

1. Can the European Commission give a detailed overview (number, name, reasons for use) of the dangerous chemicals which can legally be traded on the European market, which are not 50 % biodegradable within six months and which can bio-accumulate up to a factor of 5 000 (measured as a bio-concentration factor in fish)? This bio-accumulation formula has been proposed by the Swedish authorities (see http://www.chemicals.sustainable-sweden.gov.se).

2. Can the European Commission give a detailed overview (number, name and reasons for use) of a sub-group of dangerous chemicals, i.e. those which are not 50 % biodegradable within eightweeks and which can bio-accumulate up to a factor of 2 000 (measured as a bio-concentration factor in fish)?

3. Should it not be possible to provide a full overview of all dangerous chemicals, can the European Commission instead give an overview of the dangerous chemicals traded on the European market in volumes of more than 1 000 tons per year?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(31 October 2000)

The Commission has data available on the 2700 new chemicals placed on the market since 1981. A rapid screening gave the results presented below (for confidentiality reasons no detailed list of substance names can be given).

Among the new dangerous chemicals, 6 % are biodegradable to less than 50 % within six months and at the same time have a bio-accumulation factor (calculated from physico-chemical properties) of over 5 000. They have a wide range of uses, in particular as colouring and photographical agents, as stabilisers as well as intermediates in chemical reactions. They are applied in the polymer photographical and chemical industries.

Among the new dangerous chemicals, 10 % are biodegradable to less than 50 % within two months and at the same time have a bio-accumulation factor (calculated from physico-chemical properties) of over 2 000. Their main uses are the same as the chemicals mentioned above.

For existing chemicals, which constitute over 95 % of the volume of chemicals on the market, the Commission has data available for substance volumes of 1 000 tonnes or more per year and manufacturer or importer. A detailed study concerning biodegradability and bio-accumulation is currently ongoing and will be completed in early 2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2828/00

by Mary Banotti (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: Appointment of Directors to the Board of the European Investment Bank

Can the Commission indicate its role in the appointment of Directors to the Board of the European Investment Bank?

Can it indicate the criteria its representative uses to ratify new candidates?

Is it aware of the considerable controversy surrounding the candidate nominated by Ireland?

Is the EIB subject to the same guidelines for the appointment of Directors as other Community institutions, with particular regard to nomination, suitability and professional competence?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 2000)

The Honourable Member refers to the appointment of members of the management committee of the European Investment Bank (EIB), rather than of Directors. The Commission is aware of the public controversy in Ireland surrounding the candidature referred to by the Honourable Member, which has in fact been withdrawn, and notes that the EIB brought to the attention of its Board of Directors all correspondence received on the matter.

The EIB is an autonomous body owned directly by the Member States which provide its capital. The appointment of members of the management committee is set out in Article 13 of the EIB's Statute, which is established in a Protocol annexed to the EC Treaty and thus forms an integral part of the EC Treaty.

The Commission's role in the appointment process is via its membership of the EIB's Board of Directors. According to Article 13.1 of the Bank's Statute, it is the task of the Board of Directors to make a formal proposal to the Board of Governors for appointment to the Bank's Management Board. The Board of Governors, the highest governing body of the EIB is made up of the Ministers of the Member States, the Bank's shareholders.

There are no specific criteria used by the Commission's representative on the EIB's Board of Directors in determining whether to ratify a formal proposal for appointment. However, attention is drawn to the statutory duty of the Board of Directors (Article 11) to ensure, as the governing body reporting to the Board of Governors, that the EIB is properly run.

Although the Statute does not specify the requisite qualifications for management committee positions, it does indicate clearly the tasks and responsibilities of the management committee (Article 13). It follows that the committee must avail collectively of the necessary competencies to carry out its tasks under the authority of the President and the supervision of the Board of Directors. As regards nomination of candidates, the EIB's Statute does not indicate any specific provisions and in practice it is the Member States which, as shareholders, submit candidatures which the Board of Directors decides or not to propose to the Board of Governors for appointment.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0646/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(13 March 2000)

Subject: Belgium's and France's behaviour towards Austria

Belgium and France are demonstratively distancing themselves from Austria at international level.

Diplomats from Belgium and France boycotted the speech given by the new Austrian Foreign Minister, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, to the Organisation for

Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) in Vienna on 10 February. Their seats remained empty during the speech. After Mrs Ferrero-Waldner, Chairman-in-Office of the OSCE, had finished speaking, the diplomats returned to the meeting.

