ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1928/99

by Jan Wiersma (PSE) to the Council

(4 November 1999)

Subject: The treatment of Romanies in the Czech Republic

Is the Council aware that the council of the Czech town Usti Nad Labem is planning to build a wall in a residential area to separate the part where Romanies live from the part where non-Romanies live?

Does the Council consider this contrary to the Copenhagen criteria, which must be met by applicant countries?

If so, what action will the Council take?

Reply

(31 January 2000)

Yes, the Council was aware of the wall erected between the Romany and the non-Romany populations in Usti Nad Labem and welcomes the fact that it has been demolished by the local authority. The Union had previously joined the Czech Government in condemning the erection of this wall and supported the latter when it urged the local authorities, within whose mandate it fell, to do everything possible to dismantle the wall.

The Union is paying close attention to minority rights, not least the rights of the Romanies in all candidate countries. Action is being taken with the governments in these countries to continue the efforts to improve the situation of their Romany populations. The erection of a wall in the Czech town has been but one such occasion to raise the Romany issue. The Union will continue to keep track of the way the situation develops and will be providing support in this matter with other international organisations actively involved (e.g. the OSCE and the Council of Europe).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2841/99

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Priority given to research tasks relating to the Arctic and polar regions

What research tasks relating to the Arctic and polar regions have been identified as matters of priority by European Commission officials, or their advisers?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 2000)

Research tasks relating to polar regions (Arctic and Antarctic) are described in the work programme under the area 2.1.4 Climate variability and abrupt climate changes (e.g. hydrological cycle and its link to polar processes, quantification of its changes and its impacts on and interactions with cryosphere). In addition, research on stratospheric ozone and impacts in the Arctic remains an important research task (e.g. Theseo: Third European stratospheric experiment on ozone).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2720/99

by Michael Cashman (PSE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Money transactions

I am deeply concerned that European consumers are being misled in money exchanges across Europe. I have noted that, in the event of money exchange, customers are not being given a net receipt prior to the exchange which shows the exchange rate, commission and other deductions.

Can the Commission indicate whether there are any plans to introduce legislation which would protect consumers in these situations?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 2000)

The Honourable Member will be aware that on 23 April 1998 the Commission issued Recommendation 98/286/EC on banking charges for conversion to the euro(1), which contains some important provisions on transparency. The Commission considers that transparency of conversion or exchange charges is essential to promote competition and thus to arrive at a reduction of those charges. Article 3 of the Recommendation provides that, for conversions or exchanges of currencies in the euro zone, banks and other bodies whose business it is to exchange bank notes (and Bureaux de Change as well) should provide to their customers clear and transparent information before a transaction is effected, namely written information on any charges to be applied.

Furthermore, the Commission announced in this Recommendation that it intends to monitor the application of this standard of good practice. The results of a study launched by the Commission at the end of 1999 on this subject will be presented in a communication in the first half of 2000. Furthermore, the various aspects of cross-border payments, including the exchange of bank notes, have been dealt with by the Commission in the communication on retail payments in the internal market(2).

Where abuses of transparency requirements have been brought to the attention of the Commission, it has pursued the matter with the national authorities. This has generally resulted in an end to any reported breaches. The above mentioned retail payments communication will provide a further incentive to financial institutions to comply with these provisions on transparency.

(1) OJ L 130, 1.5.1998.

(2) COM(00) 36.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2635/99

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Support for nuclear energy and renewable energies

1. Can the Commission provide details of all financial support received, firstly, by nuclear energy (including fusion) and, secondly, by renewable energies (solar and wind power) from the relevant budget titles of the general budget of the European Communities since the Communities were established?

