ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2803/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: Local staff of the Commission's Office in Athens

For years the Commission's representation in Athens has employed local staff to cover its needs in running its office in Greece.

Will the Commission say:

1. who determines the level of monthly remuneration for the local staff of the Athens Office,

2. on what criteria this remuneration is based,

3. what the pay scales are, and

4. what the exact terms of insurance are for those staff?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(27 October 1998)

1. and 2. The working conditions of local staff in the Athens Representation are laid down by rules adopted by the Commission on 14 March 1997 with a view to expanding the content of Article 79 et seq. of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants. These rules are reviewed periodically in order to adjust the remuneration of local staff serving in Athens in accordance with the parameters contained in the said rules. At the outset, remuneration was fixed by reference to the local labour market and is kept in line with salaries paid in the public and private sectors and the consumer price index.

3. The number of steps in the career of a member of the local staff is 21 at present.

4. Under Article 80 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, local staff are covered by the national insurance scheme and the Commission pays the employer's contributions. The local rules provide for additional insurance covering the risk of sickness, invalidity and accidents at work.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2987/98

by John Iversen (PSE) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Call for national registers of veterinary drug use

The European consumer's growing desire for wholesome and unadulterated food means there is a need to step up checks on the use of drugs in farming. Antibiotic growth promoters and the excessive use of drugs are creating resistant bacteria and, in the longer term, people could die from illnesses such as influenza and pneumonia because they can no longer be treated using antibiotics.

If national registers were set up to record the use of drugs in farming, it would be possible to compare levels of use in different Member States and thus to file complaints if use was found to be excessive in certain Member States. This would also provide a tool for conducting research into the links between resistant bacteria and drug use. A pattern is already emerging which indicates that the number of resistant bacteria is much lower in the Scandinavian countries, where veterinary drug use is low compared with countries such as the UK, the Netherlands and Belgium.

Does the Commission not think it would be a good idea to submit a proposal requiring Member States to establish national registers of drug use in farming? At the same time, it could submit a proposal requiring antibiotics to be made available only on prescription in the Member States, which would prevent farmers from using drugs as growth promoters.

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 1998)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2856/98

by Niall Andrews (UPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: European Voluntary Service Programme for young people

Following the agreement between the European Parliament and Council on a budget of ECU 47,5 million for 1998/99 for the EVS programme, what assurances can the Commission provide that Irish applicants will be favourably considered, and will it outline the main areas of support in 1998/99 for EVS programmes?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 1998)

The European voluntary service for young people (EVS) has been preceded by a two-year pilot action in which Irish young people and organisations have actively participated (66 Irish volunteers sent, 85 European volunteers hosted by Irish organisations). Knowledge and information on the content and procedural aspects of EVS have therefore been widely disseminated amongst potential Irish applicants. This should facilitate their smooth participation in the newly established programme.

The EVS programme is a largely decentralised programme. Its implementation in Ireland will be highly dependent on the actions taken by the Irish EVS national structure "Leargas - the exchange bureau". This structure has already been successfully involved in the pilot phase of EVS and has also proven to be a very efficient vector for implementation of the youth for Europe programme. The efficiency and competence demonstrated by Leargas should be an asset for the participation of Irish young people and organisations during the coming months. They will, of course, benefit from the same opportunities to participate in EVS as nationals from other Member States.

As far as the main areas of support are concerned, the Commission has established a work plan outlining them for 1998. This has received full support from the programme committee. For 1998 the development of long-term (6-12 months) EVS projects remains the programme's centre of gravity but emphasis has also been put on the following activities: short-term (3 weeks - 3 months) EVS projects; preparation and training activities for young volunteers, project leaders and support staff, initiative and creativity projects of young people following their European voluntary service. Support to special projects (related to important events taking place in certain Member States), projects with non-member countries and experimental short-term projects is also envisaged.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2313/98

by Riccardo Nencini (PSE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: University qualification

Mr Simone Casamonti (Italian) was awarded the degree of "Doctor of Philosophy in Environmental Engineering" by the Golden State University of Honolulu (Hawaii, USA) in 1995. It is not clear whether with this degree it is possible to pursue the above profession in a European Union country.

