ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/407

(2004/C 78 E/0428)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2460/03

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Anti-competitive actions of the Irish State in the electricity market

The Irish State has announced the results of the latest AER support scheme for renewable energy. The main beneficiaries are subsidiaries of the national electricity utility ESB and their partner companies.

Given that the ESB is absolutely dominant in the Irish electricity market, with enormous resources at its disposal, does the Commission consider that permitting ESB subsidiaries to participate in the AER competition constitutes a distortion of the market? Does it further amount to a discrimination, given the fact that it can use the extensive resources it has accumulated under State ownership, with its State backing, to undercut independent producers?

Is the Commission willing to instruct the Irish State to halt the awards to ESB subsidiaries and partners while it investigates the foregoing questions in relation to this competition?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2003)

The Commission state aid decision regarding the rural electrification scheme (AER) (1) does not impose any requirement as to the nature of bidders. It is designed to increase the volume of electricity produced from renewable sources of energy in Ireland and there is nothing to prevent subsidiaries of the Electricity Supply Board (ESB) from participating in this increase provided that they satisfy the necessary conditions for bidding successfully.

The Commission takes the view that, as the majority shareholder in ESB, the Irish State is free to manage the company's capital as it sees fit, provided that it complies with the market-economy investor principle. In the case at issue, the Commission does not possess any information suggesting that ESB subsidiaries receive aid from their parent company in the form of, say, supplies at lower-than-market prices.

The Commission has no intention, therefore, of amending its above decision so as to exclude ESB subsidiaries from the AER scheme or of intervening in the awarding of contracts to ESB or its partners.

(1) Commission decision in Case N 553/01, OJ C 45, 19.2.2002.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/95

(2004/C 84 E/0124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3719/03

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Evaluation of the risk inherent in zinc

The manufacturing sectors involved have been waiting for years for the report on evaluating the risks of zinc in accordance with Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 (1) and Regulation (EC) No 1488/94 (2), which lay down the principles. In its answer to the previous question on the same subject (of 29 October 2001) the Commission said that the technical meeting of the Commission had set a deadline of 18 months from September 2001 for acquiring further information and/or evidence to be incorporated in the final report on evaluating the risks. The 18 months have now passed and this further delay is causing economic damage to the industry concerned.

Can the Commission say:

— what obstacles are continuing to delay the completion of the dossier;

— by what date the file may finally be closed?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(26 January 2004)

The zinc industry has finalised its additional research in the context of the risk assessment for zinc according to the timescale that was agreed at the Technical Meeting of the European Chemical Bureau (ECB) on existing substances (Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993) in September 2001. The results of this research were presented in March 2003.

The ‘rapporteur’ for the zinc dossier, the Netherlands, as well as the Member States experts expressed their appreciation for this work but needed more time to study the full contents of all study reports. Subsequently, several discussions have taken place at the Technical Meetings related to the way the study results on the bio-availability of zinc should be incorporated and used in the final risk assessment report. This discussion was finalised at the last Technical Meeting in December 2003. The ‘rapporteur’ will now produce a full risk assessment report in early 2004 which is planned to be discussed at the next Technical Meeting in March 2004. The Commission expects that the Member States experts will be able to finalise the discussions on the zinc dossier at that meeting.

(1) OJ L 84, 5.4.1993, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 161, 29.6.1994, p. 3.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/109

(2004/C 78 E/0109)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2381/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 July 2003)

Subject: Single market

Will the Commission define what it means by a successful single market? How will it know when we have arrived at the single market?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/329

(2004/C 88 E/0335)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0612/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(3 March 2003)

Subject: EU/Cape Verde 1999-2003: cooperation, development, human rights, assistance, etc.

For the years 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 and 2003 and with regard to Cape Verde, can the Commission provide information on the following: What programmes have been or are being undertaken by the EU with Cape Verde? What are the funds allocated? What is the expected duration of the individual programmes? What results have been obtained by the programmes, and what assessment has been made of their success or otherwise? What particular developments have characterised each of the programmes?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/737

(2004/C 84 E/0831)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3514/03

by Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Subject: Course financed by means of the Structural Funds

On 11 November 2002 the Naples-based Istituto nazionale di formazione per le imprese culturali launched a course entitled ‘Content Specialist & Designer’ within the PON Asse III misura III 6/D-Codice progetto 5387 discipline. The course is financed by means of the European Social Fund.

