ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1581/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(12 May 2000)

Subject: European City of Culture

How would the Commission respond to a request from up to three towns wishing to be European City of Culture?

Would it be permissible under the current criteria, and would such regional applications be considered?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 2000)

All decisions concerning the designation of the European capital of culture until 2004 have already been taken on an intergovernmental basis by the ministers for culture meeting within the Council. The procedure governing the designation of such cities from 2005 until 2019 is laid down by Decision 1419/1999/EC of the Parliament and the Council of 25 May 1999 establishing a Community action for the European capital of culture event for the years 2005 to 2019(1).

Article 2.1 of this Decision states that mldr. The nomination or nominations shall be notified to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the Committee of the Regions by the Member State concerned mldr. As there is no restriction on the number of cities to be proposed by each Member State it would be possible for any number of nominations to be notified. Article 2.2 of the same Decision sets out the procedures that will be used to assess the nominations and Annex II of the Decision sets out the criteria that could be used to this end.

Given that Article 2.1 states that one city shall be designated as European Capital of Culture in turn mldr. there would not appear to be any scope for a regional application.

(1) OJ L 166, 1.7.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0974/00

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Commission

(31 March 2000)

Subject: Relations between the European Union and Iran

The election results in the recent parliamentary elections in Iran have demonstrated the strong desire of the Iranian electorate that Iran should emerge from the international isolation in which it has been for years. However, the European Union's response to the changes taking place in Iran has so far been limited.

Will the Commission say whether it intends to take advantage of current favourable circumstances to improve relations with Iran, thus supporting the opening which Iranian society is seeking with the West?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 2000)

Following the positive outcome of the elections in Iran, the Commission is currently reviewing relations with Iran. While it is still too early to formulate specific suggestions for the development of relations with Iran, it is likely that, as a first step, these would consist primarily of a widening and deepening of the dialogue that takes place within the framework of the comprehensive dialogue since the end of 1998. Cooperation could also be enhanced in the areas of energy, refugee assistance and drugs control. In the light of the political development in Iran, and depending on a constructive Iranian engagement on international issues such as non-proliferation and the fight against terrorism, extension of cooperation to new areas, and ultimately an institutionalisation of relations, could be envisaged.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0877/00

by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 March 2000)

Subject: Unlawful State subsidy to the DSB

Passenger transport between Copenhagen and Æro is provided by two carriers, one a privately owned bus company and the other a rail link operated by the DSB (Danish Railways).

Since 1 January 1999 the Danish State has purchased public transport services from the DSB under a contract according to which the State pays a gross subsidy of DKR 2,9 billion. When the Inland Revenue Department decided in 1999 that VAT should be charged on the Great Belt Bridge tolls, the subsidy paid to the DSB was increased on the grounds that:

as the DSB had to pay VAT on permanent railway charges in 1999, the DSB net subsidy would be increased by DKR 192,5 million.

In other words, the DSB is paying VAT on the bridge tolls, but having it refunded via the State contract. The private bus company does not receive any kind of public subsidy and pays VAT which is not refunded.

Does the Commission consider this form of VAT refund to the DSB as compatible with the Community's rules on competition and State subsidies?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(25 April 2000)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it has already received information concerning the issue she raises and is currently examining the arrangement in question. The Commission has therefore asked the Danish authorities to provide the Commission with all relevant information, in order to allow it to make an assessment of the arrangement under applicable state aid rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0978/00

by Niels Busk (ELDR) to the Commission

(31 March 2000)

Subject: T5 forms

Further to my previous question (P-2817/99)(1), will the Commission base its answer on the fact that responsibility remains with the exporter, whereas, after stamping, the form is in the possession of the authorities and, therefore, under their sole control.

Will the Commission take steps to ensure that responsibility for returning T5 forms is transferred to the authorities since they are in possession of the form?

(1) OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000, p. 209.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(19 May 2000)

The Commission maintains that it is not necessary to transfer responsibility for returning T5 forms to the competent authorities since it is already legally their responsibility. As far as it is aware the situation described by the Honourable Member is not usual in one or more Member States.

If in a particular case it is found that the competent authorities have not fulfilled their obligation to return the original control copy T5, the exporter still has the option, as the Commission pointed out in its Answer to the Honourable Member's Written Question P-2817/99, to seek confirmation that the goods comply with their intended use or destination. As a last resort, exporters can exercise their rights, including through the courts, notably where a Member State may have failed to fulfil its Community obligations and particularly where they may have suffered injury as a result.

