ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/335

(2004/C 84 E/0395)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0227/04

by Ewa Hedkvist Petersen (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 2004)

Subject: Alcohol ignition interlock devices (‘alcolocks’)

Trials are now being conducted in some parts of Sweden with ‘alcolocks’ on buses. Does the Commission consider that a Member State can require all vehicles in the country to be fitted with ‘alcolocks’ in order to improve road safety?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 2004)

If a Member State should decide to make the installation of alcohol ignition interlock devices obligatory, it would have to notify the Commission of the full draft technical regulation as required by the Community rules on the notification of technical regulations. If the measure were then to be considered compatible with Community legislation for vehicles registered in that Member State, the latter would still have to comply with international agreements allowing the circulation of vehicles registered in other States.

Member States have to authorise the sale and first registration of type-approved private cars which are covered by a European certificate of conformity. For other categories of vehicles, particularly public transport vehicles, the Commission has proposed a staggered timetable which is currently being considered by the Council and the Parliament.

The Commission recognises the potential of alcohol ignition interlock devices. At the end of 2003 it launched a study to evaluate the possible applications for such systems. However, at present, given their high cost and the need for frequent recalibration, the Commission considers that such systems should be installed only as an alternative penalty for drink-driving offences, and not as a general measure which, a priori, would only be useful for a small proportion of drivers.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/664

(2004/C 84 E/0748)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0722/04

by María Herranz García (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 March 2004)

Subject: COM in olive oil

Quite apart from the fact that it does not take into account the realities of Spanish production, the proposed reform of the common organisation of the market in olive oil has a number of other harmful features (such as retention of the current arrangements for private storage, even though those arrangements have not made it possible for swift, flexible action to be taken in response to any disruption in the market).

Would the Commission reconsider its proposal by bringing the arrangements for the private storage of olive oil into line with the realities of the market and by incorporating an automatic opening and closing price mechanism?

Furthermore, under the Commission proposal the number of olive trees in an olive grove may not differ by more than 10 % from the number registered on 1 January 2005 in the olive-oil GIS. Is the Commission not aware that, in restricting the increase in the number of olive trees to 10 % when an olive grove is replanted, it is seriously damaging the interests of Spanish olive groves by preventing the replanting of groves which cannot be adapted to modern cultivation techniques?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2004)

The private storage scheme is intended for the management of crisis. Therefore, its triggering shall not be automatic but dependent on a decision by the Management Committee which, after assessing the market situation, may decide on the appropriateness of opening the scheme. On the other hand, the Commission proposes to maintain unchanged the reference prices. This is consistent with market trends over the last years where, in spite of a mounting demand, olive oil prices have remained relatively stable thanks to the very important increase of production.

In 1998, the Council decided that under the Common market organization (CMO) no aid may be paid to additional olive trees or the relevant areas planted after 1 May 1998, with the exception of areas covered by a programme approved by the Commission. This very principle is embodied in the current proposal for both the decoupled payment and the aid for olive groves. From 1 May 1998 onwards, farmers planting additional olive trees have to be able to operate in the market with no Community support.

Concerning the aid for olive groves, the Commission proposal requires that the number of trees does not differ by more than 10 % from the number registered on 1 January 2005. This provision aims to ensure that the structural features of the grove which made it eligible for support due to their environmental or social characteristics are maintained in future.
2.

According to Article 3, paragraphs 1 to 3 of Council Directive 98/24/EC, Community indicative occupational exposure limit value (IOELV) are health based, non-binding values, derived from the latest available scientific data and the availability of adequate measurement techniques, which provide for any given substance the threshold level of exposure below which no detrimental health effects are expected. They are objectives to be achieved and as such are necessary for the determination and assessment of risks by the employer, in accordance with Article 4 of Council Directive 98/24/EC. The technical/scientific nature of IOELV's is recognised by the legislator, since the Directive provides for adoption in accordance with the adaptation to technical progress procedures. In contrast, Community binding limit values are of a political nature: they are defined not only on the basis of health effects, but also on feasibility factors, socio-economic impact and the quantum of risk that society is ready to accept. They are established by the political authority in accordance with Article 137 of the EC Treaty. In the case of NO the Commission is also aware of specific measurements carried out in Member States. For example, the Chemical Agents Occupational Hygiene Unit of the Technology Division of the United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive has performed a review on the use of and exposure to nitrogen monoxide and nitrogen dioxide in United Kingdom workplaces. The overall mean occupational exposure levels measured in the mining sector were found to be in the range of 0,3 parts per million (ppm) to 0,81 ppm. The Commission has not yet assessed, to what extent these results can be taken into account when reaching a decision on a new IOELV for NO.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/779

