ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0381/03

by Wilhelm Piecyk (PSE) to the Commission

(13 February 2003)

Subject: Enforcement of Directive on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues

The European Parliament and Council Directive on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues came into force with its publication in the Official Journal on 28 December 2000. The aim of this Directive is to reduce sea pollution caused by ship-generated waste and cargo residues through the development of availability and use of reception facilities throughout the Community.

In Article 16 of the Directive, Member States were given a period of two years in which to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to implement the Directive. This period came to an end on 28 December 2002.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. In which Member States of the Community have the laws, regulations and administrative provisions already been brought into force and adequate port reception facilities provided?

2. What action has the Commission taken, or will the Commission take, to ensure that the Directive is incorporated into the national law of all Member States as swiftly as possible?

Answer given by Ms de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(20 March 2003)

On the deadline for transposition, the Directive had been transposed into German and Greek law. The Commission therefore sent a letter of formal notice to all the other Member States, in accordance with Article 226 of the EC Treaty.

By 26 February 2003, the Commission had been informed that Denmark, Spain and Luxembourg had also transposed Directive 2000/59/EC(1).

On the basis of this information, the Commission is planning to initiate infringement proceedings against Belgium, France, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom for failure to notify national implementing measures.

(1) Directive 2000/59/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2000 on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues OJ L 332, 28.12.2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1127/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the action programme for migrant workers by the municipality of Carrara

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Carrara, urgently need to use European funds to support migrant workers, including those from outside the Community, in order to guarantee them the best conditions in which to live and integrate with the local community, in terms of both work and social conditions,

Can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Carrara has submitted projects for the action programme for migrant workers?

2. whether the municipality of Carrara has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-0828/03, E-0894/03, E-1126/03,E-1127/03, E-1128/03, E-1129/03, E-1130/03, E-1131/03, E-1132/03,E-1133/03, E-1134/03, E-1135/03, E-1136/03, E-1137/03 and E-1138/03given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

There is currently no Action Programme for Migrant Workers at Community level. The Commission recalls that funding for measures to promote the integration of migrant workers, under Budget Line B3-4110, was suspended in 1998 following the judgement of the European Court of Justice in Case C-106/96. No funding has been awarded in this field since that date.

A new programme to promote the integration of third country nationals, under Budget line B5-815, will be launched by the Commission (Directorate General Justice and Home Affairs) in May 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1147/03

by Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission

(24 March 2003)

Subject: V.I.L.A. srl

With reference to access by the V.I.L.A. srl company to EU funding administered by Campania Region in accordance with its Objective 1 status, to be used in connection with the Casalgian programme financed by the Employment Ministry under Article 1b of Italian Law 236/93, the Commission, which was questioned on the matter on 25 September 2002, issued a reply (P-2772/02(1)) on 21 October 2002.

With reference to that reply the following two points should be made:

- On 24 February 2003 Mr Renato Paravia was acquitted at Salerno Law Court pursuant to Article 530 of the penal code, since there was no case to answer.

- Contrary to what is stated by the Commission, the Community co-funding provided under the 2000-2006 ROP is drawn from the ERDF, not the ESF.

Will the Commission this time answer the following questions:

1. Did V.I.L.A. srl, by taking part in two invitations to tender issued by the Employment Ministry, comply with the open and public procedure stipulated by the Commission as a prerequisite for access to Community funds under the ROP?

2. Is Campania Region obliged to grant the relevant co-funding in accordance with the ROP managerial role assigned to the provinces, which have undertaken to grant V.I.L.A. access to Community funding under the 2000-2006 ROP in its capacity as a beneficiary and an executor of the Casalgian programme?

3. Will both the Campania ROP and the PC consider the possibility of a derogation from the open and public procedure, should the beneficiary/executor be selected at national level (see, for example, measure 2(1)(3), which allows an exception in cases in which the body selected constitutes, in law or under some other provision, the executor of a national or regional strategy in a given area)?

(1) OJ C 52 E, 6.3.2003, p. 213.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2003)

The Honourable Member is asking the Commission to comment on a specific case, namely access of the company VILA srl to European funding administered by Campania Region under Objective 1 Italy.

