ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0472/02

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 February 2002)

Subject: New international financial architecture

The current crisis in Argentina, with the economy in decline and the uncertainty as to what can be done, together with the Asian crisis of 1997 and 1998, has highlighted the need to find a set of institutional rules and practices to govern the new international financial system.

It was this which prompted the United States Treasury Department in October 2001 to submit to Congress proposals for reforming the IMF, whose actions during both the Asian and Argentinian crises have revealed the need for a new international financial architecture.

What is the Commission's position on the need to promote a new international financial architecture and what contribution has it made on behalf of the EU as a whole to improve the mechanisms that could help the IMF to respond more positively than it did during the abovementioned Asian and Argentinian crises?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(5 April 2002)

The Commission, in its recent report Responses to the Challenges of Globalisation A study on the International Financial and Monetary System and on Financing for Development, analyses a number of reform proposals of the international financial architecture.

The report notes that the system has functioned well over the past half century. It has contributed to the global economic growth and has allowed countries embracing sound policies to raise the living standards of their population. The system has also been able to cope with periods of disequilibria in balance-of-payments and has ensured monetary stability in times of crises, as recently demonstrated in the case of the 11 September 2001 attacks.

The report acknowledges, nevertheless, that the changing environment poses new challenges to policy makers. The international financial crises in the nineties have initiated a debate on how the international community, in particular the International Monetary Fund (IMF), can reduce the occurrence of such crises and the likelihood that problems originating in one country can spread to others and even destabilise the system as a whole. The Commission' report looks into these problems and reviews the main solutions under discussion, ranging from very modest ones, such as increasing the flow of information to market participants, to very ambitious ones such as the creation of a single world currency. It also focuses on the involvement of the private sector in the prevention and resolution of financial crises.

The Council has welcomed the Commission report and will use it in its further deliberations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1650/02

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 June 2002)

Subject: Snus and cigarettes

1. The EU has a ban on most forms of oral tobacco including, outside of Sweden, the snus product sold in that country. Would the Commission please state the relative health risk of using snus compared to the risk of smoking cigarettes?

2. What is the evidence that Swedish smokers have successfully switched to snus, and what would be the likely health impact if the rest of the EU were able to replicate Swedish tobacco consumption patterns?

3. Are there any plans to lift the ban on snus in the rest of the EU and to replace that ban with a regulatory environment designed to reduce tobacco's health toll? If not, why not?

4. Are there ways that medicinal nicotine products (such as gum and patches) could be used more effectively as a way to replace cigarettes in the way that snus appears to have done in Sweden?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(19 July 2002)

The health risks of tobacco products are twofold. Firstly, they are addictive and therefore, after long-term and life-long exposure, lead to serious health risks and damages. From the addiction point of view, tobacco products, including snus, are similar. The main question is if snus is a dangerous product, to which the answer is yes. There is substantial and growing evidence that snus has serious health risks and should therefore not be allowed into the Community market as a new product. Here Sweden is an exception.

Situating snus as a replacement for cigarettes does not adequately highlight the health issues surrounding this new product. Snus serves to recruit new tobacco product users, in particular young ones. The evidence in Sweden and in Finland shows that there is a significant number of very young snus users, becoming addicted to nicotine, running increased health risks and, encountering an increased risk of becoming smokers. Therefore, in this context, snus cannot be considered as a form of replacement therapy for cigarettes but more importantly as a gateway to nicotine addiction. For this reason lifting the ban on the sale of snus in the rest of the Community would not reduce the damage related to the use of tobacco nor help to promote the health of the European citizens, but would rather serve a contrary purpose of increasing health damage of tobacco products.

Regarding nicotine replacement therapy, as a part of tobacco control programmes to help people to quit smoking, there are encouraging examples of effective practices leading not only to quitting smoking but also curing nicotine addiction. The Commission, in its Communication on the present and proposed Community role in combating tobacco consumption(1), refers to the question of reducing nicotine dependency identifying several policy options and providing some examples of best practice (such as the availability of smoking cessation medications at minimal or no cost to smokers and toll free numbers to inform and help consumers on the dangers of smoking).