At an informal meeting of EU Ministers in Lisbon on 11 February the Employment Ministers of Belgium and France left the room as soon as their Austrian colleague took the floor.

Belgium and France are clearly at great pains to introduce a new form of cooperation and a new culture of political dialogue in European and international relations. They ascribe their strategy of exclusion to their concern that human and minority rights may be in danger in Austria because of the involvement of the Freedom Party (FPÖ) in the new centre-right government in Vienna.

The following questions arise in this context:

1. Does the Council intend to accept this form of cooperation from now on, whenever it sees fit?

2. The EU special summit on employment policy in March was to have been prepared at the informal Council of Employment and Social Ministers. Will important political issues of which the employment policy is a prime example be pushed aside by France and Belgium in the future as soon as the opportunity arises for a hitherto very reliable partner to be excluded in a way that attracts publicity?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0645/00 and E-0646/00

(20 November 2000)

The measures to which the Honourable Member refers were announced in a statement made by the Portuguese Prime Minister on behalf of the Governments of 14 Member States. That statement is not binding on the Council.

The Council has not taken a view on this issue and is not therefore in a position to reply to the questions raised by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1895/00

by Jan Wiersma (PSE) to the Council

(19 June 2000)

Subject: Forest fires in contaminated areas of Belarus and Ukraine

1. Is it true that forest fires have broken out in Belarus and Ukraine in areas contaminated as a result of the Chernobyl disaster?

2. Are these fires causing increased risks to public health within and outside those countries?

3. Are the fires, or have they already been, a reason for action by the European Union?

4. In what way is the EU helping to deal with contamination risks in Belarus and Ukraine?

Reply

(20 November 2000)

The Council is aware that forest fires broke out in May 2000 in forests contaminated as a result of the Chernobyl accident.

The Council has not been informed of notable increases in radioactivity nor of any increased risk to public health caused by these fires. The Council is aware that research projects undertaken by the Commission have shown that the risk of radioactivity spreading as a result of forest fires is marginal.

The Council understands that the Commission is keeping the situation under permanent review in the framework of several nuclear safety programmes for Eastern Europe and will induce action if necessary.

The Council recalls that, as result of the disaster of Chernobyl, the Community has provided assistance to build a shelter for the reactor, to improve radioactive waste management, to assist in decontaminating the affected region and to install a system for monitoring radiation in air and river water.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3413/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 November 2000)

Subject: Trade agreement between the EU and China

In February 2000 the negotiations between the EU and China on the conditions for China to join the WTO were broken off.

What progress has been made in the contacts and negotiations between the EU and China since then?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(28 November 2000)

The bilateral negotiations between the Community and China concerning the conditions for China's entry into the World Trade Organisation were concluded on 19 May 2000. The member

of the Commission responsible for conducting these negotiations reported regularly on their progress to the relevant committee, including immediately after their conclusion in May 2000. Details of the outcome are sent direct to the Honourable Member, who may also wish to refer to the Commission's website for the most up to date information(1), and to Parliament's Secretariat.

(1) http://www.cc.cec:8082/comm/trade/bilateral/china/wto.htm.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2513/00

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(2 August 2000)

Subject: Safety standards for cigarette lighters

What is the latest Commission position, from the point of view of consumer and child safety, on safety standards for cigarette lighters, with particular regard to: cheap imports, flame height, catalytic lighters and structural strength?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

With regard to the different safety aspects, the Honourable Member is invited to refer to the answer given to written questions E-1798/98 from Mrs Larive and E-1988/98 and E-1989/98 from Mr Bowe(1).

Proposals for new and redrafted standards, in particular on the introduction of safety mechanisms for children, have now been completed. They have been submitted to the national standardisation bodies for their opinion. If the final voting procedure is successful the new standards could be published within 12-18 months.

With regard to imports of dangerous cheap lighters from third countries, different initiatives for improving co-operation between national authorities responsible for product safety and customs authorities are being taken. In particular an ad hoc working group consisting of representatives of industry, enforcement authorities, the European committee for standardization (CEN) and the Commission has been created.

Specific actions in the framework of the Customs 2002 programme are foreseen to increase market surveillance.