The Commission, which was already asked about this on 25 September 2002, can only remind the Honourable Member of its reply of 21 October 2002 (P-2772/02 by Mr Pitella) on the general principles governing the Structural Funds, and point out that the managing authority responsible for this is Campania Region, Assessorato alla formazione professionale, via S. Lucia 81, Naples, Tel. 0817966303.

The managing authority is also responsible for ensuring compliance with the open and public procedure for access to Community funding under the ROP.

In general, Campania Region cannot be obliged to provide cofinancing on the basis of a decision taken by a province. However, it is not up to the Commission to decide whether Campania Region was obliged to provide this cofinancing.

Finally, the Commission would remind the Honourable Member that European Directives on public procurement also apply to regional operational programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1305/03

by Jan Dhaene (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 April 2003)

Subject: Registration of cars to inflate sales figures

We are hearing reports from the automobile sector of the following practice: quotas of cars are registered temporarily in one of the Member States. They are then sold on within the EU, without actually been put on the road, and then temporarily registered in another Member State.

This practice creates two major problems:

- the consumer is given misleading information in car registration ranking lists. Car manufacturers or dealers can artificially inflate the registration figures so that their cars appear at the top of the lists.

- statistics (on replacement or greening of the vehicle fleet) are systematically distorted.

In my view, this practice clearly goes beyond national interests and requires a European response.

Can the Commission therefore say:

- whether it is aware of practices of this kind?

- whether it intends to introduce measures to prevent or eliminate these practices?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(2 June 2003)

The Commission has no knowledge of the practices described by the Honourable Member.

It is not possible to conclude from the information provided by the Honourable Member that these practices are contrary to the Community law currently in force. In specific cases, it is up to the national authorities to initiate proceedings regarding the infringement of directive 84/450/EEC(1) if the consumer is misled. In order to determine whether there is an infringement, the Court issued the necessary guidelines in its judgment in Case C-373/90; Criminal proceedings against X (1992). At this stage, the Commission does not intend to introduce measures to prevent or eliminate these practices.

The Commission will, nevertheless, carefully monitor developments in this field.

(1) Council Directive 84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising, OJ L 250, 19.9.1984.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0837/03

by Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 March 2003)

Subject: Israeli authorities' refusal to grant parole to Mordechai Vanunu

Mordechai Vanunu has been in jail in Israel since 1986 for divulging details of his country's nuclear programme in 1986. There had been signs that Vanunu, who spent more than 11 years in solitary confinement, might be granted his freedom in recognition of the harsh treatment that he has suffered. However, in February a parole board decided that Vanunu will not be granted an early release, on the grounds that he could still cause grave damage by divulging what he knows.

This is a highly tenuous argument, especially as more recent disclosures about Israel's nuclear programme have prompted no official complaint. More importantly, the behaviour of the Israeli authorities with regard to the abduction, the conduct of the judicial procedure, and the conditions in which Mordechai Vanunu is being detained have been unacceptable. Vanunu should be released immediately.

Moreover, given current concern about weapons of mass destruction and the need for non-proliferation, there are particularly strong grounds for his release.

In this light, does the Commission intend to take any action with regard to Vanunu's case?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2003)

The Commission is aware of the conditions in which Mordechai Vanunu has been held since his conviction, and would certainly be glad to see them normalised and would welcome his early release. It shares the view that, in terms of the original purpose of the measure, which was to prevent

Mr Vanunu from publishing sensitive information relating Israeli security these are no longer grounds for him to be kept in isolation. The Community regularly raises the issue of human rights in Israel in its dealings with the Israeli authorities, as well as at official Association Committee and Association Council meetings. The Commission has followed Mr Vanunu's case particularly closely, and will continue to do so, in particular through its Delegation in Tel Aviv.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/03

by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE), Bert Doorn (PPE-DE)and Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(27 February 2003)