The course students (who had to go through a selection procedure) have not received the grant awarded to them (EUR 10 389,14 per student), since the person in charge of the course — a Mr Palladino — has been deemed untrustworthy by the Ministry for State Education, Universities and Scientific Research on account of his previous record. On 30 April 2003 (20 days before the course was due to end) the Ministry decided that co-financing would be suspended and that the training project would be abandoned.

On the basis of the above information, does the Commission not think that, irrespective of any judgment regarding Mr Palladino, the 19 pre-selected women should not be denied their grants or have their course certificates withheld?

Does the Commission not agree that, in accordance with the rules, some kind of protection should be offered to the 19 unemployed course students who, having been duly selected, wished to take advantage of the opportunity afforded to them under the Structural Funds?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2004)

After receiving the required information from the Managing Authorities of the national Operational Programme (OP) 1999 IT 161 003, the Commission is now able to report as follows:

— The decision on the part of the Ministry for Education, Research and University (MIUR) to suspend the co-financing of project III 6/D-5387 (‘Content Specialist & designer — Specont’) was taken because the project managers (Mr Palladino and Ms Ruvo) could not provide adequate financial guarantees. Indeed, from that point of view, Mr Palladino and Ms Ruvo were operating illegally, and in fact, 16 students had complained already that they had not received the fellowships to which they were entitled.

— Mr Palladino and Ms Ruvo have repeatedly appealed the decision of MIUR before the administrative tribunal (TAR) and the Consiglio di Stato. The latter, pending the final judgement by the TAR, has put on hold the suspension decided by the MIUR, which would at least allow the MIUR to pay out advance payments on the fellowships, but the Consiglio di Stato only did so under the condition that Mr Palladino and Ms Ruvo are able to provide adequate financial guarantees, which as yet has not happened.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/779

(2004/C 78 E/0828)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3098/03

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 October 2003)

Subject: Margot Wallström and the EMU campaign

Margot Wallström was heavily involved during the last weeks of the recently concluded EMU campaign in Sweden.

Was the Commissioner on leave of absence from her normal duties at the Commission during this period?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/264

(2004/C 78 E/0264)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3335/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(12 November 2003)

Subject: Editorial offices of the daily newspaper ‘Il Giornale’ searched

On 17 October last the head office of the daily newspaper ‘Il Giornale’ in Rome was subjected to a seven-hour search ordered by the Public Prosecutor of Perugia in the context of investigations into the ‘Telekom Serbia’ case.

The newspaper had been conducting a detailed inquiry into the growing scandal involving the former State-owned company Telecom Italia, which purchased the Serbian company in 1997, and a number of politicians in the government at the time. The inquiry had recently revealed new aspects of the case and evidence submitted by some individuals acquainted with the facts had been published.

The editor Maurizio Belpietro and the correspondent Gianmarco Chiocci were notified of charges of defamation and violation of confidentiality by the Public Prosecutor, and Chiocci's computer was sealed.

The episode is particularly unpleasant because it constitutes a serious violation of press freedom and freedom of information, as well as the professional freedom of those subjected to the search. These principles are recognised as fundamental by the national constitutions of all democratic countries, as well as by the Council of Europe which, in Recommendation R(200)7 of 8 March 2000, stressed that the interception of communications, surveillance and judicial search and seizure are unacceptable if their purpose is to circumvent the right of journalists to information. Article 11 of the European Charter of Fundamental Rights considers this right to be inalienable and the European Court of Human Rights has on several occasions expressed views on the subject. Recently (judgment of 15 July 2003 in Case No 33400/96, Ernst v. Belgium) it established, in a similar case, that the investigators' aim of identifying those responsible for leaks of information from legal departments did not justify searching the workplace of journalists in order to discover their sources of information.