Can the Commission clarify this point and say specifically whether the above qualification enables its holder to work as a member of a profession in a European Union country.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1998)

As the Honourable Member himself indicates, the degree awarded in the United States is a university qualification. Now, the exercise of a regulated profession requires the possession of a professional qualification, and this may include, in addition to an academic qualification, the completion of training periods or the sitting of professional examinations.

Provided that it is regulated, a professional activity carried on in the engineering sector falls within the scope of Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration(1). In accordance with Article 1(a) of the Directive, the education and training attested by the diploma must have been received mainly in the Community or the holder must have three years' professional experience certified by the Member State which recognised a third-country diploma.

It follows that, under Community law, the first recognition of the diploma for professional reasons is not compulsory. Such recognition is, therefore, a matter for the Member States. Naturally, if the profession is not regulated, it is not necessary to seek recognition of the diploma.

For the person concerned to be able to find out about the steps, if any, that need to be taken to obtain recognition of his diploma, copies of the list of the institutions to be contacted in each Member State are being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2114/98

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: External effects of EU wine subsidies

Is the Commission aware that the proposal to further subsidize European wine violates our proposed stance on assisting poor countries by opening up our markets fairly to their produce?

Will the proposal not have adverse effects on, for instance, Eastern European, Latin American and South African wine producers?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

In the Uruguay Round negotiations the Community undertook to substantially reduce export subsidies, both in terms of the quantity of wine involved and in terms of budgetary expenditure. By 2000 the quantity of wine which may be covered by export refunds will be reduced by 21 % and budgetary expenditure by 36 %. It is worth pointing out that most wine is exported without subsidies. Only table wine and concentrated grape must are eligible for refunds. Quality wine produced in a specified region (quality wine psr) is excluded. In the 1996/97 marketing year exports with refunds accounted for less than a quarter of the Community's total exports to third countries. Moreover, refunds are granted only for certain destinations, and this excludes the whole of both North and South America, South Africa and nearly all the wine-producing countries in Eastern Europe. Therefore, Community export refunds on wine have a very limited impact.

Also in the context of the Uruguay Round negotiations, the Community undertook to facilitate access to the Community wine market by doing away with the system of reference prices (minimum import prices) and by reducing customs duties by around 20 % by 2000. This will substantially reduce protection at the Community borders and will make market access easier for imports from third countries, and in particular for the countries mentioned by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2109/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Curious notice of competition for Cedefop

The Commission's "Notices of Vacancies No DIV/1" of 15 June 1998 announced a vacancy for an A-grade official (a temporary A7-5 post) responsible for administrative duties. This notice is the latest of a number of curious announcements of vacant posts at Cedefop which are in breach of the Staff Regulations, sometimes subtly and at other times quite flagrantly. In the case in point, the basic qualification which Cedefop requires for appointment as an A7-5 Administrator is a "secondary-school leaving certificate" despite the fact that this post is a senior position and calls for a level of education substantially beyond completion of secondary school studies.

This minimalist notice runs directly counter to Parliament's efforts to upgrade Cedefop staff and to the Commission's desire to improve the services offered by Cedefop.

What action will the Commission take to ensure that Cedefop immediately implements the Staff Regulations in full and that its staff recruitment procedures are transparent, as it is imperative that these conditions are satisfied if the institution is to operate smoothly at its base in Thessaloniki?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(30 September 1998)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that on 22 June 1998 a corrigendum was made to the vacancy notice to which he refers, to the effect that a university degree was required in order to apply for the temporary A7-5 post involving the administrative duties in question.

The Staff Regulations provide that for in order to gain access to category A, "a university education or equivalent professional experience" are required, and the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training is bound by that provision.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2180/98

by Ben Fayot (PSE) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Duties on wine

The wine sector is worried that the Commission is planning to introduce excise duties on wine.

This is of course a topic which keeps resurfacing in political discussions.

