ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/600

(2004/C 78 E/0634)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3587/03

by Koenraad Dillen (NI) to the Commission

(5 December 2003)

Subject: Report on anti-Semitism by the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

The Financial Times and other European newspapers this week reported that the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, based in Vienna, has decided not to publish a recent report on anti-Semitism. The European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia is made up of representatives of Member States, the Council of Europe, the Commission and the European Parliament. The 112-page report in question was compiled by Berlin Technical University at the request of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia. The newspapers state that, according to the report, there has been a sharp increase in anti-Semitic statements made and crimes committed by immigrants. For reasons of ‘political correctness’, it was therefore decided not to make the report public.

Are these newspaper reports accurate?

Was the Commission aware of the decision not to publish this report? Can the Commission state how much this research cost?

By whom and on the basis of what discussions was it decided not to publish this report? On the basis of what arguments was it decided to invalidate the scientific research of Berlin Technical University in this way?

On the basis of what subsidies is the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia financed? What are the sums involved? How many members of staff are employed at the Centre? What is the composition of its Management Board? To what extent is this Centre sponsored by the Commission?

Can this report still be made available to MEPs?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/67

(2004/C 88 E/0073)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2104/03

by Bob van den Bos (ELDR) to the Commission

(18 June 2003)

Subject: Burmese Rohingya refugees

In addition to the approximately 22 000 Rohingya refugees currently accommodated at the two official refugee camps in Bangladesh, a further 4 000 illegal refugees are residing at the new, unrecognised Teknaf Makeshift Camp, which will shortly be in danger of flooding as the monsoon season begins.

Is the Commission aware of the situation of the Rohingya refugees at Teknaf Makeshift Camp?

Has the Commission contacted the Government of Bangladesh to offer assistance (e.g. emergency aid) to the Rohingyas? If not, will it do so?

Has the Commission had any contact with the UNHCR about the situation of these refugees and ways of helping them?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/58

(2004/C 88 E/0063)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2022/03

by Lennart Sacrédeus (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Subject: Arrest of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi

Burma's leading advocate of human rights and democracy, the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi, was detained on 30 May 2003 near Monywa in Burma. The country's military junta says that Aung San Suu Kyi and 19 other members of her National League for Democracy Party (NLD) have been placed in ‘protective custody’ following clashes between her supporters and pro-government demonstrators in northern Burma.

More than 100 students, NLD supporters and Buddhist monks were arrested in the early hours of 31 May 2003; a number of members of parliament were also detained. Seven high-ranking NLD officials were placed under house arrest and more than 50 local branches of the NLD party were forced to shut down. The arrests are viewed as the biggest defeat for democracy in Burma for many years.

What real pressure has the Commission and the EU exerted to persuade the junta in Burma immediately to release the Nobel Peace Prize laureate Aung San Suu Kyi and the other detainees, including the members of parliament? How can the EU lend force to the demands that the military junta should break the spiral of violence and pave the way for a speedy transition to democracy?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(7 July 2003)

The Commission and Member States have repeatedly called for the immediate release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi and the arrested NLD officials and supporters, the reopening of NLD offices throughout the country as well as the reopening of all universities in Burma/Myanmar.

On 16 June 2003 the Union also decided to implement without delay the strengthened sanctions which are specifically targeted on the military leaders and their supporters. Originally there were envisaged to enter into force on or before 29 October 2003 as agreed in the Common Position on Burma/Myanmar (2003/297/CFSP) of 28 April 2003 (1).

In addition, the Union has intensified discussions on the situation in Burma/Myanmar with its dialogue partners in Asia in order to encourage them to use their influence on the Burmese Government to release Aung San Suu Kyi and support progress on the issues of good governance, and economic reform. On 17 June 2003, the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) has launched an unprecedented call to Burma/Myanmar for ‘a peaceful transition to democracy’.

It is encouraging to see the strong international reaction to the detention of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, and the Commission sincerely hopes that this consolidated pressure will influence the Burmese Government to release her and all her supporters and finally show some signs of willingness to work towards national reconciliation and a return to democracy.

(1) OJ L 106, 29.4.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/211

(2004/C 78 E/0216)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3044/03

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 October 2003)

Subject: Τ Pods

Is the Commission aware of Τ Pods and does it plan to make Τ Pods mandatory?

