ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/777

(2004/C 78 E/0826)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3089/03

by Bruno Gollnisch (NI) to the Council

(20 October 2003)

Subject: Alstom

Article 87 of the Treaty lays down the rules governing State aids and specifies which types may be considered as compatible with the common market, e.g. aid to promote the economic development of certain areas or activities, or to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State, etc.

If Alstom, which employs tens of thousands of workers in Europe, were to go bakrupt, this would have a devastating effect on employment and the economy of entire regions and would undoubtedly cause a ‘disturbance’. And yet the Commission has decided to be particularly strict on this issue.

It is not uncommon for states to support companies experiencing difficulties. In such cases, consideration of the strategic nature of the industrial activity or the jobs situation should take precedence over a purely financial or economic analysis of the measures since the aid is clearly of a temporary and non-structural nature.

Does the Council consider that the EU texts, which have remained virtually unchanged since the beginning, are still appropriate for responding to the challenges of competition, which is now worldwide and, in may cases, unfair?

Is it prepared, in particular, to remove references in the relevant articles of the Treaty to competition and the operation of the common market and replace them with references to the need to preserve jobs and fight for the survival of strategic sectors?

Reply

(4 March 2004)

The attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the fact that it is not within the Council's competencies to revise the text of the Treaty establishing the European Community. Such a revision can only take place within the framework of an intergovernmental conference and by subsequent ratification by the Member States.

Furthermore, it is recalled that the European Parliament has taken an active part in the work carried out by the European Convention, and has presumably been in a position to present views on the issue raised by the Honourable Member in that framework.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/484

(2004/C 78 E/0506)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3189/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(27 October 2003)

Subject: Explosion of Nokia mobile phone batteries

In an article which appeared on 16 October 2003, the Brussels daily newspaper ‘La Libre Belgique’ published the results of a survey conducted by the Belgian consumer organisation ‘Test-Achats’ into various incidents in recent months in which the rechargeable batteries of Nokia mobile phones exploded.

These cases occurred mainly in Belgium and the Netherlands and other cases have been reported in Switzerland, Norway and Vietnam. According to the newspaper report a mobile phone exploded in its owner's pocket very recently in the Netherlands.

Is the Commission aware of this problem? What measures does it intend to take to protect European consumers?

Does it not consider it necessary to take precautionary action by suspending sales of these portable phones in the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2003)

The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission's answers to Written Questions P-3145/03 from Mr van Velzen (1) and P-3152/03 from Mrs Plooij-Van Gorsel (2).

(1) See page 474.

(2) See page 476.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/642

(2004/C 88 E/0658)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3310/03

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(10 November 2003)

Subject: Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline; violations of the ‘acquis communautaire’ by Turkey

In connection with the construction of an oil pipeline between Baku (Azerbaijan) via Tbilisi (Georgia) to Ceyhan (Turkey), Turkey has allegedly violated a number of provisions concerning the environment and human rights which it would have had to comply with if European law applied to Turkey. There have not been any serious environmental impact assessments, property has been expropriated unlawfully, etc. Various NGOs have already protested about this.

The State of Turkey is one of the main partners in the consortium which intends to construct the pipeline. However, as it is also an applicant country, it may reasonably be expected to abide by the Copenhagen criteria, including therefore the ‘acquis communautaire’. The above-mentioned project makes it clear that it is no means doing so.

To what extent is the Commission monitoring developments with regard to the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline? Has it contacted the Turkish authorities on the subject? If so, what was the outcome of the discussions?

Turkey receives pre-accession aid from the European Union. Will the Commission consider freezing this aid (or perhaps only part of it) if Turkey continues to disregard the Copenhagen criteria? Is there a specific timetable for this?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(5 December 2003)

In its regular report on Turkey's progress towards accession published on 5 November 2003, the Commission sets out its assessment of developments over the last year and the overall situation with regard to human rights and the protection of minorities.

As regards the specific questions raised by the Honourable Member concerning the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline project, any potential violations as regards human rights arising from the implementation of the pipeline project would have to be considered in the context of the Copenhagen political criteria.

Turkey is at this stage not bound by the environmental ‘acquis’, but the Commission is aware that environmental impact assessments have been carried out for this project, for example, to meet the conditions of international lending organisations.