While it is not for the Commission to interfere in individual cases such as these, it will nonetheless remind Member States of their obligations in this matter with regard to general compliance with Community law.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0713/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(17 March 2000)

Subject: Ethnic entrepreneurship

Can the Commission give a breakdown of the value of ethnic entrepreneurship by Member States over the past five years? Will the Commission in future include a section on ethnic entrepreneurship in its annual report on SME's?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2000)

Reliable statistics on ethnic entrepreneurs and on the importance of ethnic entrepreneurship in the Community are not yet available.

In order to obtain information on the problems and potential of ethnic entrepreneurship in Europe a study on young entrepreneurs, women entrepreneurs, co- entrepreneurs and entrepreneurs from ethnic minorities has been launched (open call for tender No 98/S 137-92958/EN(1). Once completed the Commission will analyse and disseminate the results.

Prior to the launch of the study mentioned above and within the framework of the third multiannual programme for SMEs (1997-2000), the Commission published a call for proposals on assistance for craft enterprises(2). The objective of this call was to provide assistance to these enterprises with a particular focus on measures in favour of women entrepreneurs, young entrepreneurs and enterprises made up of disadvantaged groups. One of the pilot actions financed under this call was The ethnic minority business network (EMBNeT). Its main objective is to assist ethnic entrepreneurs to overcome business obstacles and regulation constraints. The final report is due by 30 June 2000.

Finally, in its forthcoming report on the coordination of activities in favour of SMEs and the crafts sector, under the section on promoting the spirit of enterprise and support to target groups, the Commission will report on action undertaken in favour of specific target groups including ethnic minorities.

(1) OJ S 137, 18.7.1998.

(2) OJ C 117, 15.4.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0745/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(13 March 2000)

Subject: EU health, Aids and population policies

Would the Commission clarify what the status of the EC document Health, Aids and Population (HAP) policies is? Is it the case that it was well received by Member States? Is it the case that it has not had due consideration at management level in the Commission? Would the Commission make the document available for consideration by the Parliament?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0745/00 and E-0746/00 given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(17 April 2000)

The Commission is presently reviewing the Community's past experiences in the field of health, human immunedeficiency virus/acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) and population and presenting orientations for the Community's future efforts.

This exercise is part of the general discussion and reformulation of the Community development policy and the related discussion on a poverty action plan, a gender action plan and a review of priorities in social policy areas.

Informal discussions have taken place with the experts from Member States and some other major partners. In general, the orientations have been well received, and will now be discussed in management, before wider consultations.

The policy orientations will of course also become available for discussions in Parliament, but should be considered within the larger framework referred above.

As regards management of the specific budget line mentioned by the Honourable Member, considerations will be given to human resources and technical assistance within the context of the overall exercise of policy and resource priority setting that is ongoing. Part of this exercise will be addressed in the follow up on the white paper(1) on reform of the Commission.

In this framework the distribution of human and financial resources will be part of an overall exercise on priority setting and distribution of resources which will be completed by September 2000.

(1) COM(2000) 200 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0879/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Council

(23 March 2000)

Subject: EU initiatives on education in the Third World

With reference to the question tabled by Graham Watson MEP on 19 November 1999 (No. P-2163/99(1)) regarding initiatives to promote literacy in lesser developed countries, can the Council clarify what collective action has so far been taken by the Member States to promote education in the Third World? How exactly does the Council intend to develop the provision for education in its aid programmes?

(1) OJ C 219 E, 1.8.2000, p. 107.

Reply

(8 June 2000)

1. The Council would reiterate that it considers support for education in developing countries of vital importance, in particular as it can make a significant contribution to the fight against poverty which is one of the principal objectives of Community development policy.

2. The Council has no information on action taken by Member States, in the framework of their bilateral aid, to promote education in the third world.

3. The Council would draw the honourable Members' attention to the fact that the Commission is responsible for the development and management of the Community's aid programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0996/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(31 March 2000)

Subject: White Paper on Food Safety

In paragraph 101 of its White Paper on Food Safety (COM(1999) 719 final), that it will revise the Food Labelling Directive 79/112/EEC(1) in order to address the question of nutrition and functional claims.