2. If not, why not?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2000)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2550/99

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(4 January 2000)

Subject: Agenda 2000

Reform of CAP was part of the Agenda 2000 package. Within that there was a promise to reform the milk regime. I understand that it will be 2003 before any reform takes place but in the meantime milk quotas for Ireland, Italy and Portugal have been increased. What were the reasons for this increase?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2000)

The Berlin European Council decided two essential points for the milk sector within the framework of Agenda 2000: the guide price for milk and the intervention prices for butter and skimmed milk powder would be reduced as from 2005 and the system of milk quotas would be continued until 2008 (although the Council committed itself to proceeding to a review in 2003 with a view to allowing the current arrangements to expire after 2006) with the national quotas being increased in two stages.

The increase in milk quotas was indissolubly linked on the one hand with the extension of the system of quotas beyond 31 March 2000, the date when the system expires, and on the other with the fall in institutional prices which made such an increase possible.

Therefore, and in view of the immediate and urgent structural problems involved in the continuation of the quota system, the Council decided on a special increase brought forward in relation to the linear 1,5 % increase in the quotas as from 2005 for five Member States, namely Greece, Spain, Ireland, Italy and the United Kingdom (Northern Ireland), as from 1 April 2000. This special increase moreover was decided on in the conviction that it will have little or no influence on the production of these Member States and therefore on the total volume of Community production.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2437/99

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Right of establishment in the EU for nationals of Central and Eastern Europe countries (CEECs) for the purposes of business or of providing services as self-employed persons

1. Has the Commission any knowledge of the number of nationals of Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) who have sought permission to establish themselves in the EU in the last two years in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Agreements between the CEE and the EU?

2. Has the Commission produced any guidance for nationals of Central and Eastern European countries seeking to establish themselves in accordance with these provisions?

3. Has the Commission produced any memoranda or advice notes for the national authorities of the Central and Eastern European countries concerning the right of establishment under these Agreements?

4. Has the Commission received any complaints from nationals of Central and Eastern European countries with regard to the exercise of the right of establishment under these Agreements?

5. Is the Commission aware of any references made by national courts to the European Court of Justice of matters arising from the right of establishment under these Agreements?

6. Does the Commission intend to take any action in the near future to promote the exercise of the right of establishment under these agreements?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 2000)

The questions raised by the Honourable Member touch upon the right of establishment for nationals of Central and Eastern European countries (CEEC) in the Community for the purposes of business or providing services as self-employed persons.

1. The Commission has no data or estimates on the number of CEEC nationals who have sought to establish themselves in the last two years in the Member States.

2. and 3. The exercise of the right of establishment depends not only on the provisions of the Europe agreements, but also on national legislation. Therefore, it is not practical to produce any general guidance or advice for nationals of CEEC or Member States.

4. The Commission has received some complaints concerning delays in handling requests for the right of establishment. The complaints are addressed by the relevant national authority.

5. There are currently four cases in which national courts have requested a preliminary ruling by the Court of justice on the application of the relevant provisions in the Europe agreements (Gloszczuk/C-63/99, Kondova/C-235/99, Barkoci & Malik/C-257/99 and Jany etc./C-268/99). The Commission has submitted observations in all cases. The rulings by the Court of justice cannot be expected before summer 2000.

6. No special action is foreseen to promote the exercise of the right of establishment under the Europe agreements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2517/99

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) to the Commission

(22 December 1999)

Subject: The Sviluppo Italia company and breaches of Community rules

The Sviluppo Italia company was set up by a legislative decree of the Italian Government (1/99) to provide assistance to depressed areas of the Mezzogiorno region.

In addition to resources from the revolving fund set up by law 208/99, its original capital stock is also made up of Community funds and its relations with the public authorities are governed by special agreements not subject to public accounting procedures.

Does the Commission not consider that this situation is incompatible with Community law on competition, use of Community funds and state aids, particularly in the light of the considerations set out below?

1. Public funds of Community origin intended to finance business promotion programmes in depressed areas are being used to provide start-up (risk) capital and liquidity flows (finance) for a single (joint stock) company formally belonging to the private sector and not subject to government control. These funds could be used for purposes other than those stipulated with little real prospect of doing anything to assist the local situation they were originally intended to alleviate.