(1) COM(96) 609 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0877/02

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 April 2002)

Subject: Allocation of UMTS licences in Sweden

The Swedish media report that the Commission launched an inquiry in September 2000 into whether the allocation of licences to third generation mobile networks (UMTS, also known as 3G) in Sweden was contrary to Union rules on state aid. Several telecommunications companies in France and the Netherlands are alleged to have complained to the Commission that the companies awarded the prized licences in Sweden did not pay the market price.

Sweden was one of the Member States that opted for a beauty contest approach to select the four operators which each received a UMTS licence free of charge. Some other Member States opted to hold auctions, selling licences to the highest bidder.

What was the outcome of the Commission's inquiry into the Swedish allocation of UMTS licences and which model did the Commission actually prefer for allocating those licences?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2002)

The Commission has not launche any inquiry on possible State aid issues raised by the grant of licenses to third generation mobile operators in Sweden, nor has it received any complaint alleging granting of State aid in connection with the awarding of licenses at below market price.

As regards the preferred procedure for the granting of licences, the Commission has specified on various occasions that, provided Member States comply with the applicable provisions of Community Law, it is for them to determine the process by which they grant third generation licences. (see i.a. replies to written questions P-1839/00 by Mr. Van Velzen(1), E-1640/00 by Mr. Agag Longo(2), E-1227/00 by Mr. Valdivielso de Cué(3) and E-3119/00 by Mrs. Langenhagen(4)).

(1) OJ C 89 E, 20.3.2001.

(2) OJ C 136 E, 8.5.2001.

(3) OJ C 89 E, 20.3.2001, p. 16.

(4) OJ C 151 E, 22.5.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1144/02

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 April 2002)

Subject: State aid

Was the Commission ever consulted as to whether the contribution of GBP 150 000 made in 1999/2000 by Lincolnshire County Council towards the construction of a road to the premises of QV Foods Limited at Holbeach Hurn was a State aid which was acceptable under European Union rules?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2002)

The construction of new public roads which are open to all road users is in general considered to be a general infrastructure measure and not State aid and is therefore not subject to notification to the Commission in accordance with Article 88 of the EC Treaty.

The Commission was not consulted on the payment mentioned, no such case has been registered.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1222/02

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(29 April 2002)

Subject: The removal of mercury amalgam fillings

Mercury amalgam poisoning is caused by the mercury metal in fillings, and has been linked to a number of different illnesses and diseases, including Alzheimer's, and problems to the heart, the neurological system and the immune system.

The Swedish Government banned the use of amalgam fillings in Sweden and since 1991 has paid 70 % of the cost of removing amalgam fillings from Swedish people.

Germany has warned certain groups of people against using dental amalgam.

Could the Commission indicate if there is currently any EU legislation concerning the removal of mercury amalgam fillings, and whether there is currently any research being done on this subject?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2002)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that there is no Community legislation in reference to the removal of amalgam fillings and that it is not systematically informed of Member States' initiatives in this area. As regards research activities, the Commission refers to the report(1) Dental Amalgam A report with reference to the Medical Devices Directive 93/42/EEC(2) from an Ad Hoc Working Group mandated by DGIII of the European Commission 1998.

As stated in the answer given by the Commission to written question E-0917/01 by Mrs Hulthén(3) on the same issue, the report concluded that all dental restorative materials have the potential for causing some adverse reactions and that most contain components which are toxic. However, it also concluded that currently available data indicate that mercury from dental amalgams will not cause an unacceptable risk to the general population. Local reactions to dental amalgams fillings and other dental restorative materials do occur but are relatively rare; cases have also been reported of such reactions to materials used as alternatives to dental amalgams. According to the report, the benefits of restoring teeth with dental amalgam outweigh significantly the documented risks, and the risk-benefit ration corresponds to the currently acknowledged and accepted state of the art.

Commission and national authorities, in close co-operation with other interested parties, keep the use of dental amalgams under constant scrutiny and follow attentively the development of substitutes and their impact on health.

(1) Available on website http://www.nordiskadental.se/default.htm.

(2) Council Directive 93/42/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning medical devices, OJ L 169, 12.7.1993.

(3) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1021/02

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 April 2002)

Subject: Air traffic noise

Air traffic noise is a general problem but under the Commission proposal(1) noise management will become the responsibility of airports that have 50 000 or more movements a year.