(1) OJ C 13, 20.1.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1990/00

by Maria Sanders-ten Holte (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 June 2000)

Subject: Cultural Villages of Europe

In 1985, on the initiative of Mrs Melina Mercouri, the Council decided to launch the European Capital of the Year project. It saw the many cultural events that would take place in the European Cultural Capital during its year as a way of raising European citizens' awareness of the wealth of their cultural heritage, the vital cultural creativity in Europe and the new opportunities that cultural cooperation can provide for social integration, growth and employment. In 2000 the Commission is co-financing the project through the Culture 2000 programme.

Following the example of Copenhagen as the 1996 Cultural Capital, a number of villages have taken the initiative to expand the project and incorporate a network of villages throughout Europe, which are setting up and carrying out cultural events with one another, with the aim of bringing the culture and cultural diversity of villages in Europe to the attention of their citizens.

1. As villages are in fact often the custodians of cultural assets and are close to the citizen, is the Commission prepared in the light of the above to take note of projects of this kind concerning villages in Europe?

2. Might the Commission be prepared to take on part of the funding for an annually revolving project for the Cultural Village of the Year?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2000)

The Commission is aware of this initiative and was there when it was presented to Parliament. Although the Commission acknowledges the important cultural role of European villages in the process of European integration, it must inform the Honourable Member that the Community can support cultural projects only under and in accordance with the criteria of existing programmes.

Thus, the choice of towns and cities for the European Capital of Culture up to the year 2004 was based on a decision taken at intergovernmental level by the Ministers of Culture within the Council.

As regards the period 2005 to 2019, the procedure and the criteria for determining the European Capitals of Culture have been set out in Decision 1419/1999/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 establishing a Community action for the European Capital of Culture event for the years 2005 to 2019(1).

Regarding all other cultural projects, the cultural operators (in this case, the villages of Europe) may present a project under and in accordance with the criteria provided for by the Culture 2000 programme, which is the single programming and financing instrument for cultural cooperation.

(1) OJ L 166, 1.7.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2438/00

by Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission

(19 July 2000)

Subject: Failure to respect linguistic diversity by the European Commission

Can the Commission explain why it now systematically gives priority to English in the communications it issues which are of interest to the public, increasingly cutting down its use of the other ten official languages of the European Union?

Most of the information contained on the web-sites of the Commission's directorates-general is in English and, where translations are available, these are usually confined to French or German. For example, the fact that instructions for the submission of projects are almost exclusively in English makes it difficult for non-anglophone citizens, associations or bodies to take part. In addition, the Commission frequently asks project organisers to submit interim and final reports on their activities in the Commission's working languages (English and French), causing pointless delays and extra administrative costs to those who do not have a good knowledge of these languages, to the detriment of the operational aspects of the project.

Does the Commission not consider that these practices promote discrimination? Are such practices not incompatible with the activities and programmes designed to promote respect for cultural and linguistic diversity geared to the European Year of Languages?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(30 November 2000)

The Commission does not give preference to the use of any of the official languages of the Community by comparison with the other languages, except for the internal work of the institution, in conformity with Article 6 of Regulation No 1 of the Council of 15 April 1958 establishing the language regime of the Community(1). This Regulation still remains the guideline for the contacts of the Commission with the public and also for the publishing policy of the Commission. Regulation No 1 determines the official languages of the Community and determines that legal acts have to be published in those languages.

The Commission pays great attention to the respect of the language regime, in particular with regard to its own communication with the public, in order to guarantee non-discriminatory practices. Thus, the web-sites of the Directorates-general are usually presented in the eleven official languages too. It may happen that supplementary information can be made available in one language only. This is sometimes unavoidable due to the actuality of information and the limited resources available for translation of all information or documents in all the official languages.

Instructions for the submission of projects are generally published in the Official journal, so that citizens, companies, or organisations have the same fair chance to take part in the execution of a programme. In cases where additional information appears on a web-site in one or some of the official languages only, a request can be addressed to the Secretary general of the Commission, who will examine what further steps can be taken.

(1) OJ 17, 6.10.1958.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3359/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 October 2000)

Subject: Mass redundancy

Vesticom, a clothing firm which forms part of the UK multinational Coats Viyella Clothing, is based in Torres Vedras, Portugal, and employs almost 300 people. It has, according to the Sindicato dos Trabalhadores Têxteis, Lanificios e Vestuário do Sul (Trade Union of Southern Textile, Wool and Clothing Workers), announced that it intends to issue redundancy notices to the entire workforce.

