ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1638/00

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Elimination of milk quotas and its consequences

In the recent reform of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), provision is made for a possible revision of certain sectoral policies adopted in the first years after its entry into force. More specifically, the revision of the milk sector is envisaged for 2003. In such a review, will consideration be given to bringing forward the possible elimination of the quota system to a date before 2008? If so, and if the definitive elimination of quotas in 2008 or before were to be agreed on, what measures or mechanisms does the Commission envisage in order to compensate farmers for the major investments made to acquire quotas in the various Member States?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 2000)

Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1256/1999 of 17 May 1999 amending Regulation (EEC) No 3950/92 establishing an additional levy in the milk and milk products sector(1) states that: The Council undertakes to conduct a mid-term review in 2003, on the basis of a Commission report, with the aim of allowing the present quota arrangements to run out after 2006.

The Commission has not yet drawn up this report or decided on the measures that it will propose. Moreover, it would not be wise to decide on measures now that will not be published until 2003, without taking subsequent account of the situation at that time, since it may have changed in the interim.

The Commission would nonetheless like to reassure the Honourable Member that, when the time comes, it will look again at the quotas in the context of the dairy sector as a whole, and if their progressive abolition should be decided, it will examine any possible repercussions and propose the appropriate transitional measures.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1607/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Illegal collection of waste oils

Directive 75/439/EEC(1) on the disposal of waste oils provides that the Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure the safe collection and disposal of waste oils. According to the Commission's latest report, in Greece 92 % of waste oils was collected illegally and sold without any processing as fuel.

Given that Greece transposed the above Directive into national law in 1995, but has failed to ensure that mechanisms are set up for the legal collection and treatment of oils and that the burning of waste oils generates fumes which are harmful to the environment, what measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure that Greece effectively implements the Directive on waste oils?

(1) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 23.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2000)

In the report from the Commission to the Council and the Parliament on the implementation of Community waste legislation(1), the figures provided for the disposal of waste oils in Greece were taken from the study Economics of Waste Oils Regeneration done by Coopers & Lybrand(2), because the reply to the questionnaire sent by the national authorities arrived too late to be included in the report.

The official figures provided by the Greek authorities are currently being examined by the Commission.

(1) COM(1999) 752 final.

(2) Economics of Waste Oils Regeneration, Coopers & Lybrand, the Hague, 29 January 1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1813/00

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Council

(13 June 2000)

Subject: Ecofin meeting of 28 February 2000

Did the Council discuss common rules governing national tax cuts at the Ecofin Council meeting of 28 February 2000 or at any other meeting?

If so:

1. Did the Council reach agreement on these common rules?

2. Could the Council explain the criteria adopted for the assessment of whether a Member State may cut taxes without contravening commitments on budgetary discipline?

3. Could the Council explain why details of the agreement did not appear in the Council conclusions published following the meeting?

Reply

(23 October 2000)

The Council informs the Honourable Parliamentarian that it has not discussed common rules governing national tax cuts, or the other issues raised in his question at its meeting of 28 February 2000 or at any other, and thus is not in position to give an answer.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1606/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Sport event for kidney sufferers

The Kidney Sufferers Sports Association intends to organise the first European games for kidney sufferers in Athens in order to give kidney sufferers the opportunity to become involved in sport and also to make public opinion more aware of the idea of organ donations. Given the particular nature of the participants in these games, will the Commission co-fund the above sports event? If so, through which financial instrument?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 2000)

Although it recognises the value of sport in promoting health, the Commission regrets to have to inform the Honourable Member that the Community budget does not have a heading that would allow it to co-fund a sporting event of this kind.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1845/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 June 2000)

Subject: Free movement of capital

Can the Commission confirm that certain Member States notably Spain set limits on the amount of cash that may be taken out of the country and, if so, state whether it regards these provisions as compatible with the obligations of the Member States under the Treaties?

If not, what action is the Commission taking to remedy this matter, and what courses of action are open to anyone who has suffered losses on account of these provisions?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(7 July 2000)

Member States cannot under the obligations of Article 56 (ex Article 73b) of the EC Treaty set limits on the amount of cash that may be taken out of the country. Spain, in compliance with the EC Treaty's obligations, does not set limits to the export of capital.