(2004/C 84 E/0875)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0350/04

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(12 February 2004)

Subject: Travel agencies: repercussions of the Alitalia crisis on employment

The crisis affecting Alitalia is likely to damage other sectors connected with air transport, in particular travel agencies.

The industrial restructuring plan under discussion at present envisages drastic cuts in the commission paid to agencies — from 7 % to 1 % on the sale of international tickets and from 3 % to 1 % on the sale of domestic tickets.

As reported by the national representatives of associations of travel agents, these decisions may lead to the closure of hundreds of agencies. This means that more than 10 000 jobs, about four times as many jobs as those threatened in Alitalia, are at risk.

Furthermore the cuts, which would result in a rise in air fares, would have other repercussions on consumers. The end user would have the practical problem of obtaining tickets, because agencies are obliged to refuse to provide a service which has become too expensive.

It should also be noted that operators in the sector were informed of these decisions, unprecedented in Europe, only 60 days in advance.

In view of the serious consequences such a move would have on employment and bearing in mind that travel agencies are the main channel for air-ticket sales, since they manage 91 % of ticket turnover, and hence a crisis in the sector would impact not only on Alitalia, worsening its already precarious position, but also on all other European airlines, can the Commission say:

1. whether the European Union has the power to intervene in the matter, in accordance with policies to safeguard employment or by virtue of any other relevant competence;
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/923

(2004/C 84 E/1020)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0953/04

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(29 March 2004)

Subject: Discriminatory practices by Romania

With reference to the studies on the internal situation in Romania and the meetings held with the representatives of that country in the context of the accession negotiations:

1. Is the Commission aware of the serious discriminatory policy being pursued by the Romanian State vis-à-vis foreign investors, and in particular Italian firms, participating in procedures for the privatisation of Romanian state-owned property?

2. Does it know that these undertakings, despite having contributed to the recovery of vital sectors of the Romanian economy by way of substantial investments, are suffering repeated violations of their rights as guaranteed under European and Romanian regulations, particularly as regards the right of ownership, in favour of companies with links to the previous regime?

3. Is it aware of the fact that the legal protection afforded by the Romanian legal system — under which judgements are passed by the supreme judicial bodies in violation of general legal principles and binding internal rules — has created great uncertainty as to the capacity for guaranteeing the rights of foreign investors participating in privatisation procedures in complete compliance with the national rules?

4. Is it conscious of the fact that this discriminatory policy is being pursued in spite of the public commitments made by the Romanian State to adopt reforms on the theme of the ‘rule of law’ and ‘combating corruption’?

5. What measures will it take to counteract this discriminatory policy?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The Commission has closely monitored the development of a functioning market economy throughout the accession process with Romania. Although considerable progress has been made over recent years, the Commission's regular reports have made it clear that considerable reforms are still needed to attract greater amounts of foreign investment. Particular attention has been drawn to the high levels of corruption that exist, to weaknesses in the legal system, and to an overall business environment that remains difficult.

The Commission is not aware of any systematic discrimination against foreign investors in general or Italian firms in particular. However, if specific evidence of such discrimination is provided then the Commission will investigate fully and take the appropriate action either under the provisions of the EU-Romania Association Agreement or in the context of the accession negotiations.