Τ Pods are self-contained submersible computer and hydrophone units that recognise and log echo-location clicks from porpoises and dolphins and are manufactured in the UK.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 2003)

Under the ‘Habitats’ Directive (1), the Member States must undertake surveillance of the conservation status of species of wild fauna of Community interest and take the requisite measures.

The Commission is paying very close attention to the research and data recording equipment used at sea (T Pods) mentioned by the Honourable Member, and all other technologies which help improve knowledge of the natural marine environment.

However, the Commission does not believe it is necessary to interfere in the choice of methods or technologies used for obtaining the data required for the surveillance activities of the Member States.

Consequently, the Commission does not plan to make the use of Τ Pods mandatory.

(1) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/312

(2004/C 88 E/0317)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0046/03

by Pasqualina Napoletano (PSE) and Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission

(21 January 2003)

Subject: Crisis in Venezuela

Venezuela is being torn apart by a dramatic political and social crisis, which includes both organised violence on the part of the most radical groups close to the government of President Chavez and acts on the part of extremist opposition groups which are little short of a coup d'état. The situation is a real threat to democracy and freedom in a country where a very large section of the population is of European origin (including a large community of Italian origin).

What steps have already been taken (and with what results) and what further action is planned to ensure that the European Union can help to enhance the role of the international community and institutions, which is of decisive importance for the purposes of overcoming the crisis in the context of political negotiation and respect for democracy and the Constitution?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(13 February 2003)

On the current crisis in Venezuela, the Union has issued three declarations in 2002, after the April coup, on 9 October and on 23 December. In them, the Union expressed its full support for the Organisation of American States (OAS) efforts to facilitate a national dialogue between the Government of Venezuela and the Coordinadora Democrática (organised opposition) as well as other relevant sectors of society. These declarations, as others issued by other countries, regions and international institutions, have probably had a positive impact in that they encouraged the Venezuelan population to abstain from violence, and made it clear to the most radical elements in the opposition that the international community would not tolerate any non-democratic or non-constitutional solutions.

The OAS efforts have, however, as yet not produced any concrete results in resolving the political crisis. The parties in conflict appear to be unable to engage in a constructive dialogue to solve the situation. A new initiative to help address the conflict, the creation of a ‘Group of Friends’, was launched in Quito on 15 January 2003. Two Member States are part of the group, Spain and Portugal, whose creation the Union welcomed in a Declaration of 21 January 2003. The Group of Friends will work in support of the OAS efforts.

Furthermore, the Commission has approved a project of financial assistance to the OAS in its efforts to implement possible agreements reached between the parties of the OAS mediated dialogue. In addition to facilitating the ongoing dialogue, it has three main components: support for free and fair elections; investigation of the events of April 2002 (failed coup); and disarming the civilian population.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/75

(2004/C 88 E/0082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2244/03

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 July 2003)

Subject: Wild birds directive in Malta

Beyond the transition agreement for the trapping of finches, is the Commission satisfied that Malta will be able to comply with the Wild Birds Directive 79/409/EEC (1) from the date of its accession to the EU? If the Commission is not satisfied that Malta will be able to comply, what action does it intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(4 August 2003)

The Commission will continue to monitor legislative progress made by Malta and other Acceding Countries till 1 May 2004. This analysis will be reflected in the comprehensive monitoring report that will be published in November 2003.

When Malta becomes a member of the Union, the Commission will verify that Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds has been correctly transposed as it does for all Member States. Should Malta not comply with the Directive then the Commission will consider the action to be taken on the basis of the EC Treaty provisions.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/912

(2004/C 78 E/0964)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4087/03

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 January 2004)

Subject: Data Protection Supervisor

When will the Commission appoint a Data Protection Supervisor, when will he/she take office, and when will the Commission expect this person to provide an independent assessment regarding the release of information relevant to the dispute between the Commission, the European Ombudsman and Parliament in the matter of the Bavarian Lager Company?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2004)

In accordance with Article 42 of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 (1), the Parliament and the Council appoint by common accord the European Data Protection Supervisor and the Assistant Supervisor. That appointment took place on 22 December 2003 (2), and as a result, Mr Peter Hustinx and Mr Joaquím Bayo Delgado have been nominated repectively as European Data Protection Supervisor and Assistant Supervisor. They have taken office in early February 2004.