However, under Spanish law the import or the export of currency in excess of a given amount has to be declared to the customs administration. The law establishing such a declaration system is not in breach of Community law. In fact, under Article 58 (ex Article 73d) of the EC Treaty, it is set out that the provisions of Article 56 shall be without prejudice to the right of the Member States to lay down procedures for the declaration of capital movements for purposes of administrative or statistical information, provided the measures and procedures applied shall not constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination or a disguised restriction on the free movements of capital. Moreover, Member States using such a declaration system have also the right to define amounts of fines in case of infringements of the regulation.

Questions concerning damages for the loss suffered on capital (exchange rate differentials) and interest (interest on the sums withheld in excess of the fine) can only be determined by the Spanish courts.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2890/00

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 September 2000)

Subject: Breakdown of EIB loans to SMEs and town councils in the Canary Islands (Spain), 1994-1999

Commission sources indicate that between 1994 and 1999, the EIB granted PTA 22 084 million to SMEs and town councils in the Canaries.

Will the Commission please detail the specific projects concerned, and give an exact breakdown of the total figure?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(3 October 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to his Written Question E-1997/00(1).

(1) See p. 128.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1429/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 May 2000)

Subject: The procedure used by the Commission in determining its response to address a Treaty violation

In order to protect the good name of the Commission and individual Commissioners from accusations of political bias, will the Commission, when asked to investigate a possible Treaty violation either by an aggrieved person or legal personality or by a member of this Parliament, take independent legal advice as to the Commission's obligations, and publish that advice even if legal immunity is provided to those providing such advice?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2000)

When the Commission receives a complaint regarding an alleged infringement of the EC Treaty, it is registered at the Secretariat-General and the file is sent to the Directorate-General concerned, with a copy to the Legal Service.

The Commission decision regarding any alleged infringement of the EC Treaty is prepared by the Directorate-General concerned in coordination with the other Directorates-General involved, and the Legal Service gives an opinion on it.

If the complaint is considered well-founded, the procedure then depends on the perpetrator: if it is a Member State, the full Commission can take the decision to initiate proceedings under Article 226 (former Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

The Legal Service opinion is not published, and the code of conduct relating to public access to Commission documents does not give access to this type of document (Order of the President of the Court of First Instance in Case T-610/97/R Carlsen [1998] ECR II- 485).
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1978/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(19 June 2000)

Subject: EU sanctions and Austria

Austria, a landlocked country in southern central Europe, is one of Europe's core countries by virtue of the fact that it includes part of the eastern Alps and of the Danube region as well as through its proximity to the Mediterranean. Because of its geopolitical situation it has always been at the crossroads of major European cultural and economic areas. From the time of the border marchland and the rule of the Babenbergs through the 600-year reign of the Habsburgs until the present-day republic, Austria has continually been at the centre of European intellectual and cultural history and has helped shape Europe decisively. The Austrian economy has intensive links with the EU, stronger than, for example, Sweden, Finland or Switzerland. It is hardly surprising therefore that a large majority of the electorate voted in a referendum on 12 June 1994 for accession to the Community.

Austria and its people have not deserved to be excluded either from bilateral relations as the superficial argument goes or from European affairs as is the case de facto.

This being so, when will the Council give thought to Austria's significant services to the cause of Europe and call a halt to the pointless policy of sanctions?

Reply

(10 October 2000)

The Council has not adopted a position on this matter and is, therefore, unable to reply to the Honourable Member's question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2150/00

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) and Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 2000)

Subject: Possible closure of the British Council school in Alicante, Spain

The British Council school in Alicante, which has 170 pupils, provides teaching in accordance with both Spanish and British legislation ((LOGSE and the National Curriculum respectively). The British Council recently announced that it intended to close the school, citing faults in the construction of new buildings to which the school had intended to relocate, and stating that the deadlines for completion of the new buildings had not been met. Although the British Council had complained on previous occasions about the construction of the new facilities, all problems had until now been overcome, until this most recent statement when, by means of a letter to parents, the British Council announced that the school would be closed and pre-registration fees reimbursed.