In the light of all these considerations can the Commission say:

1. whether it considers that the episode mentioned constitutes a serious violation of the principles and provisions mentioned;

2. how the European Union might act to sanction such restrictions on freedom of the press;

3. whether it intends to make a statement on the issue?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 2003)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written P-3201/03 by Mr Tajani (1)

(1) See page 240.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/730

(2004/C 84 E/0822)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2748/03

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 September 2003)

Subject: Rizokarpasso primary school

In my previous question (E-2033/03 (1)), I asked the Commission to do everything within its power, in the context of the rapprochement between the Greek and Turkish Cypriot communities, to secure the re-opening of the secondary school at Rizokarpasso in occupied Cyprus. Unfortunately, however, not only has the secondary school failed to re-open but the Denktash regime appears also to have decided to close the primary school in the area. Since requiring the two teachers to leave Rizokarpasso within two hours, the authorities have as yet failed to approve the transfer of the two new teachers who, according to instructions from the Education Ministry, should have taken up their duties on 1 September.

The inevitable result of this particular practice will be to stifle all cultural and educational opportunities for the population of the enclave. Without teachers, the school will close. The children will either be forced to stay in their villages deprived of the fundamental right to education or they will abandon their homes to become refugees.

At practically the same time, the regime announced via its police authorities that it was banning pilgrims from entering the Holy Church of St Synesios at Rizokarpasso, one of several visited by many pilgrims since the partial lifting of travel restrictions.

Is the Commission aware of the developments surrounding the primary school at Rizokarpasso? What representations will it make to the Denktash regime and the Turkish government, in accordance with its obligations under the partnership agreement for the accession of Turkey, to avert the prospect of such an inauspicious future for Greek Cypriot families living in this enclave in occupied Cyprus?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2003)

The Commission is fully aware of the school situation in the enclaved Greek Cypriot community of Rizokarpasso. Only recently the Commission replied to several written questions (2) of and letters by Honourable Members regarding the situation in Rizokarpasso.

Within the framework of the Council, the issue was also discussed in the last COCEN-COSEE (3) meeting in the Council and Greece provided its own extensive information on the obstacles to the operation of the primary school.

The Presidency has instructed its Embassy in Nicosia to gather further information including an assessment by the Government of the Republic. The Presidency stated that the issue would have to be discussed in depth before any form of action could be considered by the Union.

The Honourable Member will appreciate, as earlier indicated in the replies, that the Commission's responsibilities in the field of education are restricted and limited in accordance with Article 149 of the EC Treaty.

(1) See page 729.

(2) Joint reply to E-1983/03 by Mr Alavanos and E-2033/03 by Mr Hatzidakis.

(3) Central and Southeast Europe Working Party in the Council.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/310

(2004/C 78 E/0312)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3664/03

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Women's reproductive health

UNFPA reported a large number of deaths of women in Liberia as a result of treatable reproductive tract infections and from pregnancy-related complications. There is also a high incidence of HIV/AIDS among Liberian women, contracted as a result of widespread rape during the civil war and a lack of safe blood supplies for transfusions.

In light of this, would the Commission outline what measures it is taking to support women's reproductive health programmes in Liberia?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2003)

Through its local representative and various field missions, the Commission is fully aware of the situation of women in Liberia. The Commission had its concern by this situation and also in the tremendous impact the civil war has on women's health either directly through all sorts of abuse and rape or indirectly through displacement, widespread poverty and absence of a health system to cover basic health needs.

All interventions supporting the restoration of a peaceful environment and the application of the rule of law therefore have an impact on women's health. The programme, currently under implementation, to support the peacekeeping forces from Ecowas (EUR 8 million) is designed to build the suitable peaceful environment, together with other bilateral and multilateral donors. However some of the interventions are specifically designed to provide support to the rehabilitation of the health services and to provide direct health support.

The ‘Reintegration programme for returnees and displaced people in Liberia’ (EUR 25 million) under implementation since 2001, has a strong health component. The purpose is the improved delivery of basic health services through the County Health Teams assisted by non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and improved access to good quality and cheaper drugs through improvements in the functioning of the nongovernment National Drug Service.