According to Article 41 of the above-mentioned Regulation, the European Data Protection Supervisor is a fully independent supervisory authority. It is, therefore, not for the Commission to determine which activities that authority should conduct or the timeframe to address them.

(1) Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data, OJ L 8, 12.1.2001.

(2) Decision 2004/55/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 December 2003 appointing the independent supervisory body provided for in Article 286 of the EC Treaty (European Data Protection Supervisor), OJ L 12, 17.1.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/696

(2004/C 78 E/0744)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0118/03

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

(28 January 2003)

Subject: Delineation of the European Union's final borders

The signature of the Accession Treaty in Athens on 16 April 2003 will definitively open the way for ten new countries to join the European Union on 1 May 2004, once that Treaty has been ratified by the current Member States and by the ten new Member States.

Many analysts believe that we should take the opportunity provided by this enlargement to definitively establish what the final borders of the European Union should be, because the EU cannot go on expanding for ever.

Does the Commission not feel that in order to lay the bases for discussions on this subject it should sponsor an in-depth study by a select group of eminent figures and scholars in this field on where the European Union's borders should end, based on Europe's conception of its own culture and civilisation, which are the unequivocal identifying signs of a common and identical geographical background?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2003)

As the Honourable Member is aware, ‘Any European State that respects the principles set out in Article 6(1) of the Treaty on the European Union may apply to become a member of the Union’ in accordance with Article 49 of the Treaty on the European Union. The principles set out in Article 6 of the Treaty are the following: ‘liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law, principles which are common to the Member States.’

After the accession of 10 new members in 2004, the Union has taken the commitment to support Bulgaria and Romania in their efforts to become members in 2007. In March 2002, the Commission plans to propose revised Accession Partnerships for these two countries, as well as for Turkey, ‘a candidate state destined to join the Union on the basis of the same criteria as applied to the other candidate states’ as specified by the Copenhagen European Council in December 2002.

The Copenhagen European Council declared that the Union remains determined to avoid the creation of new dividing lines in Europe and to promote stability and prosperity within and beyond the new borders of the Union.

The European Council reaffirmed the European perspective of the countries of the Western Balkans in the Stabilisation and Association Process as stipulated by the European Council in Feira (19/20 June 2000).

With regard to relations between the enlarged Union and its neighbours, the European Council stated that enlargement will strengthen relations with Russia, and expressed the wish that relations with Ukraine, Moldova, Belarus and the southern Mediterranean countries be enhanced, based on a long-term approach promoting democratic and economic reforms, sustainable developments and trade.

The Commission will soon bring forward proposals to that end.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/105

(2004/C 78 E/0105)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2348/03

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

(16 July 2003)

Subject: Measures to be taken in response to evidence that oil from the ‘Prestige’ is continuing to reach the coasts of Galicia and the Bay of Biscay

It is now July, eight months after the ‘Prestige’ disaster, and oil from the ‘Prestige’ is continuing to reach the coasts of Galicia and the Bay of Biscay. This is undermining confidence among people living in the areas affected, who can see that the forecasts made by the authorities responsible are systematically failing to match reality. What measures is the Commission taking, in conjunction with the authorities of the Spanish State and Galician Government, in order to assess the scale of this problem and prevent it from recurring?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 September 2003)

The Honourable Member is invited to refer to the answers given to his previous Written Questions E-3595/02 (1), E-1259/03 (2) and E-2059/03 (3), and to his oral question H-69/03 during question time at Parliament's March 2003 session (4).

(1) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 63.

(2) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 121.

(3) See page 73.

(4) Written reply, 12.3.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/639

(2004/C 78 E/0674)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3751/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the 2000 City Twinning Programme by the municipality of Terni

In its answer to question E-1029/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Terni had submitted projects and secured funding under the 2000 City Twinning Programme, the Commission stated that no funding had been granted for the year 2000.

Can the Commission say whether the municipality has submitted any projects and obtained and used any funding in the budget years since then?

(1) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 208.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/734

(2004/C 84 E/0827)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3325/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 November 2003)

Subject: Community expenditure

Will the Commission state what the total Community expenditure, throughout the EU, has been each year for the last five years?

