ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0479/02

by Ari Vatanen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 February 2002)

Subject: The Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) and the Interim Agreement between the EU and the Russian Federation principle of non-discrimination

The above-mentioned Interim Agreement was accepted on 17 July 1995 and came into force on 1 February 1996.

Like the Amsterdam Treaty (Article 90), the agreements between the EU and the Russian Federation also include the principle of mutual non-discrimination.

Are these articles in the latter agreements also directly binding on EU Member States Courts and other authorities?

An example would be where an EU Member State's court finds that the national import tax legislation violates in some way the principle of non-discrimination as regards the importation of certain goods.

Under these circumstances is it possible for the court to accept an appeal by company A importing such goods from other EU Member States by reference to Article 90 of the Amsterdam Treaty, but not to accept the appeal of company B, which imports similar goods from Russia based on the argument that the non-discrimination rules of the PCA and the Interim Agreements are not binding on the tax authorities like the Amsterdam Treaty non-discrimination rules?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(19 March 2002)

According to Article 300(7) of the EC Treaty, agreements with third countries concluded by the Council, pursuant to the provisions of the EC Treaty, are binding for the Community institutions and the Member States. Agreements with third countries may be invoked by individual operators if the agreements are considered to be directly effective. An agreement might be considered to be directly effective if the provisions lay down a sufficiently clear and precise obligation which does not require the adoption of any subsequent measure for its implementation (see eg. Case 12/86 Demirel and, with respect to the World Trade Organisation Agreement, Case C-149/96 Portugal v Council).

The question of whether these agreements are directly effective, and can therefore be relied upon by individuals, is for the Community Courts to determine. To the best of the Commission's knowledge, neither the European Court of Justice nor the Court of First Instance have been asked to determine whether the provisions of the Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (PCA) and the Interim Agreement between the Community and the Russian Federation are directly effective.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0702/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE)and Robert Goodwill (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 March 2002)

Subject: The implications for money-laundering and tax evasion of the new 500 note

In its answer to Written Question E-3213/01(1), the Commission listed a number of EU Member States which, until recently, used banknotes worth between 200 and 600, although it remains the case that only Germany and Holland used banknotes of comparable value to the new 500 note.

The Commission pointed-out that it is difficult to assess the extent to which the euro will be used in unlawful transactions, adding that it would endeavour to detect any evidence of disproportionate use of banknotes in unlawful transactions after 2001. It did not, however, indicate, as requested, whether police forces were consulted before the decision was made to issue the 500 note, and whether the Commission would be prepared to recommend the note be withdrawn if, following its introduction, Europol or Interpol were to conclude that it significantly assisted organised criminals in carrying-out their activities. Could the Commission now make clear whether or not this is the case?

Can the Commission also confirm that the note was introduced primarily because the German government insisted on it, despite the fact that it makes it easier for German residents who wish to evade taxes to take money out of the country undetected? If so, does the Commission believe that this sits easily with the German government's insistence in recent years on the need for a Europe-wide withholding tax or exchange of information in order to reduce tax evasion?

(1) OJ C 147 E, 20.6.2002, p. 133.

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2002)

According to the EC Treaty and the European system of central banks (ESCB) Statute the competence for banknotes lies with the European Central Bank. Decisions to introduce or to withdraw banknotes can therefore not be taken by the Commission.

In relation to 500 banknotes, which were introduced only a few months ago, the Commission considers that it would be inappropriate to consider or to anticipate hypothetical policy recommendations based on pre-judgements or speculations on the specific use which will or could be made of this specific banknote denomination.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0786/02

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(19 March 2002)

Subject: List of safety and security measures at nuclear power plants

Will the Commission produce a list of safety and security measures taken at nuclear power plants since 11 September and assess the risks posed by a suicide attack such as occurred at the World Trade Center? Could the risks be eliminated by fitting a 2,5 m-thick concrete shield, as suggested in Politikken on 6 November 2001 by Hans Bjerregård of the Forum for Energy and Development?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2002)

The Honourable Member's question concerns the security measures taken by nuclear power plants following the events of 11 September 2001. It is important to point out that, because of concerns relating to non-proliferation and radiological protection, the nuclear industry is one of the sectors of industry with the highest security and safety standards.