2. Given the vagueness of the role assigned to the Sviluppo Italia company and the impossibility of separating its accounts for activities undertaken in the public interest and its business activities, the company enjoys a dominant position on the market for development services and financial services, while being able to evade public accounting procedures, giving it a privileged position as sole partner, to the detriment of new or existing businesses in the sector.

3. The Sviluppo Italia company has the legal personality of a private firm and thus the capacity to evade the securities and guarantees required of a company subject to public law as regard the organisation and performance of its activities (parliamentary control, auditing, public accounting procedures and recruitment by competitive examination).

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2000)

Member States are competent to manage resources deriving from structural funds. Therefore, the choice to merge all the State's holdings in a single company, constituted as a joint stock company, is not relevant under Community state aid rules. Article 222 (ex Article 166) of the EC Treaty does not prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership. Accordingly the creation, by a Member State, of a holding in the form of joint stock company operating on the market does not constitute, per se, an infringement of Community competition rules.

In any case, the commercial activities performed by Sviluppo Italia will be subject to the Community rules on competition and on structural funds.

The Commission is not informed as to the involvement of state aid elements in favour of Sviluppo Italia. If information should come to the attention of the Commission, it will examine it and take a decision in this respect.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2566/99

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Extending the deadline for discontinuing the use of super leaded petrol

What is the Commission's position on allowing extensions to the 1 January 2000 deadline for discontinuing the use of super leaded petrol for some countries facing considerable difficulties, such as Greece where an estimated two million vehicles or more will be directly affected unless an extension is granted?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2000)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it has granted Greece a derogation to continue to permit the marketing of leaded petrol within its territory until 31 December 2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2047/99

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(3 November 1999)

Subject: Number of stars on the European Union flag

Can the Commission explain why, when the European Union was expanded from 12 to 15 nation states, the number of 5-pointed golden stars on the EU flag did not increase to 15?

Can it explain the procedure (if any) by which Members of Parliament may propose and decide on changes to the European Union flag?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1999)

The stars of the European flag do not represent the Member States.

According to the decision of the Council of Europe which adopted the European flag in 1955 the number of stars is invariably twelve.

In a resolution adopted in April 1983(1) the Parliament recommended that the Community's flag should be that adopted by the Council of Europe in 1955. It was introduced by the institutions of the Community in early 1986.

(1) OJ C 128, 16.5.1983.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2505/99

by Caroline Jackson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 December 1999)

Subject: Water fluoridation

Can the Commission state whether it is prepared to review the existing legislation on drinking water so as to include a prohibition on water fluoridation, in line with fears raised by some of my constituents?

Can the Commission list the principal scientific studies which may underlie its decision not to address the fluoridation issue at EU level or to propose a prohibition on this process?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2000)

Drinking water quality is regulated in the Community by Council Directive 80/778/EEC of 15 July 1980 relating to the quality of water intended for human consumption(1), which will be replaced by 25 December 2003 by the recently adopted new drinking water Directive 98/83/EC(2). Both directives limit the maximum admissible concentration of fluoride in drinking water, regardless of its origin, i.e. naturally present or artificially added. The matter of fluoridation of water supplies lies within the Member States' responsibility. The Member States, however, must respect the maximum limit set out in the directive. Member States policies on this matter depend on a number of factors, including local customs and habits which differ from one Member State to the other. Unquestionably, fluoridation is a controversial issue because of the positive or negative effects fluoride might have, depending on the concentration of the substance in the drinking water.

The limit set out in the drinking water Directive is 1,5 milligrammes per litre (mg/l), which according to the view of the World health organisation (WHO) as expressed in its drinking water quality guidelines represents a good balance between the positive and negative effects of fluoride. Positive effects start around 0,5mg/l up to 2 mg/l. The more the concentration shifts upwards from 2mg/l the more the risk of negative effects is increased i.e. dental fluorosis or even skeletal fluorosis at very high concentrations.