The Commission continues to observe the developments with regard to this project.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/412

(2004/C 88 E/0418)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2476/03

by Juan Naranjo Escobar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 July 2003)

Subject: Reduced VAT for hotels, restaurants and cafés in the European Union

At present, hotel and catering services are included in Annex H to the Sixth VAT Directive.

On the basis of that Directive, 12 of the 15 Member States have decided to apply a VAT rate below 15 % for this category of services, but it is clear that the disparity in the rates applicable in the various countries is leading to unequal treatment which may distort competition in the industry, which is highly sensitive to any kind of tax-related question.

Will the Commission take action, on the basis of its power of initiative, with a view to suggesting to the Member States that they take account of the accumulation of circumstances which affect the hotel sector so that the VAT rate applicable to the sector is as low as possible?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2003)

In its 2000 communication the Commission set out a strategy to improve the operation of the value-added tax (VAT) system in the context of the internal market (1).

No changes in the level of VAT rates are envisaged during the implementation of this strategy. Mindful of the principle of subsidiarity, the Commission does not wish to interfere with the Member States' fiscal competence any more than is necessary for the smooth operation of the internal market, especially as regards the VAT rates the Member States wish to set.

However, it is the role of the Commission to propose to the Council any rules necessary for the smoother operation of the internal market. The Commission has therefore chosen to focus on the disparities in present system of rates with a view to making an important step in this direction. More equal treatment must be ensured in all the Member States, including the new members, and a stop put to the distortions created by the fact that some may apply reduced rates for certain sectors that are elsewhere prohibited.

Accordingly, on 23 July 2003 the Commission adopted a proposal for a Directive on reduced rates (2). Catering services have now been added to hotel services on the new list of goods and services eligible for the reduced rate. In any event, the reduced rates remain entirely optional and it is therefore up to the Member States to decide on the sectors where they wish to apply reduced rates.

The Council now has to decide unanimously on the future scope of reduced VAT rates.

(1) COM(2000) 348 final.

(2) COM(2003) 397 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/139

(2004/C 78 E/0142)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2635/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(2 September 2003)

Subject: Refunds on exports from Member States to the Vatican City State of butter and other fats and oils derived from milk, milk products (code 0405) for 1998

In response to questions E-1477/03 and E-1480/03 (1) relating to refunds on exports of agricultural products from Member States to the Vatican City State (VCS), Commissioner Fischler stated on 21 May 2003 that the Commission was collecting the information it needed to answer the question and would communicate its findings as soon as possible.

The following supplementary data can be supplied in relation to the export of butter and other fats and oils derived from milk, milk products (code 0405):

(a) the European Commission's CATS (Clearance Audit Trail System) database shows that in 1998: — 155000 kg were exported from Austria to the VCS with a refund of EUR 272 200,57, equivalent to aid of EUR 1,76/kg; — 19 215,50 kg were exported from Germany to the VCS with a refund of EUR 33 854,82, equivalent to aid of EUR 1,76/kg;

(b) the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) database shows that in 1998: — 150 000 kg were exported from Austria and 18 000 kg from Germany to the VCS,

(c) This indicates that: — unwarranted aid of EUR 10 922,19 was paid on an additional 6 215,50 kg not shown in the OECD data;

Does the Commission not agree that the increasingly patent omissions and the discrepancies between the data from the different institutional sources seriously affect the credibility of these institutions and might be due to possible fraud against Community funds, or is it already able to discount this possibility?

(1) OJ C 70 E, 20.3.2004, p. 45.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/17

(2004/C 84 E/0020)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2302/03

by Miguel Martínez Martínez (PSE) to the Council

(8 July 2003)

Subject: Murder of the young Spanish voluntary worker Ana Isabel Sánchez Torralba in Equatorial Guinea

Voluntary workers in Equatorial Guinea have now confirmed the sad news of the death of a young Spanish woman in that country, who was killed in dramatic circumstances by Equatorial Guinean soldiers. Ana Isabel Sánchez Torralba was 22 years old, came from Ocaña in Castilla-La Mancha and had been in Africa for only a few days generously contributing to the solidarity-based work of the Escolapian Missionaries. She was travelling towards the town of Aconibe in a civilian bus with other citizens and a couple of fellow missionaries when the vehicle was inexplicably shot at by members of the country's armed forces on passing a checkpoint, with fatal consequences.