Although the text recognises the need to abandon high-noise-level aircraft equipped with imperfectly functioning noise-reduction devices (the famous US-backed hushkits), it has been substantially watered down in this way so European ministers can renegotiate the agreements with their American counterparts.

Does the Commission have no concern about the public reaction to measures that authorise differing conditions for people who live near airports, despite the fact that they are subject to the same noise nuisance? Does it not think that in the circumstances it would be appropriate to lower the thresholds?

(1) COM(2001) 695.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(28 May 2002)

The proposed directive to which the Honourable Member refers has been adopted by Parliament and the Council (Directive 2002/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 March 2002 on the establishment of rules and procedures with regard to the introduction of noise-related operating restrictions at Community airports)(1) and entered into force on the date when it was published in the Official Journal.

The Directive implements throughout the EU the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) guidelines on noise management adopted at the 33rd ICAO Assembly in Montreal (25 September to 5 October 2001) and set out in Resolution A 33/7, particularly Appendix C Policies and programmes based on a balanced approach to aircraft noise management and Appendix E Local noise-related operating restrictions at airports thereto.

The resolution is an international agreement. There is consequently no need for agreements to be renegotiated with our American counterparts.

The Commission does not share the view that the new Directive will create differing conditions for people living near airports.

Real sound-pollution levels are not identical at all airports. The Commission has therefore advocated a case-by-case approach allowing solutions to be optimised to suit each individual airport.

The threshold above which the Directive is applicable has been set at 50 000 movements a year to make it consistent with the proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise(2) because Directive 2002/30/EC makes use of some of the airport environmental noise data to be obtained under the proposed Directive.

Another reason for selecting the threshold of 50 000 movements is that, where small airports are concerned, the Member States can themselves take the necessary action.

The fact that they are not required to carry out the preliminary evaluation described in Annex II to Directive 2002/30/EC is more likely to help them bring in measures to combat noise pollution at such airports.

(1) OJ L 85, 28.3.2002.

(2) OJ C 337 E, 28.11.2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1777/02

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 June 2002)

Subject: New threat to the environment in the Vigo ría (Galicia, Spain)

The Galician estuaries, or rías, make up a unique ecosystem of immense ecological, social and economic value. I have already contacted the Commission on several occasions to complain about actions which were endangering the future of most of these areas. Specific recent complaints have concerned filling work at the San Simón inlet and the construction of the marina at A Lagoa (Teis, Vigo). These are just two of more than ten projects which will have an irreversible impact on the Vigo ría.

Residents' associations, fishermen's federations, cultural associations, ecological organisations, the university, the Institute of Maríne Research and the Spanish Institute of Oceanography, among others, have now joined forces to protest at the latest threat to the environment: the port authority's plans to fill in the Arenal, which would cover an area of 208 000 m2.

Once again, this will represent a serious challenge to the directives on habitats and on environmental impact assessment, as well as the EU's strategy for coastal areas.

What steps will the Commission take to prevent this new threat to the environment in the Vigo ría and guarantee the survival of the unique ecosystem which the Galician rías represent?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2002)

The Commission was not aware of the plan to fill in the Arenal in the Vigo ría to which Honourable Member refers.

It has therefore asked the Spanish authorities for their comments on the situation reported by the Honourable Member in her written question, with a view to ensuring that any Community legislation which might be applicable is observed in this particular case.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0801/02

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 March 2002)

Subject: Travel concessions in Member States

What is the Commission doing to encourage railway companies to recognise travel concessions issued in or by other Member States?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2002)

This question addresses an important issue in the development of the Community's regulatory framework regarding railways. It is true that the quality of international rail passenger services is hindered by the national approaches of such services by railway undertakings and public authorities.

For unprofitable services railway undertakings award reductions to passengers belonging to specific categories on the basis of (legal) provisions which largely differ between Member States. These differences have major consequences for the definition of the categories of persons entitled to reduced fares as well as to the size of the reduction which is geographically limited to the network operated by the railway undertaking.

These reductions are awarded for services provided within the framework of public service obligations and contracts under the amended Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 of the Council of 26 June 1969 on action by Member States concerning the obligations inherent in the concept of a public service in transport by rail, road and inland waterway(1). Railway undertakings receive financial compensations from the public authorities to carry out services, which would have been unprofitable otherwise.