Vesticom set up business in Torres Vedras almost 27 years ago, and closure will harm the whole region, by cutting job opportunities, increasing dole queues and reducing its wealth creation capacity by PTE 1 billion. The closure is all the more unacceptable in view of the firm's high quality workforce, facilities and products.

Can the Commission tell me:

1. What measures it intends to take to prevent yet another instance of hundreds of workers being laid off on mass by a multinational;

2. Whether the firms in question have received any Community funding, either in Portugal or the UK?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 2000)

1. The Honourable Member refers to the problems raised by a possible collective redundancy announced by a company in Torres Vedras, Portugal.

Community law, through the consolidating Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies(1), aims to establish arrangements and procedures for collective redundancies together with measures designed to alleviate the consequences of redundancy for workers.

As Portugal has transposed this Directive into national law, it is the national courts and administrative authorities which are responsible for resolving any disputes relating to the case in point.

2. According to the information supplied by the Portuguese authorities, the Vesticom company received a Community contribution of 8 477 from the European Regional Development Fund in connection with an investment project worth 16 960 approved on 19 March 1996 as part of the Industry sub-programme of the operational programme Modernising the economic fabric.

A search of the Department of Education and Employment's projects and payments databases and the United Kingdom database for Coats Viyella, using the registered name of Coats Viyella PLC and related trading names(2), did not find any European Social Fund payments.

(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1998.

(2) Coats; Madura Coats Ltd; Coats India; Madura Textiles; Jaeger; Viyella; Van Heuson; Ladybird; Coats Crafts UK; Coats Fabra; Barbour Threads.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3418/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 November 2000)

Subject: Promoting olive oil in the northern countries of the EU

An advertising campaign for the use of olive in Sweden among other countries began in October 2000. According to press reports the campaign is seeking to increase the consumption of olive oil, and has been funded by the Commission.

Will the Commission give details its expenditure in respect of this campaign?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 December 2000)

The seventh campaign to promote the consumption of olive oil in the Community covers a three-year period (2000-2002).

The total budget for this period is 35,26 million for the Community as a whole, with the following amounts allocated to the Nordic Member States:

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3741/00

by Gerard Collins (UEN) to the Commission

(28 November 2000)

Subject: UK road tax

As the Commission is aware the UK is proposing to introduce a road tax for foreign hauliers as part of a package of measures aimed at cutting road costs for British hauliers and motorists. Has the Commission concluded its examination of this proposed measure, does it agree that it would discriminate more seriously against Irish road hauliers than their counterparts in other EU countries, on the basis that some 70 % of Irish hauliers use the UK road system either as a means of access to the continent or as a final destination, and will it therefore rule against the introduction of this discriminatory road tax?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-0873/00 by Mr McCartin during question time at Parliament's December 2000 part-session(1).

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (December 2000).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3264/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Incorporation of EU directives into national law

Commission statistics concerning the percentage of directives contained in the 1992 programme for the internal market which have been properly incorporated into national law by the Member States showed that as of 7 March 1997, Sweden had incorporated 98,2 %, Finland 95,9 % and Austria 86,2 %, and that a total of 94,3 % had been incorporated in the 15 member States of the EU.

Does the Commission have statistics showing the percentage of EU directives incorporated into national law by the 15 Member States up to and including 1999?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(6 December 2000)

Since November 1997 the Commission has published the single market scoreboard twice a year. This includes statistics on the implementation of internal market directives by the Member States.

The scoreboard shows the implementation deficit of each Member State, i.e. the percentage of internal market directives not yet transposed by a Member State. For comparison purposes the performance of Member States is given below for May 1998 to May 2000, the date of the last scoreboard (all internal market directives are taken into account, not only those contained in the 1992 programme).

>TABLE>

The scoreboard measures the overall Community position on transposition in terms of the percentage of directives not yet implemented in all Member States.

The percentages for the same period were:

>TABLE>

All the single market scoreboard reports are accessible on the internal market website at http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/.

In its yearly report to the Parliament on monitoring the implementation of Community law, the Commission also publishes statistics on the implementation rate by Member States of directives from all sectors of Community competence.

For more information, the Honourable Member is invited to refer to the XVIIth report on monitoring the implementation of Community law (1999) published notably at the following address: http://europa.eu.int/comm/secretariat_general/sgb/infringements/report99_fr.htm