Could the Commission please explain:

1. What it means by the term functional claims, i.e. does this definition encompass enhanced functional claims, as have been defined in the draft Codex recommendations for the use of health claims (Alinorm 99/22A)?

2. Why has the Commission not addressed the issue of disease risk reduction claims in its White Paper?

(1) OJ L 33, 8.2.1979, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2000)

1. In its white paper on food safety(1) the Commission indicated its intention to consider whether specific provisions should be introduced in Community legislation to govern functional claims and nutritional claims on foodstuffs. This would include, among other provisions, definitions of the different categories of claims. Work on the subject is still in its early stage and, at present, these definitions have not yet been discussed in detail. In the white paper on food safety, functional claims are referred to as claims related to beneficial effects of a nutrient on certain normal bodily functions; this corresponds to the definition of nutrient function claim given in Codex Alimentarius Guidelines CAC/GL 23-1997. In the proposed draft Codex recommendations for the use of health claims enhanced function claims are presented as a special category of health claim. It must be noted that these draft Codex recommendations are at a very early stage of consultation and that there is no consensus yet on the definitions appearing therein.

2. Under current Community legislation (Article 2 of Council Directive 79/112/EEC of 18 December 1978 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs for sale to the ultimate consumer(2)) the attribution to any foodstuff of the property of preventing, treating or curing a human disease, or reference to such properties, is prohibited. As indicated in its white paper on food safety, the Commission does not foresee the need to modify the principle of this provision. Disease risk reduction claims are regarded as prevention of a disease and therefore covered by this prohibition.

(1) COM(1999) 719 final.

(2) OJ L 33, 8.2.1979.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0811/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(20 March 2000)

Subject: Minister Christian Sautter's behaviour

At the meeting of EU Finance Ministers in Brussels on 28 February the French Finance Minister, Christian Sautter, caused a stir by displaying an unusual sticker. Attached to his overcoat and, later, his suit was a palm-size sticker showing a no-traffic sign with the diagonal through a bow tie, the trademark of the new

Austrian Federal Chancellor, Wolfgang Schüssel. To show his disapproval of Austria's ruling coalition, the French Finance Minister turned in all directions several times on his arrival in the Belgian capital to draw the journalists' attention to the sticker and the message it conveyed. His delegation, he said, had enough stickers for the other ministers. Later the Belgian Finance Minister, Didier Reynders, joined his French colleague. What constitutes good taste is, of course, arguable, but some things are totally lacking in taste.

Dr Wolfgang Schüssel is the Federal Chancellor of the Republic of Austria. As secretary of the parliamentary group of the Austrian People's Party (ÖVP) for many years, as Secretary-General of the Austrian Economic Federation, as Federal Minister for Economic Affairs, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs and Vice-Chancellor, he had a blameless career. Since 1995 he has been the Federal party chairman of the ÖVP, a party which, like no other in Austria, has always pledged its allegiance to a democratic Europe. On 4 February 2000 Dr Wolfgang Schüssel was sworn in as Federal Chancellor. Over the years the Austrian people have been able to see how efficiently and professionally he operates. There cannot be the slightest doubt about his European mentality and attitude. The Council is therefore asked when it intends to put a stop to this evil campaign of character assassination and to ensure that common sense prevails in relations among European partners and friends.

Reply

(25 May 2000)

The Council has not taken a view on this subject and cannot therefore comment on the issues raised in the Honourable Member's question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0407/00

by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(15 February 2000)

Subject: Compensation for German shipping and transport firm operating on the Danube following the closing of the Yugoslav section of the Danube

A number of firms in Regensburg (Germany) are specialised in transport operations from Germany to destinations below Yugoslavia on the Danube. As a result of the war in Kosovo, the destruction of bridges over the Danube, and the subsequent closure of the Yugoslav section of the Danube the business operations of these firms have come to a halt. Since these firms specialise in very specific transport operations on the Danube, they have practically no possibility of branching out into other areas of activity.

Can the Commission therefore provide the following information:

1. Should these firms be regarded as victims of the Kosovo war in the same way as firms situated in Kosovo itself?

2. Are these firms eligible for financial restructuring aid to offset their losses?

3. Are these companies entitled to non-reimbursable aid for restructuring or consolidation to offset their ongoing losses and to publicly guaranteed investment aid?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2000)

The Commission is aware of the specific problems of companies involved, both directly and indirectly, in transport on the Danube as a result of the blockage of the Danube due to NATO's destruction of the bridges at Novi Sad.