This serious incident leads me, as a citizen of the same country as the young murder victim who shares the grief and indignation of her family and friends, to put the following questions to the Council for written answer:

— Is the Council aware of the above facts, or will it seek the relevant information?

— Now that the murder of this exemplary young European has been confirmed, will the Council respond by demanding that the Equatorial Guinean authorities take appropriate action against those responsible?

— Does the Council consider it appropriate to take steps within the framework of the Partnership Agreement with the countries of Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific, to which Equatorial Guinea is a signatory alongside the European Union, so that those governing that country with such complete disregard for human rights and the rule of law finally receive the sanctions laid down in the above Treaty?

Reply

(8 March 2004)

The Council takes note of the information concerning the murder of the Spanish citizen Ana Isabel Sánchez Torralba in Equatorial Guinea. The Council regrets all acts of violence and crimes; these should be addressed not only in relation to events affecting EU citizens, but also in general terms.

The EU is deeply concerned at the deterioration in the internal political situation in Equatorial Guinea as regards human rights and the democratisation process. Following last year's elections (December 2002) the EU expressed its concern at the political development of the country and in particular at the increase in violations of human rights. The EU urged the government and the political opposition to hold an all-inclusive political dialogue on the process of democratisation and on the establishment of guarantees for respect of human rights. It will continue to do so and will pursue any relevant action within the framework of its contacts with the competent authorities to prevent and clear up situations such as the one described by the Honourable Member in his question.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/695

(2004/C 78 E/0743)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0115/03

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: Malta's accession to the EU: Wild Birds Directive (79/409/EEC)

Further to the answer given to my Written Question E-2554/02 (1) on 11 November, can the Commission confirm that any spring hunting would also only be acceptable if ‘there is no other satisfactory solution’ (79/409/EEC (2) Article 9.1) and can it explain why, when these species both migrate through Malta in the autumn, when hunting of them would be legal under the Directive, this is not a perfectly satisfactory solution?

Can the Commission confirm that any spring hunting would also only be acceptable if the use was judicious (79/409/EEC Article 9.1(c)) and will it explain how it could be judicious to kill individuals of two species, whose populations are declining in Europe, in the few weeks immediately prior to their breeding?

Moreover, can the Commission confirm that Malta did indeed establish its Ornis Committee by 31 December 2002, and will it list those individuals who sit on this Committee?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2003)

The implementation of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds and, in particular, the specific aspect of spring hunting has been negotiated in the framework of the accession negotiations on the environment chapter with Malta.

The Commission confirms that any use of derogations must be in conformity with each of the requirements of Article 9 of the Directive. Malta has committed itself to fully implement, as from accession, the Directive. If Malta wishes to allow spring hunting on the basis of the exceptions foreseen by Article 9 of the Directive, for instance in relation to turtle dove and quail, it would need to ensure that all these requirements are met.

The use of derogations is decided by Member States in accordance with these requirements and reported retrospectively to the Commission. The Commission confirms that it will take all necessary measures to ensure that the terms of the Directive, and in particular those related to the use of derogations, are fully implemented by Malta as from accession in accordance with the outcome of the Accession Negotiation.

In particular, as regards the Ornis Committee, Malta has issued at the end of January 2003 a regulation establishing it. Subsequently, a call for applications for membership from non-governmental organisations has been issued and was closed on 5 February 2003. It is expected that the selection of the members as well as the official appointment of the chairman of the committee will be concluded by March 2003.

(1) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 5.

(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/123

(2004/C 88 E/0130)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2953/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) and Marco Cappato (NI) to the Commission

(8 October 2003)

Subject: Sentence of death by stoning in Nigeria

Mr Jibrin Babaji, a Nigerian citizen aged 20, has been found guilty of sexual relations with three underage boys and has been sentenced to death by stoning. The sentence was handed down on Tuesday, 23 September 2003 by an Islamic court in Bauchi state, under the Sharia penal code.

Does the Commission have further information on the matter? What measures does it intend to take, in line with the European positions in favour of a moratorium on the death penalty worldwide, to ensure that this death sentence is not executed?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(21 November 2003)

The Commission has followed closely appeals against death sentences passed by Sharia courts. It is encouraging to note that in some well-publicised recent cases those sentenced have been acquitted on appeal (Amina Lawal in Katsina and Safiya Husseini in Sokoto). The Commission is aware of the case of Jibril Babaji and expects to receive more details from Heads of Mission in Abuja.