I should like to know if any new facts have arisen to justify reopening this subject, and what precisely the Commission intends to do in this connection.

In particular, does the Commission propose to demonstrate once and for all that the zero-rating of excise duties practised in all wine-producing countries leads to a distortion of competition with other drinks?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 October 1998)

Under Article 8 of Council Directive 92/84/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the approximation of the rates of excise duty on alcohol and alcoholic beverages(1), the Commission reports to the Council and Parliament every two years on the operation of the minimum rates of duty on alcoholic drinks. Such a report is now in preparation, although no decisions have been taken as to its final content.

However, the Honourable Member will recognize that the report cannot avoid examining the question of whether or not the minimum rate for wine should remain at zero. Moreover, since Article 8 specifically requires it to do so, the report will also cover the question of competition between alcoholic drinks.

(1) OJ L 316, 31.10.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2214/98

by Brian Simpson (PSE) to the Commission

(16 July 1998)

Subject: Joint Committee on Post and Telecommunications

Will the Commissioner for Social Affairs indicate why he feels the present Joint Committee should be replaced by an inferior arrangement in which postal and telecom workers will lose out and is he willing to meet with Communications International as a matter of urgency to discuss this whole issue?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-2137/98 and E-2214/98 given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 1998)

In its communication on adapting and promoting the social dialogue at European level(1) adopted on 20 May 1998, the Commission emphasises the importance of sectoral dialogue and points out that this is a key area for future social dialogue at European level. The Commission is also convinced that in order for sectoral dialogue to continue its positive development and to develop the process in as many sectors as possible it is necessary to modernise the existing structures and to provide balanced support for the parties.

The Communication therefore adopted a decision, in parallel with the communication, creating new sectoral committees. The decision seeks to promote social dialogue in a much greater number of sectors, without discrimination in terms of resources or status, and without dictating a specific form of dialogue which may not be appropriate to one or other sector.

Apart from giving increased flexibility and autonomy to the social partners, the only significant change compared to the current arrangements for the post and telecommunications sectors is in relation to the number of participants. As the reimbursement of travel expenses is by far the largest element of expenditure, their restriction to a maximum of 30 reimbursed participants each meeting will ensure that the greatest number of sectors overall are able to benefit from the available limited resources. This will allow for one representative per Member State on each side, and will encourage the development of European level co-ordination, which is a precondition for participation in and a qualitative output from European social dialogue.

These arrangements aim to give the social partners in each sector, not least in the post and telecommunications sectors, the opportunity to deepen their dialogue and contribute more actively at European level. This will ensure, firstly, that the interests of a large number of social partner organisations and sectors are taken into account, and, secondly, that the resources available are used to develop a quality social dialogue in as many sectors as possible.

The Commission has acknowledged the important contribution made by the post and telecommunications joint committees and is convinced that the new structures will help and not hinder the social dialogue in these sectors. The Commission has responded directly to the social partners including Communications International, to explain its views as stated above.

(1) COM(98) 322 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2147/98

by Sebastiano Musumeci (NI) to the Commission

(13 July 1998)

Subject: Inclusion of the Palermo-Trapani-Siracusa rail route in the trans-European rail network outline plan

At its sitting of 18 May 1995, when voting on the proposal for an EP and Council Decision on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network, Parliament adopted Amendment 80, thus inserting in Annex I, Railway Network, Italy the routes Palermo-Trapani and Siracusa-Ragusa-Agrigento-Trapani.

What degree of priority does the Commission accord to the implementation of the project for the above rail routes in Italy and what, if any, operational measures have been taken towards this end in conjunction with the national authorities?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 1998)

The Honourable Member will be aware that the Parliament and the Council adopted the Decision No 1692/96/EC of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network(1).

Under Parliament's amendment 80, only the conventional lines Palermo - Trapani and Siracusa-Agrigento were included in the guidelines. Agrigento - Trapani, a narrow gauge line closed to commercial service in 1985, did not fulfil the criteria for inclusion and could not be considered of trans-European interest.