Will the Commission set out in a table the total public expenditure for each EU Member State for every year for the last five years?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2004)

1. The total outturn of Community payments including payments for ECSC, Euratom and the European Development Fund (EDF) is as follows: (million euros) Year Amount 1998 82 502,6 1999 84 951,6 2000 82 132,1 2001 82 562,3 2002 89 886,2 This data is drawn from Table 6 of the 2002 Financial Report (pp. 132-133 in the English version) and apply only to the outturn of payments, which normally is of special interest for the Member States. The said report was circulated among the members of the Budget Committee during the first week of August 2003.

2. The following table sets out total public expenditure of each Member State for every year for the last five years, according to national accounts figures officially communicated by the Member States to Eurostat. For the sake of comparison the outturn figures of the EU budget in payments have also been added. (million euros) MemberStates Total expenditure of general government — ESA 1995 (2) 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 BE 113 498 118 090 122 352 125 609 131 281 DK 88 741 91 459 94 050 97 890 101 989 DE 935 280 964 530 928 470 1 001 380 1 023 870 EL 52 101 56 085 61 357 62 582 66 266 ES 217 333 227 329 242 456 257 288 276 507 FR 698 788 725 799 747 982 775 817 814 435 IE 27 155 31 005 32 994 38 947 43 070 IT 533 571 541 648 546 939 591 793 599 804 LU 7 089 7 730 8 187 8 604 9 909 NL 166 014 175 554 182 228 200 033 211 162 AT 102 674 106 797 108 302 109 984 112 094 PT 44 283 48 906 52 196 57 015 59 572 FI 61 015 62 458 63 773 66 445 69 795 SE 134 482 142 295 149 381 139 920 149 349 UK 505 529 537 702 576 172 647 452 686 190 EUR-15 3 687 551 3 837 387 3 916 839 4 180 760 4 355 293 EU Budget (3) 80 713 80 310 83 331 79 987 85 144

(1) Figures in national currency have been converted into euro according to average annual exchange rates.

(2) European System of Accounts 1995.

(3) Outturn of payment appropriations of the year and of appropriations carried forward from the previous year.
1.

As appointing authority the Commission may, under the provisions of the Staff Regulations and operational rules, decide to reassign an official from a management position to a non-management function at any time, if it considers this to be in the interest of the service. Directors can therefore be reassigned to a function of ‘principal adviser’. The corresponding non-managerial function for Directors General and Deputy Directors General is ‘adviser hors classe’. ‘Special advisers’ are individuals who -on account of their expertise and qualifications- are given a contract as special adviser and are attached to one of the Commissioners. They can be outside experts or retired (high level) Commission officials, and in the latter case are only entitled to reimbursement of expenses. Special advisers to the Commission are not (or no longer) Commission officials and hence do not exercise managerial functions, nor do they appear in the organisation chart.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/364

(2004/C 88 E/0370)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1921/03

by Carlos Bautista Ojeda (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 June 2003)

Subject: Preserved mandarin segments from China

The enormous increase in imports of preserved mandarin segments from China has seriously upset the Community market, whose mandarin segment production is located almost exclusively in Spain and fell by 36 % between the 1998/1999 and 2001/2002 marketing years.

Bearing in mind the safeguard clause in Article 22 of Council Regulation (EC) 2201/96 (1) which states that if the Community market is seriously disturbed by imports the Commission shall, at the request of a Member State or on its own initiative, decide upon the necessary measures within three working days following receipt of the request.

Why has the Commission not adopted any measure, in view of the serious situation there has been since 5 June 2002, when the Spanish Government urgently requested implementation of such measures?

Why has the Commission not adopted any measures on its own initiative?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-1646/03, E-1920/03 and E-1921/03

given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(25 July 2003)

The Commission would like to take this opportunity to inform the Honourable Members that it has now received a fully documented request from the Spanish Government under Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 427/2003 of 3 March 2003 on a transitional product-specific safeguard mechanism for imports originating in the People's Republic of China and amending Regulation (EC) No 519/94 on common rules for imports from certain third countries (2).

The Commission recognises the urgency of this request, which it is already in the course of analysing, and a copy of the request has been sent to all Member States with a view to consultation.

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 29.

(2) OJ L 65, 8.3.2003.