The parents' association of the school questions the arguments used, and in view of fact that the British Council has made no attempt to seek alternatives or solutions, has decided to exercise its right to petition the European institutions.

Whereas, in accordance with the EC Treaty:

- Article 3(1) provides for various Community measures and policies aimed at achieving the objectives of the Community,

- Article 3(1)(q) expressly states that this action shall include a contribution to education and training of quality and to the flowering of the cultures of the Member States,

- Article 149 encourages the Member States to cooperate in order to contribute to the development of quality education, mldr and given the Commission's role as guardian of the Treaties.

What measures does the Commission intend to take to guarantee freedom of choice in education in the specific case of the British Council school in Alicante?

Does the Commission agree there is a need for a directive to set out criteria governing the establishment of schools attached to educational organisations in other Community Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2000)

The Commission would remind the Honourable Members that the organisation of education systems, including types of schools and the content of teaching, is the responsibility of the Member States. As provided in Article 149 (ex-Article 126) of the EC Treaty, the Community shall contribute to the development of quality education by encouraging cooperation between Member States (mldr) while fully respecting the responsibility of the Member States for the content of teaching and the organisation of education systems (mldr).

In the case mentioned by the Honourable Members, it is not within the Commission's competence to intervene.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1853/00

by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 June 2000)

Subject: Funds for Turkey

What proportion of the total funds earmarked for Turkey under the MEDA programme and the European strategy for Turkey has been spent in sectors such as education, health, the environment, promotion of civil society, human rights and protection of minorities in the south-east (Kurdish) region of Turkey?

What checks are carried out in order to ensure that the money is in fact spent on the identified projects and is the Commission satisfied by the degree of local consultation with the Kurdish people in connection with framing and implementation of the projects?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(7 July 2000)

Within the framework of the MEDA I programme (1996-1999), the Commission has committed a total of 376 million for Turkey. The Commission's policy is to focus its interventions on the most disadvantaged groups in society, such as women, children and minorities. Thus, a substantial proportion of the sums committed to Turkey have been allocated to projects which are gender-centric (for example, funding family-planning centres) and which are implemented in those regions which suffer from the greatest development deficit, such as the south-east (for example, a project to support basic education in the south-eastern provinces).

The projects the Commission supports are designed to benefit the entire population of Turkey. However, it is only natural that projects which focus on the south-east of the country and on the poorest sections of Turkish society are likely to have most impact on Kurdish communities (which tend to be poorer and are principally to be found in these areas). A large part of the funds committed to date are destined for projects of this kind.

The Commission would also like to point out that in 1997 it had hoped to fund a rural development project in south-east Turkey, but Parliament issued a negative opinion on the proposal.

The priority accorded to the most disadvantaged groups (women, children and minorities) has been reaffirmed in the financial aid programme for Turkey for the period 2000-2002, both in the context of the MEDA II programme, and in the European Strategy regulations.

Project proposals are identified in the field, and care is taken to consult with all concerned persons and organisations, as well as with civil society. The preparation and administration of the projects are monitored on a daily basis by the Commission and its representation in Ankara, so as to ensure that the terms of reference are respected, with regard both to objectives and to target populations. An independent audit is carried out whenever a project is completed.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1837/00

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(31 May 2000)

Subject: Construction of an underground railway in Brescia, Italy

In reply to my Question No E-2176/99(1) concerning the underground railway in Brescia, the Commission confirmed the view that, in accordance with Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 on environmental impact assessments (EIAS)(2), the project should be screened with a view to establishing whether the it should be made subject to an EIA procedure. As far as we know, such screening, which is provided for in Article 10 of the Presidential Decree of 12 April 1996, has not been carried out. In the meantime, an invitation to tender for the public works involved has been issued by the Brescia Municipal Services Agency, and the deadline for submission of tenders is 31 May 2000. That invitation to tender, which was published in Official Journal(3), lays down no conditions or requirements for an environmental impact assessment. On 31 March 2000, a memorandum of understanding was concluded between the Lombardy Regional Council and the Brescia Provincial and Municipal Councils, under which the Regional Council undertook to contribute ITL 165 billion towards the project. This means that the Lombardy Regional Council, which is itself responsible for ensuring that the project is screened for EIA purposes, has in fact agreed to finance part of the project before such screening has been performed.