Since 11 September 2001, the authorities in the Member States have strengthened existing protection arrangements and the physical protection measures already in place for installations at risk, in particular nuclear power plants. The most obvious measures have been widely reported in the press, such as the installation of a battery of surface-to-air missiles near the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at La Hague in France. Having said that, the physical protection measures are by their very nature confidential. If the details were released, their dissuasive effect and hence their effectiveness could be compromised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0787/02

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 March 2002)

Subject: Reform of the European Schools

Is the Commission aware of proposals by the Board of Governors of the European Schools to extend the use of the first foreign language to additional subjects and thereby reduce the use of the mother tongue in lessons? What is the Commission's view of the proposals for reform raised by the Board of Governors, and what steps will it take to prevent most of the other language sections from being compromised?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2002)

According to the preamble to the Convention signed by all the Member States and the Communities on 17 June 1994, the European schools system fully acknowledg(es) the Member States' responsibility for the content of teaching and the organisation of their educational system, and for their cultural and linguistic diversity.

The Board of Governors, the intergovernmental body responsible for these schools, has not made or considered any proposal to extend teaching in the first foreign language.

It has established a working party to make a statistical study of the financial impact that might result if such a change was made. The Commission will not take a view on this matter before the results of this study are available, and it will then seek to ensure that all relevant views are taken into account.

The Commission does its utmost to ensure that cultural and linguistic diversity is respected in principle and practice and, with one representative out of a total of 16 Members of the Board of Governors of the European Schools, it will continue to follow that course to the best of its abilities and powers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1447/02

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 May 2002)

Subject: Future of milk quotas

There is concern in the dairy sector about the possible dismantling of the milk quota system, which guarantees producers adequate prices. The system's disappearance could lead to a major fall in prices and therefore in producers' incomes.

1. Has the Commission carried out any study of the impact on the Community market which the abolition of the quota system might have?

2. If not, does it intend to assess the consequences of such a step in the near future?

3. Has the Commission investigated what the real cost-benefit relationship of abolishing the quota system would be?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2002)

Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1256/1999 of 17 May 1999 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 establishing an additional levy in the milk and milk products sector(1), which adjusts the milk quota arrangements laid down in Council Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 of 28 December 1992(2), states: The Council undertakes to conduct a mid-term review in 2003, on the basis of a Commission report, with the aim of allowing the present quota arrangements to run out after 2006.

With a view to drafting this report, several scenarios are currently being examined. The outcome of this analysis will be set before Parliament and the Council in the Mid-Term Review planned for July 2002.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.

(2) OJ L 405, 31.12.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0632/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(6 March 2002)

Subject: Militaristic tendencies on the part of the United States

We all feel unequivocal sympathy for the victims, and US society in general, following the appalling attacks of 11 September. However, we cannot but reject the militaristic tendencies of the US government which, instead of eliminating international terrorism, may cause greater evil and by taking unilateral action introduce highly dangerous elements contrary to the quest for world peace. These elements may even destabilise the EU and its role in world politics.

What steps is the Council taking to resist the temptations of militarism offered by the United States?

Reply

(22 July 2002)

The EU expressed its full sympathy with the families of the victims of the 11 September attacks, in particular, and with the people of the United States.

The fight against terrorism remains a shared priority and, to this end, the EU is in regular contact with the United States on how best to act. The Council is of the view that military action alone cannot resolve conflicts, but rather has to be put in context and accompanied by appropriate political, economic and development measures, if peace, stability and security are to be achieved.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1230/02

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 April 2002)

Subject: 'Telepass' standard

For some years now an automatic toll collection system called Telepass has been in widespread use on the Italian motorway network. Can the Commission state whether this standard could be exported to other EU countries, or whether it would be preferable to develop a new and more modern single standard for Union-wide application, in the context of infrastructure charging?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2002)

Telepass is the first automatic toll collection system in widespread use in Europe. It was introduced in the early 1990s and now has over 2 million subscribers in Italy.

However, general application of this system beyond the frontiers of Italy raises a series of problems:

- first, several European countries have already installed other systems nationwide: Portugal, France and Spain. Others, such as Germany or the Netherlands, are also moving towards other solutions;

- second, the European standardisation bodies have repeatedly refused to adopt Telepass as the European standard;

- finally, this system is now ageing and more sophisticated technologies have emerged which make it possible, for example, to avoid radio interference between adjacent tollbooths, one problem encountered with Telepass in certain cases.