Subject: Government aid for the Laarbruch airfield

A civilian airport is currently being developed at the former (German) military airfield in Laarbruch. A private company, Flughafen Niederrhein GmbH, purchased the complex (with an area of 615 ha) from the German Vermögensverwaltung (Public assets management agency) at a cost of EUR 11,5 million. Flughafen Niederrhein GmbH simultaneously sold the complex on for the same price to the Van de Lande group. The airfield is now called Airport Niederrhein (Lower Rhine Airport). Of the EUR 11,5 million, EUR 3,83 million has already been paid and another EUR 3,83 million will be paid at the end of 2003. The remaining EUR 3,83 million only needs to be paid

if the airport has not created 350 jobs by the end of 2007. There was no public invitation to tender for the sale of the site, even though gravel extraction firms were prepared to pay 3 times as much. The German Land of North Rhine-Westphalia is expected to have to provide an annual amount of EUR 3,83 million to cover costs including public utilities for the civilian airport.

This raises the following questions:

1. Was this project notified, or did an investigation take place, in connection with the European regulations on government aid?

2. If such an investigation did take place, what were its conclusions?

3. If no such investigation took place, does the Commission now propose to carry one out at short notice?

4. What measures will the Commission take if an investigation shows or has shown that this case involves government aid which is not covered by the European regulations in this area?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 2003)

1. and 2. The Commission can herewith inform the Honourable Members that the Commission has not received any notification with regard to the development of Laarbrucher Airport and that no investigation has been carried out by the Commission in connection herewith.

3. and 4. According to the Commission Communication on State aid elements in sales of land and buildings by public authorities(1), no state aid issues arises were the public assets have been sold at a market value. Although the information provided by the Honourable Members does not, a priori, indicate that the airport was sold below market price or on non-commercial terms it cannot, in the absence of a tendering procedure, be excluded that this has been the case. Therefore, the Commission will request information from the competent Member State in order to assess whether or not the sale of the airport has been carried out under market conditions.

In case this inquiry would indicate that State aid elements may be present, the Commission will initiate the procedures foreseen under Article 88 of the EC Treaty and Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 (new Article 88) of the EC Treaty(2).

(1) OJ C 209, 10.7.1997.

(2) OJ L 83, 27.3.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1119/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) by the municipality of Carrara

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Carrara, urgently need to use European funds to regenerate areas in industrial decline and to reduce imbalances in social and economic development, can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Carrara has submitted projects for the ERDF?

2. whether the municipality of Carrara has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1119/03, E-1120/03,E-1121/03, E-1122/03, E-1123/03 and E-1124/03given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 2003)

The municipalities of Massa, Carrara, Livorno, Pisa, Pistoia and Florence are all partly eligible for assistance from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) under the Tuscany SPD (single programming document) for 2000-2006.

The Tuscany SPD has been approved by Commission decision(1) and provides for ERDF financing of EUR 322,5 million for total public expenditure of EUR 804,9 million.

Since the Tuscany SPD is a programme with decentralised management, the authority responsible for carrying out operations is the Tuscany region which has laid down project selection criteria in the programming supplement and is responsible for appraising applications. The Honourable Member could therefore appropriately ask that authority for detailed information on the projects presented and financed for the municipalities of Massa, Carrara, Livorno, Pisa, Pistoia and Florence.

(1) C(2001) 2725, 27.9.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1371/03

by Ursula Schleicher (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 April 2003)

Subject: Introduction of the European health insurance card from 1 July 2004

Some Member States have had the negative experience of the misuse of cards of this type. I know this to be the case at least in Germany, where it is estimated that illegal electronic chip cards have been used to defraud health insurance funds of around EUR 1 000 million (Bayernkurier, 13 March 2003).

What precautions has the Commission taken to protect the European health insurance card from forgery and to prevent its abuse when used in another Member State?

Answer given by Ms Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2003)

On 20 March 2003 the Brussels European Council asked for the European card to be introduced by the summer of 2004. Initially, this card will replace the E111 form (certificate of rights to health care during a tourist visit to another Member State). Given the diversity of national situations concerning the use of health insurance cards, a single model will be used whose format will make it possible to read with the naked eye the essential data for the provision of care and for reimbursement between institutions.