Particularly for regional cross-border services that are not profitable, it is desirable that public authorities on both sides of the border co-operate in concluding a public service contract with a railway undertaking. If concessionary fares are wanted by the public authority it is desirable that the concessionary fares are applicable for travelling on both sides of the border. The Commission made proposals to facilitate such approach but they still have to be approved by the Council and the Parliament(2).

For profitable services, the railway undertakings may conclude an arrangement for passenger services between themselves (within the framework of Community Competition law) as is the case for Interrail offering fare reductions across Europe for

young people. In the upmarket segments of high speed trains international marketing of rail services is gradually improving, e.g. with yield management techniques. The Commission will, as announced in the new rail package(3), launch an initiative to improve international rail passenger rights and obligations and will address the issue of international fares as well. The Parliament will be fully involved in that process.

(1) OJ L 156, 28.6.1969.

(2) Amended proposal for a Regulation of the Parliament and of the Council on action by Member States concerning public service requirements and the award of public service contracts in passenger transport by rail, road and inland waterway, 21/02/2002, COM(2002) 107 final.

(3) COM(2002) 18 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0789/02

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 March 2002)

Subject: Reform of the European Schools

Is the Commission aware of the proposals made by the Board of Governers of the European Schools to increase the minimum number of participants required for courses be created, and to increase the number of subjects taught in a foreign language?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(28 May 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 either to amend the existing rules on the size of the various groups or to extend teaching in the first foreign language.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1088/02

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 April 2002)

Subject: Tampering with odometers in private cars

According to a report by the British television channel the BBC (Lifting the bonnet series, programme broadcast on 21 March 2002), the phenomenon of tampering with odometers (clocking) of used private cars with the aim of increasing the car's sale value has increased sharply in Europe. For example, one in 12 second-hand cars for sale in England has had its odometer tampered with so as to show fewer miles than have actually been covered.

Does the Commission therefore intend to set up a body to monitor practices such as these in order to protect European consumers?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 2002)

There have been in the past reports to the Commission about the issue raised in the BBC's Lifting the Bonnet programme, which concerned odometer tampering or clocking as the term is called, in order to increase the perceived market value of a vehicle.

At present, there is no mechanism for controlling the practice at community level.

However, the Community has responsibility for Directives concerning roadworthiness testing and has a technical committee to advise on how this legislation can be adapted in the interest of road safety and protection of the environment and the consumers.

The Commission intends to raise the issue at a future meeting of this committee.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0888/02

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(2 April 2002)

Subject: Il Forteto

Il Forteto is an agricultural cooperative in Tuscany which receives public funding of between LIT 65 000 and 300 000 a day for looking after young people in care.

The leaders of the Il Forteto community include two people who were convicted in 1985 of the sexual abuse and ill-treatment of minors.

Following the conviction by the Florence Court of Appeal in 1985, the Youth Court still relies on Il Forteto despite a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights against Italy for placing two children of Italian immigrants in Belgium with the Il Forteto community and imposing a fine of LIT 200 million and awarding damages for moral injury.

Can the Commission:

- verify the actions of the Italian authorities and their compliance with the judgment requiring the immediate removal of all minors from care facilities run by Il Forteto and for Il Forteto to be struck off the list of centres used by the Child Protection Agency?

- set up a committee of inquiry to ascertain the real reasons for opposition to enforcement of the judgment?

- sponsor an EU inquiry into the 14 000 Italian children in care placed in communities financed with public funds, the cost of which may exceed 600 a day in Italy?

- introduce appropriate measures to make legal recognition of care facilities for minors conditional upon irrefutable evidence that they satisfy the necessary moral standards and standards of probity?

Reply given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2002)

The Commission thanks the Honorable Member for her question but draws her attention to the fact that as regards her first two requests, concerning Italy's compliance with the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 13 July 2000 (Scozzari and Giunta against Italy), the Commission has no power to act in the matter. The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe is the body responsible for supervising the execution of judgments given by the European Court of Human Rights in accordance with Article 46 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.

Similarly, the Commission does not believe that, on the basis of the Treaties, it has the power to conduct an investigation such as that wished for by the Honorable Member.