In response to the failed attempts at national level and by the standardisation bodies and drawing on, inter alia, the technical work carried out in recent months on research projects and the trans-European networks, the Commission will be submitting a proposal for a directive on the interoperability of electronic road toll systems in Europe as part of its work programme for 2002. As announced in the September 2001 White Paper European transport policy for 2010: time to decide1(1), the objective is to make a pan-European automatic toll collection service available on the entire toll network in Europe and for vehicles of all types between 2005 and 2008. Such a service by no means rules out using other systems alongside it to cater for local or national requirements. The system will have to be based on modern, efficient technology available all over Europe and capable of offering other value-added services to motorists and travellers.

(1) COM(2001) 370 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0569/02

by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 February 2002)

Subject: Follow-up to Question E-2783/00

I refer to my Written Question E-2783/00(1) asking whether the Danish law requiring securities to be lodged when registering companies was compatible with Community rules, and my follow-up letter of 27 March 2001 to the Commission, to both of which the Commission replied that it would deal with the matter once it had received additional information. Has additional information reached the Commission yet, which would allow it to answer my original question?

(1) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001, p. 95.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2002)

The Commission has begun a detailed examination of the rules referred to by the Honourable Member on the basis of the information provided by the Danish authorities. It will soon be in a position, therefore, to say whether those rules are compatible with the principles of the EC Treaty as referred to by the Court of Justice in Centros.

At issue is the matter of the minimum capital requirement for setting up a company. Following the Lisbon European Council (23 and 24 March 2000), a benchmarking exercise on the length of time and the costs involved in setting up a company was conducted. The results have now been published and can be found at the website: europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/entrepreneurship/support_measures/start-ups/benchmarking.htm.

The usefulness of a minimum level of capital in the case of limited companies is also on the agenda of the High-Level Expert Group on Company Law, which was set up in September 2001 and instructed to submit to the Commission recommendations for modernising company law. The Group will present its report in July. Its recommendations could have a major impact on the establishment of companies in Europe. and in particular the concept of minimum capital.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1405/02

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(13 May 2002)

Subject: Privatisation of ABX, the Belgian Railways (NMBS/SNCB) road freight company

In the context of the restructuring of Belgian Railways (NMBS/SNCB), ABX, the Belgian Railways' loss-making road freight company, which also has branches in other countries, is to be

privatised. According to press reports, Belgian Railways assets are to be sold off to ABX at extremely low prices. For example, the Brussels site of Klein-Eiland, 70 000 square metres in size, is to be sold for 10 000, although the true value of the land is estimated at 260 million.

I would like to know whether the Commission considers that these low estimates of the value of assets with a view to selling them to a subsidiary company about to be privatised are consistent with Community legislation on competition and state subsidies.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(21 June 2002)

According to information available to the Commission the SNCB plans to restructure its organisation and, amongst others, transfer its road haulage activities that are currently carried out by SNCB and via subsidiaries under the brand name ABX, to an independent company, wholly owned by SNCB (ABX Logistics Group). As part of this re-organisation SNCB intends to make a capital increase in the holding company in exchange for shares by way of, inter alia, a transfer of assets. The Commission has not yet been informed of the details of the financial elements of this re-organisation and is therefore, as the Honourable Member will understand, not in a position to give a view on whether it may involve state aid and, if so, whether it would be compatible with the Community rules on competition and state aid.

The Commission considers seriously requesting the Belgian authorities to notify their plan to restructure SNCB/ABX, according to Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0381/02

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Council

(20 February 2002)

Subject: Import controls on Moroccan tomatoes

The chairman of the organisation of farmers and stock-breeders of Tenerife (ASAGA), Fernando Jiménez, recently asked the Spanish Agriculture Minister, Miguel Aria Canete, that the European Union should exercise stricter controls over imports of Moroccan tomatoes since, in his opinion, controls are systematically ignored, causing producers in the Canary Islands problems as regards marketing outlets and pricing.

What view does the Council take of this claim?