The Commission unreservedly opposes the use of the death sentence. Where the death penalty still exists, the Union calls for its use to be progressively restricted, and where relevant, for moratoria to be introduced. The Troika made a démarche on the application of the death penalty in Nigeria on 12 February 2002.

Moreover, the Commission encourages governments to comply with international standards on human rights and to respect civil liberties without discrimination. The Commission seeks to end the practice in certain countries of public and particularly cruel executions.

As stated in several Council conclusions on Nigeria political dialogue is considered a constructive mechanism for raising human rights issues and questions concerning the death penalty. The Commission will also be guided by the Cotonou Agreement, for which an essential element is respect for human rights.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/51

(2004/C 88 E/0054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1928/03

by Maria Carrilho (PSE) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject: Aid to uprooted people in Asia and Latin America: revision of Regulation (EC) No 2130/2001 of 29 October 2001

Given the need to avoid any interruption in the aid to uprooted people in Asia and Latin America and the fact that in 2001, prior to the September terrorist attacks, when all donors had reduced their contributions, the Commission, to its credit, sent out a positive signal concerning its strategy by increasing the amounts earmarked for this specific aid, would the Commission answer the following questions:

As the current Regulation (EC) No 2130/2001 (1) of 29 October 2001 is due to expire on 31 December 2004, does the Commission intend to submit a proposal to extend the regulation? If so, when?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2003)

In July 2002, the Commission adopted a proposal for a ‘Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning Community co-operation with Asian and Latin American countries’ (2). This proposal has been submitted to the Parliament and the Council and is currently under discussion.

With a view to reducing the number of legal bases, the proposed Regulation also covers Community assistance to uprooted people and will, when adopted, repeal Regulation (EC) No 2130/2001 of the Parliament and of the Council of 29 October 2001 on operations to aid uprooted people in Asian and Latin American developing countries.

Should the adoption of the ‘Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning Community co-operation with Asian and Latin American countries’ be delayed, there would be a risk that the new Regulation would not enter into force before 31 December 2004. In that event the Commission would submit a proposal to extend the period of application of Regulation (EC) No 2130/2001. This proposal for extending the current Regulation would be introduced sufficiently early so as to ensure continuity of assistance to uprooted people.

(1) OJ L 287, 31.10.2001, p. 3.

(2) OJ C 331 E, 31.12.2002.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/712

(2004/C 84 E/0799)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0093/03

by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: German capital gains tax

Could the Commission tell the European Parliament what steps it is taking to persuade the German Government not to adopt its proposed new capital gains tax discriminating against funds domiciled outside of Germany (by exposing them to higher taxation levels than funds domiciled within Germany)? Does the Commissioner agree that this measure is an illegal breach of single market principles, constituting an impediment to the free movement of capital? Has the Commission been in touch with the German Government to give its views on the proposed new tax?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2003)

The Commission has opened an infringement procedure against Germany for an already existing discriminatory tax regime for foreign investment funds (infr 2000/5059). In the press release issued on that occasion (1) the Commission also expressed its concern about the draft German bill, which, if adopted, would extend the tax discrimination to capital gains.

(1) IP/02/1924.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/891

(2004/C 78 E/0942)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4005/03

by Anna Terrón i Cusí (PSE) to the Commission

(7 January 2004)

Subject: Discrimination against Community children as regards access to sports federations in Spain

Any person who is a national of a Member State enjoys citizenship of the European Union, and any form of discrimination against them on the grounds of their nationality is prohibited under the Treaties and Articles 4 and 8 of the Draft European Constitution.

Article 31 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises the right of children to rest and leisure, to engage in play and recreational activities appropriate to their age and to participate freely in cultural life and the arts.

Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union lays down children's right to the protection and care necessary for their well-being.

Serious cases of discrimination against girls and boys are arising in Spain as regards access to sports leagues, as a result of administrative obstacles or the refusal of sports federations to grant them membership, despite the fact that they are Community citizens.

What is the Commission's view of the refusal by Spanish sports federations to grant membership cards to children who are Member State nationals, when this refusal means that they are unable to play sport?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 2004)

On the subject of difficulties encountered by young foreigners concerning access to sports activities organised by certain federations in Spain, the Honourable Member is referred to the answer given by the Commission to Written Question P-3911/03 from Mrs Valenciano Martinez-Orozco (1).

(1) See page 335.