Therefore, the answer to the first question is that the Commission is not considering a revision of the legislation, as the new drinking water Directive was adopted on November 1998 and it has to be implemented.

As for the second question, the principal reference is the WHO publication: Guidelines for drinking water quality, second edition volume 2, Geneva 1996. In this volume, information on fluoride can be found in pages 231-237 including a list of 18 relative references.

(1) OJ L 229, 30.8.1980.

(2) OJ L 330, 5.12.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2336/99

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Potentially fatal health hazards arising from exposure to radiation from mobile telephones

Recent research by Swedish scientists and other public health experts have shown that exposure to radiation from the use of mobile telephones causes serious damage to the human organism, for example the development of carcinogenic tumours on the brain and the acoustic nerve, together with functional genetic disorders.

What measures and policies will the Council launch with a view to ensuring the safe use of mobile telephones and the protection of public health in general?

Reply

(10/11 April 2000)

The Council, on the basis of a proposal from the Commission and after consulting the European Parliament, adopted on 12 July 1999 a Recommendation on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz)(1) which aims to provide a Community framework with regard to exposure to electromagnetic fields, with the objective of protecting the public. The Recommendation, which is based solely on established scientific effects, comprises basic restrictions and reference levels which apply to all radiation emitted by electromagnetic fields emanating from electric appliances, including mobile telephones. It is based on advice from the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and endorsed by the Commission's Scientific Steering Committee.

Concerning, more specifically, the long term-effects to which the Honourable Member refers, the Council has invited the Commission to encourage research on the short and long-term effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields at all relevant frequencies as part of the implementation of the current framework programme of research and to keep the matters covered by this Recommendation under review, with a view to its revision and updating, taking into account also possible effects which are currently the subject of research, including relevant aspects of precaution.

The Council, aware of the issues at stake for public health, and in the light of the fact that at international level it has not been proven that such exposure, including from the use of mobile telephones, might cause the development of cancer, has asked the Commission to keep a very open attitude towards ongoing and future research in this area.

(1) OJ L 199, 30.7.1999, p. 59.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2355/99

by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Standardisation of flight control systems

Some 30 different flight control systems are currently in use worldwide. This simply exacerbates the problem of air traffic congestion. Standardising flight control systems in Europe might be beneficial both to the environment and to the economy. What does the Commission intend to do to have flight control systems standardised at least in Europe?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2000)

On 1 December 1999, the Commission adopted a communication(1) on the current situation of air traffic delays and on new initiatives to be taken to provide the Community with the air traffic management system it needs to ensure the proper functioning of its internal market. The question raised by the Honourable Member, regarding the multiplicity of air traffic control systems in Europe and the urgent need for their integration, is answered in this document.

(1) COM(1999) 614 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2667/99

by Olivier Dupuis (TDI) to the Council

(13 January 2000)

Subject: Prospects of Azerbaijan joining the Council of Europe and development of EU/Azerbaijan relations

Can the High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy give full details on the state of progress of Azerbaijan's accession to the Council of Europe? More generally, can the High Representative indicate how the EU intends to develop relations with the country?

Reply

(16 March 2000)

The Council fully supports the objective of Azerbaijan to become a member of the Council of Europe. However, neither the Council nor the High Representative is involved in this accession process and is therefore not in a position to comment on it.

The High Representative will continue to assist the Council in support of developing closer relations between the European Union and Azerbaijan. The European Union has contractual relations with Azerbaijan through a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement which provides for, amongst other things, enhanced trade relations, financial cooperation, and a political dialogue.

The first meeting of the EU-Azerbaijan Cooperation Council established under this agreement took place in October 1999 and a further meeting is planned later this year.

The political dialogue provides the European Union with the opportunity to raise a number of issues of interest including human rights, regional cooperation and the situation in Nagorno-Karabakh.