According to the principle of subsidiarity, the implementation of projects of common interest is the responsibility of the Member State concerned. Projects concerning the lines covered by Annex 1 can be co-financed by the Community via the TEN-T budget upon request from the Member State concerned, subject to the Commission's agreement.

According to Article 18§3 of the Decision, the Commission has to report on the implementation of the projects of common interest included in the guidelines. On the basis of the information received from the Italian authorities, the situation on the two lines is understood to be that Palermo-Trapani was electrified some years ago and upgrading of the section from Palermo to Punta Raisi (airport connection) is underway and scheduled to be completed in year 2000, while for Siracusa-Agrigento minor improvements (doubling tracks) on some sections are underway.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2617/98

by Sören Wibe (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Commission policy on public opinion

In the Swedish Government, for example, it is considered impossible in principle for a member of the government to express a view which contradicts the political line adopted by the Swedish Government.

What is the position within the Commission? Can a commissioner take a different political line from the one adopted by the Commission as a whole ahead of a government conference, for example? Can a commissioner take a liberal line on drugs if the Commission as a whole does not advocate such a policy?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(20 October 1998)

The Commission would point out that it adopts its positions in accordance with the conditions laid down in the Treaties. They reflect the will of the Members of the Commission as a whole, and only these are binding on them.

The Commission has had the occasion to recall in reply to written and oral questions by Members of Parliament(1) that its Members exercise a political function and, while honouring the obligations imposed by the function, remain free to express their personal opinions quite independently and on their own responsibility.

(1) For example, reply from President Rey to oral question No 10/68 by Mr Habib-Deloncle, and Commission replies to Written Questions Nos 44/83 by Mr Bendebien, 1682/85 by Mr Vandemeulebroucke, and 1404/97 by Mr Pasty, OJ C 55, 10.3.1986; OJ C 391, 23.12.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2199/98

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(14 July 1998)

Subject: Excise duty on wine

In the light of the fact that a number of non-wine-producing Member States levy excise duty on wine, does the Commission believe that wine-producing Member States which do not levy excise duty on wine are in fact giving a state aid to that industry?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 October 1998)

Community legislation governing excise duties stipulates that the minimum amount of excise duty on wine to be applied by Member States is 0 (zero) ecu. Accordingly, from the viewpoint of Community tax legislation, there is nothing to prevent a wine-producing Member State from applying that minimum amount.

Such generalised zero-rating by a Member State, which is approved by Community secondary legislation, cannot in itself be regarded as state aid within the meaning of Article 92 of the Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2525/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Cross-border "junk mail"

As cross-border "junk-mail", i.e. bogus lotteries and false competitions, is now a widespread phenomenon throughout the European Union, does the Commission intend to take action to reduce the perpetuation of such a problem?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 1998)

The Commission has no specific information on the extent of cross-border "junk mail" relating to bogus lotteries and false competitions.

At present, the organisation of cross-border lotteries falls under the provisions of Article 59 of the EC Treaty et seq. as interpreted by the Court of justice in the "Schindler" judgement (case C-275/92). In accordance with this judgement and given the peculiar nature of lotteries which involves a risk of crime or fraud, it is justified that national authorities have a sufficient degree of latitude to determine what is required to protect the players and to maintain order in society. In those circumstances, it is for them to assess if it is necessary to prohibit or restrict the activities of lotteries, provided the restrictions are not discriminatory.

Besides, Directive 97/7/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 1997 on consumer protection with respect to distance contracts(1), which is to be brought into force by the Member States no later than 3 June 2000, provides for restrictions on the use of certain means of distance communication. According to Article 10(1), the prior consumer consent is required for a supplier's use of automatic calling machines and facsimile machines. Article 10(2) stipulates that "Member States shall ensure that means of distant communication, other than those referred to in paragraph 1, which allow individual communication may be used only where there is no clear objection from the consumer."

The Commission considers that these restrictions, provided that appropriate implementing measures are taken at the national level, represent an adequate legal basis for effectively dealing with situations such as those indicated by the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L 144, 4.6.1997.