In more general terms, the Commission will continue to support Romania's efforts to effectively tackle corruption and to guarantee the rule of law. Bilateral contacts will be used in order to urge Romanian authorities to prioritise these issues and financial assistance is being provided to promote anti-corruption initiatives and to modernise the judiciary.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/824

(2004/C 84 E/0919)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0629/04

by Willi Piecyk (PSE), Gerhard Schmid (PSE) and Johannes Swoboda (PSE) to the Commission

(3 March 2004)

Subject: Trans-European Networks — development of the Danube

As part of the revision of the Trans-European Networks, the Commission has proposed that development of the Danube should be a priority project. However, the Commission's aims in terms of the extent of development or the depths to be reached are not clear.

In the current debate and in various documents, reference is constantly being made to the so-called ‘Van Miert Group’ recommendations, which firstly identify a number of bottlenecks in the Danube and then propose that improvements be made to these bottlenecks to achieve a draught of 2,5 metres.

A draught of 2,5 metres is not specifically mentioned or called for in these documents, however, and this allows the Member States broad scope for interpretation and creates uncertainty about the extent of development envisaged for the Danube.

Environmentally and economically speaking, the decision on this issue is of vital importance. The more the depth increases, the greater the impact on the Danube's ecosystem and the higher the costs.

1. With this in mind, is the possible co-financing of the Danube projects based on achieving a specific depth?

2. If so, what would that be?

3. If not, does the Commission believe that the aim of generally improving the stretches defined as bottlenecks is sufficient to be able to apply for and receive financial support as part of the Trans-European Networks?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2004)

The Rhine-Meuse-Main-Danube corridor is a major freight route connecting the North Sea with the Black Sea. Several sections of this waterway pose navigability problems since the draught is less than 2,8 metres at some times of year. The ‘Van Miert Group’ had recommended a minimum draught of 2,5 metres along the entire length of the waterway to give access to vessels of up to 3 000 tonnes.

In its decision of 1 October 2003 (1) the Commission proposes this transport axis as a priority project and identifies a series of bottlenecks which need to be removed in order best to use this transport mode in the interest of the enlarged Europe.

The Commission did not propose technical standards for the improvement of navigability for this project due to the fact that Member States have to go through a series of legal, technical and environmental studies in the phase of project planning before putting any specific possible conditions.

(1) COM(2003) 564 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/751

(2004/C 84 E/0846)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0023/04

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 January 2004)

Subject: Inadequate information to the Commission concerning the Bothnia Line

The Commission has approved the Swedish Government's application to extend the Bothnia Line eastwards, which gave the journey time and operation of the line as ‘compelling reasons’ for exploiting the biggest delta in northern Europe, a classified Natura 2000 area.

Even before the opinion was delivered last spring, the National Rail Administration had economised on extending the line eastwards, thereby invalidating the ‘compelling reasons’ for the project. According to Chef de Cabinet Rolf Annerberg, the Commission has not been provided with this information. The government has authorised the line and the savings. Is the Commission satisfied with the inadequate information provided by the government?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(2 March 2004)

The Commission has not been informed of any changes in the planning of Botniabanan that would invalidate the compelling reasons which justified the positive opinion for the project. It will ask the Swedish authorities about the nature of the changes in the project development referred to. The Commission will inform the Honourable Member about the outcome of the further inquiries.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/651

(2004/C 84 E/0733)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0671/04

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: Ireland's failure to report on CO2 emissions from new passenger cars

What reply, if any, has the Commission received from the Irish Government in response to the reasoned opinion sent to Ireland in April 2002, as announced in IP/02/553, regarding Ireland's failure to report on CO2 emissions from new passenger cars in line with Decision No 1753/2000/EC (1) of 22 June 2000? What action has the Commission taken or is it considering taking in this matter?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 2004)

The infringement procedure referred to by the Honourable Member (2) relates to the failure by Ireland to provide monitoring data on Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from new passenger cars for the year 2000 pursuant to Decision No 1753/2000/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 2000 establishing a scheme to monitor the average specific emissions of CO2 from new passenger cars. As Ireland's response to this infringement did not provide the missing information, the Commission decided to refer Ireland to the Court of Justice and a Court application was lodged in June 2003. During the course of the Court proceedings, Ireland provided data for 2000 and 2001. The Commission considered that the infringement had thereby been brought to an end and in December 2003 it decided to withdraw the proceedings from the Court.