How does the Commission intend to ensure that the necessary screening of the Brescia underground railway project is actually performed?

How is it possible for an invitation to tender for the performance of work on a project which the Commission itself has stated must be the subject of EIA screening to be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities without such screening ever having been performed?

(1) OJ C 280 E, 3.10.2000, p. 15.

(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

(3) OJ S 78, 20.4.2000.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2000)

The Italian authorities have communicated that the development consent to the project mentioned by the Honourable Member will be given only after the procedura di verifica di assoggettabilità a Valutazione di Impatto Ambientale (screening) is carried out, under DPR 12 aprile 1996 Atto di indirizzo e coordinamento per l'attuazione dell'articolo 40 comma 1 della legge 22 febbraio 1994, n. 146, concernente disposizioni in materia di valutazione di impatto ambientale, national legislation transposing Annex II of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects

on the environment(1) and under legge regionale 7 dicembre 1999, No 472, legislation of Regione Lombardia implementing DPR 12 aprile 1996. The authorities of Regione Lombardia have already communicated to the Municipality of Brescia that the project is to be the subject of a screening procedure, in order to assess whether an environmental impact assessment procedure is necessary.

In the light of the above, no breach of Community law can be identified at present.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2225/00

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Application of Article 299 (ex Article 227) of the EC Treaty

In its answer to oral question H-0413/00(1) by Carlos Costa Neves, the Commission announced that it had adopted the report setting out the measures it intended to use to implement new Article 299 (2) of the Treaty and that the first proposals would be submitted before or shortly after the summer break.

Will the Commission say whether the regions of Sicily and Sardinia will be included in these proposals?

(1) Written answer 16 May 2000.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2000)

The regions of Sicily and Sardinia will not be affected by the proposals to which the Honourable Member refers, which will apply only to remote regions of the Community as defined in Article 299(2) (formerly Article 227) of the EC Treaty: the French overseas departments, the Canary Islands, the Azores and Madeira.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1695/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Legal aid to sue Paul van Buitenen

Has the Commission, or has the Commission not, offered free legal aid (with a possible view to suing) to EU staff who feel that they have been slandered or discredited by Paul van Buitenen in his book?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2000)

Under Article 24 Staff Regulations, the Communities shall assist any official, in particular in proceedings against any person perpetrating threats, insulting or defamatory acts or utterances, (mldr) by reason of his position or duties.

Based on this provision, the Commission can after due consideration be obliged to offer assistance to members of Community staff who have been slandered or discredited. The assistance granted can consist of the reimbursement of the legal fees due to a lawyer for suing the author of the defamation.

In relation to Mr. van Buitenen's book, assistance under Article 24 has, to date, been requested only once. It was granted after consideration of the fact that a pseudonym used in the book was identical to the name of an official. In this case, Mr van Buitenen officially presented his apologies to the official concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1975/00

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(21 June 2000)

Subject: The milk industry in Galicia

Has the Commission reached any agreement with the Galician Government to develop the industrial milk sector in Galicia, given that at present only 14 % of Galician milk production is processed, despite the fact that accounts for 35 % of all Spanish milk production and given that existing Galician companies are being steadily taken over by foreign companies, as in the recent instance of the purchase of Leite Celta by the US firm Suiza Foods?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1975/00 and E-1977/00 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 2000)

The common organisation of the market in milk and milk products contains no provision for any kind of agreement with regional authorities in the Member States to develop local dairy industries.

However, the forthcoming operational programme for regional development in Galicia will include, in the section on agriculture and rural development, possible measures to support and strengthen the structure of the milk and cattle sector and its downstream industries (dairy and meat enterprises).