Reply

(22 July 2002)

On 24 January 2000 the Council adopted the Decision on the conclusion, on behalf of the European Community and the ECSC, of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the European Communities and the Kingdom of Morocco(1). That Agreement entered into force on 1 March 2000. Article 1(5) of Protocol 1 annexed thereto on the arrangements applying to imports into the Community of agricultural products originating in Morocco lays down certain provisions regarding tariff quotas for certain products, including tomatoes.

Where tomatoes are concerned, it should also be remembered that, following consultations under Article 2(6) of the aforesaid Protocol, the Community decided on an autonomous increase of the quota opened for Morocco, which was finally set at 168 757 tonnes for the period 1 October 2001 to 31 May 2002 (namely 150 676 tonnes under the Protocol and 18 081 tonnes on an autonomous basis)(2).

To obviate possible disturbances on the Community tomato markets, Morocco undertook in the context of this Agreement to ensure that its total exports would not exceed the overall volume referred to above.

12 081 tonnes of the autonomous quota will be opened only provided Morocco's total exports between 1 October 2001 and 31 March 2002 do not exceed 156 676 tonnes. Morocco has hitherto complied with these limits.

The quantities Member States import on to the Community markets each week are notified on a weekly basis to the Commission. For their part, the Moroccan authorities also submit weekly figures for their exports of tomatoes to the Community. As a result, over and above the TAXUD supervision, the Commission has instruments enabling it to monitor day to day the quantities of tomatoes imported from Morocco.

It should be borne in mind that the average prices of tomatoes in the Community have been higher than the preferential entry price threshold since December, a fact which appears to indicate that imports of Moroccan tomatoes have not had a negative effect on prices, the variability of which may in fact be the result of internal fluctuations in Community production.

Accordingly, while the Council believes it has managed to find an equitable solution, it will remain vigilant, particularly as regards the difficulties the Honourable Member describes.

(1) OJ L 70, 18.3.2000, p. 1.

(2) See Regulation (EC) No 2264/2001 (OJ L 305, 22.11.2001, p. 20).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0721/02

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 March 2002)

Subject: Tobacco duty on medicinal herbal cigarettes

With regard to the Commission's answers in 1997 to the questions by Doeke Eisma (E-0480/97(1) and E-2484/97(2), the court in Leeuwarden has in the meantime handed down a ruling.

1. Has the Commission noted that ruling?

2. If so, and having regard also to the Commission inquiries into the situation in the various Member States, has the Commission now formed a judgment on this matter?

(1) OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 88.

(2) OJ C 82, 17.3.1998, p. 90.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2002)

1. The Commission has noted the ruling of the court in Leeuwarden of 16 April 1999 (nr 1059/96, year 1994-1995).

2. The application of Article 7 paragraph 2 of Council Directive 95/59/EC of 27 November 1995 on taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of manufactured tobacco(1) to medicinal herbal cigarettes has been discussed in the Excise Committee. The conclusion reached was that such products should be subject to excise duty unless a national health authority or equivalent official body in a Member State decides, by reference to a list of pharmaceutical products, that a certain product is used exclusively for medical purposes. According to the information available to the Commission, Denmark is the only Member State exempting such products from excise duty.

(1) OJ L 291, 6.12.1995, as last amended by Council Directive 2002/10/EC of 12 February 2002, OJ L 46, 16.2.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1815/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(25 June 2002)

Subject: Economic integration

Will the Commission give figures for the most recent available year, for the previous five years and for the previous ten years, relating to the stock of quoted equities held by non-residents in each Member State of the European Union as a percentage of that Member State's GDP, and will it also break down that figure into non-resident holdings of equities held by residents of other EU Member States and by non-EU residents?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2002)

The Commission (Eurostat) regrets to inform the Honourable Member that it is not in the position to provide the requested data.

The most likely source of information would be Financial Accounts by Institutional Sector. However, the data collection on Financial Accounts data is established in the transmission program in the ESA95 Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 2223/96 of 25 June 1996 on the European system of national and regional accounts in the Community(1), and it does not require the split of the financial instrument shares and other equity in quoted shares and other items. Similarly, the split of the non-resident sector into Union and extra-Union is not foreseen.

(1) OJ L 310, 30.11.1996.