The ‘Post Conflict Rehabilitation and Capacity Building Programme’ (EUR 40 million) has been recently decided. Its purpose is to facilitate and support the initiatives of peace and national reconciliation contained in the Accra Peace Agreement, in order to ease socio-political tensions and ensure reconciliation (demobilization and economic and social reinsertion of the fighters) at the national and community levels (re-establishment and functioning of key public Ministries and key other Institution). Notably its purpose is also to encourage and accelerate the process of social and economic rehabilitation of the affected populations (particularly at the community level) and to contribute to the physical rehabilitation of basic infrastructure and services (public and other), including the availability of health services, medicines, education and water.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/145

(2004/C 84 E/0183)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4075/03

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 January 2004)

Subject: Contracts of doctors working for the Greek Electricity Board (DEI)

The Commission recently received a complaint from doctors working for the Greek Electricity Board (DEI) about the terms they are obliged to accept in order to work for this organisation. These doctors who are specialists in various fields worked for many years with ‘contracts for the provision of independent services’; after court rulings these have now been converted into ‘contracts for part-time dependent employment for an unlimited duration’. However, according to the conditions of the new contract provided by the DEI, they are not covered by the same DEI arrangements as regular and other staff and are excluded from pay increases due to promotions and from allowances, Christmas bonuses and other benefits provided for in Collective Employment Conditions or by law.

Will the Commission say whether the above terms communicated to the doctors by the DEI in respect of their new employment contract violate the provisions of Directive 97/81 (1) and in particular the principle of non-discrimination which is defined in Clause 4 and which provides that: ‘In respect of employment conditions, part-time workers shall not be treated in a less favourable manner than comparable full-time workers’?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2004)

The written question deals with the issue of whether the Directive on part-time work (2) is breached by the granting of special contracts without certain additional benefits which are normally given to employees.

Greece has correctly transposed the part-time work Directive by Article 2 of Act No 2369 of 1 September 1998. The Greek legislation applies to the whole private sector and employment relations with public enterprises and other public sector bodies.

The Commission has not received any similar representations as regards violation of the nondiscrimination principle of the part-time work Directive in Greece.

Any alleged breach of the afore-mentioned Greek legislation should in the first instance be addressed to the competent Greek authorities and, in fact, the Commission is aware that the case in question has been brought before the Greek courts.

(1) OJ L 14, 20.1.1998, p. 9.

(2) Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, OJ L 14, 20.1.1998.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/31

(2004/C 88 E/0033)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1467/03

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 April 2003)

Subject: Killing of Street Children in Guatemala and Honduras

There are allegations that ‘street-children’ in Guatemala and Honduras have been killed. These allegations are vigorously denied by the governments concerned. Does the Commission itself have any independent confirmation of the truth of these allegations and has it raised this matter with the governments concerned? Does the Commission know if homes and shelter are offered to all homeless children under the age of 16 and what alternatives are available to the children who roam the streets in these countries? Finally, has the Commission urged governments in the region to ensure that children who break the law are in all cases punished in accordance with the rule of law and that, where appropriate, support is given to reduce their chances of leading lives of crime?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2003)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its joint reply to Written Questions E-0356/03 by Mr Newton Dunn and Baroness Ludford (1), E-0086/03 by Mr Helmer (2) and Written Question E-0097/03 by Mr Whitehead (2) on the same subject.

As far as Guatemala is concerned, the Commission would like to add the following elements:

— the Commission is aware that the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (Minugua), as well as local and international human rights organisations have reported a general deterioration in the situation of human rights during recent months, with several attacks against and murders of street children. In particular, the Inter-American Human Rights Commission has expressly pointed out the Guatemalan State's non observance of a set of recommendations made to guarantee the prevention of human rights violations by state agents, including aggression against street children. However, as in Honduras, there is no evidence of an institutional state policy aimed at infringing human rights;

— the Commission will continue to urge the Guatemalan authorities to make additional effort to ensure respect for the rule of law. In line with the Resolution on human rights in Guatemala that the Parliament issued in April 2003, the Commission's main objective for the Consultative Group Meeting for Guatemala, scheduled in Guatemala City for the beginning of May 2003, is to encourage the local authorities and society to accelerate the implementation of the Peace Accords signed in 1996, to promote human rights as well as to reinforce the judicial system.

(1) See page 11.

(2) See page 5.