However, the question of any compensation for such losses cannot be addressed until the issue of liability, if any, for these losses has been determined in the appropriate legal fora.

As regards the restoration of navigation on the Danube, the European Commission is presently analysing a request by the Danube Commission for cofinancing of a project proposal for the clearance of a navigation channel by removing the debris of the bridges destroyed by NATO, as well as any unexploded ordnance, and also the repair of the riverbed and banks. The project and its context is complex, from the political, technical and legal points of view.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1300/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Council

(27 April 2000)

Subject: Solutions to the Council's frequent inability to answer Parliamentary questions on time

Can the Council indicate whether slow responses on the part of certain Member States are responsible for the Council's frequent inability to answer Parliamentary questions on time, and if so, has thought been given to setting a time limit for objections by states to suggested answers so that those answers can be provided to Members of the Parliament within the allotted time frame?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1299/00, E-1300/00 and P-1541/00

(10 July 2000)

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that it is not bound by the deadlines mentioned, as these ensue from Rule 44(5), (6) and (7) of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament.

It would, however, stress that with a view to better collaboration with the European Parliament in this area the Council has acted swiftly to introduce a series of internal measures enabling it to reply to written questions within two months. In this context its preparatory bodies have defined a procedure for examining questions intended to strike the requisite balance between this objective and the essential need to provide replies of the highest quality possible after consultation with the competent departments and an exchange of views at Council level.

Over the years various factors have made it harder to keep this balance, with adverse consequences on the promptness of replies, examples being the significant increase in the number of written questions put to the Council, which should not be under-estimated, the emergence of questions in areas which call for in-depth study, or the topical nature of certain issues which on occasion require some time for Members to be given genuine updates.

The Council does, in any case, share the concern expressed by the Honourable Member and reaffirms its commitment to providing, in all circumstances, the most appropriate and fullest replies possible to written questions put to it. It will reflect on solutions to optimise the current procedures for studying questions, in compliance with the requirements listed above.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1221/00

by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(10 April 2000)

Subject: Transport of live animals use of approved staging points in Italy

Council Directive 91/628/EEC(1) (as amended by Council Directive 95/29/EC(2)) on the protection of animals during transport lays down that animals must be unloaded and given 24 hours rest, food and water after travelling for 29 hours in the case of sheep and 24 hours in the case of pigs.

This obligatory unloading, feeding, watering and resting must take place at a staging point which has been approved by the Member State under Council Regulation No 1255/97(3).

Many pigs, sheep and cattle are transported on long journeys to Italy from other Member States. Which approved Italian staging points are in practice used for the unloading, feeding, watering and resting of animals which enter northern Italy from other Member States and are then transported through Italy to southern Italy or Greece?

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, p. 17.

(2) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995, p. 52.

(3) OJ L 174, 2.7.1997, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/97 of 25 June 1997 concerning Community criteria for staging points and amending the route plan referred to in the Annex to Council Directive 91/628/EC as amended by Council Directive 95/29/EC of 29 June 1995 on the protection of animals during transport provides (Article 3(1) that Member States shall ensure that staging points are approved by the competent authority of the Member State in whose territory they are situated. The competence of the Commission is defined in paragraph 3 of the same article, which states that The competent authority shall notify the Commission of the list of approved staging points and any updates. The Commission shall present this information to Member States in the framework of the Standing Veterinary Committee.

Additionally, in order to increase the diffusion of this list to the public and in particular to non-governmental organisations such as transporters and animal protection organisations, the Commission has also made the staging point list available at the following Internet address:

http://forum.europa.eu.int/Public/irc/dg6/vets/info/data/stagpt/stagpt.htm

Concerning the transport of animals to Greece or to Southern Italy, the last update of the list on 31 March 2000 mentioned seven staging points in Italy. The last staging point communicated by the Italian authorities is located in the province of Bari (Puglia region) which corresponds to the main route used for the transport of sheep to Greece. Another Italian staging point is situated in the province of Roma (Lazio region) on one of the main routes to Southern Italy.

The Commission is following with particular attention the development of the network of staging points within the territory of the Community.