(1) OJ L 202, 10.8.2000, p. 1.

(2) 2001/2203.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/167

(2004/C 84 E/0205)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0139/04

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 January 2004)

Subject: Financial support for undersea optic-fibre cable link for the islands of Flores and Corvo (Azores)

An undersea optic-fibre cable link, co-funded by the Community, now connects all parts of Portugal except for the islands of Flores and Corvo in the Azores Autonomous Region. This state of affairs constitutes serious discrimination against the residents of those islands in one of the Community's most remote regions.

Can the Commission provide information on possible Community support, especially financial, for constructing an undersea optic-fibre cable link for the islands of Flores and Corvo?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2004)

The fibre-optic undersea cable linking the Azores to the mainland and the fibre-optic undersea cable between the islands (except Flores and Corvo) were part-financed by the Regis II Community Initiative. The former cost approximately EUR 16,6 million, the latter approximately EUR 12,5 million. These projects received part-financing of EUR 12,5 million and EUR 9,35 million respectively from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). REGIS II was a Community Initiative during the 1994-1999 programming period.

Submitting applications and allocating finance came under the responsibility of the regional authorities, whose aim was to develop as many projects as possible as efficiently as possible. Flores and Corvo have a combined population of 4 400 and are 140 nautical miles (about 200 kilometres) from Faial, the nearest other island, and some 500 kilometres from the most populated island (Saint Miguel). Due to the cost of providing Flores and Corvo with a fibre-optic link, it was decided to use alternative technical means (wireless data link and satellite).

This type of project could be eligible for support under the POSI operational programme, but the choice of projects for approval also has to consider their cost-effectiveness in relation to existing and foreseeable traffic and take into account the results of the alternative solutions available. Approval of the projects submitted rests with the programme manager and the managing unit (at national level) taking into account inter alia the priorities set, the selection criteria laid down and the project's economic viability so as to maximise the operational programme's effectiveness while complying with the rules in force, including those on competition.

The Commission is currently also examining the question of remotest regions' links with the rest of the Union and ways of reducing their inaccessibility, with a view to responding to the memorandum which Portugal, France and Spain sent to the Commission in June 2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/565

(2004/C 84 E/0642)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0286/04

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject: EU monkey experiments

I was very concerned to see the results of the undercover investigation by the UK Animal Rights Organisation BUAV (British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection) conducted at research facilities in Munster, Germany owned by Covance GmbH Laboratories. The investigation indicates poor enforcement of Directive 86/609/EEC (1) on the Protection of Animals used for Scientific and other Experimental Purposes. As there are many similar research facilities throughout the EU, the conditions at the Munster laboratory are of particular concern.

Please could the Commission respond to the findings of the BUAV investigation, and in particular say what is being done to prevent further similar breaches of Directive 86/609 taking place in future?

How many contract testing laboratories are currently operating in the EU?

To what extent is the Commission able to monitor conditions for test animals in these facilities?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 March 2004)

The Commission has been informed about the treatment of non-human primates at the Covance animal research laboratories in Münster (in North Rhine-Westphalia) in Germany.

A subsequent Commission investigation showed that the German authorities have swiftly taken action. According to information from North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW), the Minister of Environment of NRW has instructed the veterinarians in charge to immediately inspect the Covance laboratories. In addition, the German authorities have agreed to start the procedure to cancel Covance's licence to keep laboratory animals. The public prosecutor has also been involved. Since appropriate action has been taken by the German authorities, the Commission currently sees no need to conduct further investigations in this matter.

Directive 86/609/CEE on the protection of animals used for experimental and other scientific purposes requires user establishments to be registered with the national authority. Article 13 requires Member States to provide statistical data only on the numbers of animals used in experiments. Therefore, the Commission does not possess any statistics on the numbers of contract laboratories in the EU.

According to Directive 86/609/CEE the control of laboratories carrying out animal experiments is the responsibility of the competent national authorities.

(1) OJ L 358, 18.12.1986, p. 1.