This standardisation should help to avoid the common errors with the current forms and to make it possible for the authorities of the states issuing the card and of the states of temporary residence to prevent improper, unlawful or fraudulent use of the card. In particular, the logical number mentioned on the card will make it possible to check that the information on the card and the information in the possession of the competent health care institution for the same number tallies. Above all, these measures will make it possible to prepare the final phase, namely the transition to an electronic European card, which will provide greater protection against fraud. Effective cooperation between Member States, and especially between the competent institutions, should thus make it possible to reduce the risk of fraud or unlawful use.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0274/03

by Carlos Coelho (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 January 2003)

Subject: Daphne programme

The AMCV (Association of Women Against Violence) is one of Portugal's best recognised and most active NGOs in the field of violence against women and children, in particular domestic violence, rape and sexual abuse. Over a ten-year period the AMCV has provided support for approximately 4 000 women with an average of two or three children apiece.

Under the Daphne initiative the AMCV submitted a project in partnership with countries such as Spain, Italy, Ireland and Denmark. The project was ultimately rejected.

For what reasons and on what grounds was the project rejected, despite the fact that Portugal has been a Priority 1 country over the last few years and certainly has much work to do in the above areas? Given this state of affairs it is all the more curious that, according to an analysis of the project-distribution pattern for all 15 EU Member States, Portugal has had only one project approved in each of the last two years.

Since the Commission has reportedly drawn attention to what it alleges are shortcomings on the part of the organiser, would it provide an explanation regarding the basis for such a judgment?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2003)

Since 1997 the Daphne initiative and subsequently the Daphne programme have been victims of their own success, with over 1 600 proposals being submitted, of which only 13 % could be selected for financing, given the modest budget of EUR 5 million per year.

Fully aware of these limitations, and in view also of Parliament's favourable resolution on the Daphne programme (A5-0233/2002), the Commission has just approved a draft decision on a second programme (Daphné II) for the period 2004-2008, with a higher budget, designed to continue the work in progress.

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that eight projects with a Portuguese coordinator have been financed since 1997, which gives Portuguese proposals a success rate of 22 % (by comparison with the average of 13 %). Over the same period, more than 50 Portuguese associations and local authorities have participated in some 25 Daphne projects.

On 18 October 2002 the Commission gave the Associaçao de Mulheres contra a violencia (AMCV) detailed reasons for the rejection of the project to which the Honourable Member refers. These did not allege that the AMCV was incompetent in any way. Quite the reverse, the skills of the AMCV have been recognised as demonstrated by its participation in six other Daphne projects and in a large-scale, two-year project selected in 2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1066/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(31 March 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the Leonardo da Vinci programme by the municipality of Macerata

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Macerata, urgently need to use European funds to enhance quality, promote innovation and support the European dimension of vocational training systems and practices, can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Macerata has submitted projects for the Leonardo da Vinci programme?

2. whether the municipality of Macerata has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-0833/03, E-0890/03, E-1062/03, E-1063/03,E-1064/03, E-1065/03, E-1066/03, E-1067/03, E-1068/03, E-1069/03,E-1070/03, E-1071/03, E-1072/03, E-1073/03 and E-1074/03given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2003)

Some of the funds awarded under the Leonardo da Vinci programme are managed decentrally by national agencies, in particular the transnational mobility projects, whose total budget takes up almost 40 % of the total for the programme.

For these projects, please contact the national agency in Italy for further information:

ISFOLVia G.B. Morgagni 30/eI-00161 Romatel. (+39-06)44.59.01fax (+39-06)44.59.04.75.

With regard to the funds managed centrally by the Commission (pilot projects, thematic actions, language skills, transnational networks, reference tools), the search check for the municipalities of Frosinone, Fiumincino, Ancona, Carrara, Florence, Livorno, Macerata, Massa, Perugia, Pesaro, Pisa, Pistoia, Prato, Siena and Terni showed that:

- only Pesaro has submitted a proposal for a pilot project under the Leonardo programme. This project is entitled: Laboratori Tematici Virtuali: Metodologia di Supporto alla Formazione Nel Sel (Sistema Economico Locale) (virtual thematic workshops: methodology for fostering training in local economies);

- it obtained funding of EUR 264 161 for this project, which began at the end of 2002.

The Honourable Member could contact the local authorities mentioned above for more information.