ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1751/01

by Carlos Ripoll y Martínez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 June 2001)

Subject: Aid for dried fruit

Agriculture plays only a small part in economic activity on the island of Majorca. Nevertheless, agriculture is a key element in its social structure and in regional planning and environmental protection policy on the island.

Dried fruit accounts for the bulk of agricultural production in Majorca, and the reduction or abolition of European Union aid would therefore deal a heavy blow to social cohesion on the island, since virtually all farming activity would disappear and farms would be abandoned.

1. What is the Commission's policy on dried fruit?

2. Will aid policy for dried fruit be continued?

3. Will the Commission draw a distinction between possible types of aid in line with their social impact in the various areas?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 2001)

1. The policy of the Commission on nuts (almonds, hazelnuts, walnuts, pistachios and carobs) since 1989 has been to support the nut sector through specific and temporary measures. In this context, specific aid has been granted to the nut sector for 10 years under the provisions of Title IIa of Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of the Council of 18 May 1972 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables(1) (improvement plans). The aim of the measure has been essentially to improve productivity and competitiveness.

A temporary specific flat-rate aid for hazelnuts was granted between 1997 and 2000.

2. Community expenditure from 1990 to 2000 was over 800 million. Further expenditure of nearly 200 million is foreseen until 2006 for improvement plans still in operation. In addition to this, producer organisations whose improvement plans were approved in 1990 were able to request continued financing of their plans for up to one year.

However such specific aid was always intended to be temporary and digressive, in order to allow a shift of financial responsibility on to the growers. On this basis, the Commission considers that a prolongation of improvement plans to provide economic support for the sector is not the most appropriate method to address this issue. The issue of nuts therefore has to be looked at in a wider context.

As for all other products in the fruit and vegetable sector, aid is available for nuts through the operational fund scheme of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organization of the market in fruit and vegetables(2), which provides financial support for all fruit and vegetables marketed through producer organisations.

3. Finally, taking into account environmental and social aspects of nut production, Member States can of course include nuts in their rural development plans under the conditions of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations(3).

(1) OJ L 118, 20.5.1972.

(2) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.

(3) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1397/01

by Véronique Mathieu (EDD) to the Commission

(2 May 2001)

Subject: Assessment of damage caused by game in Europe

Does the Commission have statistics concerning the damage caused by species classified as game in the forestry and agricultural sectors, broken down by Member State of the Union?

If so, does the Commission intend to publish them?

If the Commission does not possess such data, does it intend to carry out a study on this subject?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 May 2001)

The Commission does not have any figures on the damage in the agricultural and forestry sectors caused by species classified as game.

No study in this field is planned at present.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1168/01

by Pere Esteve (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 April 2001)

Subject: Lack of air traffic controllers

European air traffic management and control is one of the major challenges which the EU has taken up. The move towards harmonising air traffic control means that proper training to cope with the new situation is required, given the significance of the human factor and the sheer importance of the work of air traffic controllers.

What is required is the introduction of a European air traffic controllers' diploma.

Furthermore, while current figures show that this highly specialised workforce is between 800 and 1 600 short of a total of 15 000, this situation is forecast to deteriorate in the immediate future due to the number of retirements coming up.

Given the new situation looming, what steps is the Commission going to take to deal with the lack of air traffic controllers and the need to update and provide suitable training?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(25 June 2001)

The situation described by the Honourable Member was discussed by the High Level Group on the creation of the Single European Sky as one of the strategic issues to be addressed at the European level as a matter of urgency. The Group's report is available at http://europa.eu.int/comm/transport/themes/air/english/single_eur_sky_en.html.

The Commission is currently preparing proposals to give effect to the report. These proposals will include measures to alleviate the shortage of air traffic controllers by stimulating training and mobility and to initiate the harmonisation of controller licences.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1362/01

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

(27 April 2001)

Subject: Human rights situation in Nigeria

Some states in northern Nigeria have adopted Islamic religious law (the Sharia). This has led to serious unrest and violence in which thousands of civilians died

last year. There is a real possibility of civil war and of unrest spreading to the whole continent. Nigeria's political leaders do not seem aware of the seriousness of the country's political situation when they try to entice international investments into the country. It seems that at present the EU is the only actor on the international scene strong enough to force Nigeria's political leaders to tackle this problem decisively, and seek a solution.

What does the EU intend to do to remedy the serious situation in Nigeria? Does the EU intend to take the situation in Nigeria in account in its policies on business investments and trade?

Reply

(20 July 2001)

The European Union maintains a close and regular political dialogue with Nigeria, with a view to strengthen the existing process in the country towards a consolidation of democracy and the respect for human rights. The EU thereby endeavours to follow a constructive approach, welcoming the achievements of the Nigerian authorities to date, while encouraging them to make progress in areas where they still face considerable challenges. Notwithstanding this positive and constructive approach towards Nigeria, the Council has publicly stated its position in cases of human rights violations, whenever appropriate. For instance, on 30 January 2001 the Presidency issued a declaration on behalf of the European Union on corporal punishment in Zamfara State, Nigeria.

With regard to investment and trade, the Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the EU Common Position on Nigeria, adopted by the Council on 14 May 2001. In this Common Position, the EU sets out its overall policy on Nigeria, including on the link between the consolidation of democracy and the socio-economic development of the country.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1845/01

by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 June 2001)

Subject: Breaches of Community rules in the Netherlands

Further to my Question P-0843/01(1) and the Commission's answer, I would ask a supplementary question concerning the corresponding figures for the Netherlands.

With regard to possible breaches of Community rules, will the Commission provide details of instances in which the Netherlands has drafted legislation and taken decisions which have ultimately had to be reworked at the request of the Commission?

Where there were differences between Dutch legislation and Community rules, was it possible to resolve those inconsistencies bilaterally or was it ever necessary to take matters to the court?

(1) OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001, p. 49.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Further to its answer to the Honourable Member's Written Question P-0843/01, the Commission, while reminding the Honourable Member that there is no means of obtaining the specific data requested, can report that between 1979 and 2000 some 1 750 infringement proceedings were initiated against the Netherlands and that during this period the European Court of Justice ruled on 32 infringement cases, 27 of its judgments being for the Commission. Nearly 200 infringement proceedings against the Netherlands are currently in motion.

Nearly 60 % of infringement proceedings related to failure to notify national measures to transpose Community directives, 10 % to transposal measures that did not comply with obligations under the directives and nearly 30 % to incorrect application of Community law, whether general or individual. It is chiefly in the last type of case (incorrect application) that the Commission may call on the Member State concerned to amend its rules: the other categories (failure to notify and failure to comply with obligations) relate to the obligation to transpose Community directives properly. Finally, it should be noted that some 60 % of these cases were shelved even before a letter of formal notice had been sent, as the complaints proved to be without foundation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0717/01

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 March 2001)

Subject: Stage reached in the approval of the Canaries tax AIEM

The industrial sector in the Canaries has expressed concern at the delay within the Commission regarding approval of the tax on the importation and transfer of goods in the Canaries (AIEM). In the past week, business representatives explained to Community tax experts their concerns regarding the delay in the introduction of the AIEM and in the approval of the regulation governing exemptions from duty on imports of certain industrial and fisheries products. Failure to approve the rules in the course of this year could lead to the cessation of the bulk of industrial activity in the Canaries.

Can the Commission say what stage has been reached in work on the approval of the AIEM, and can it give a date for its entry into force?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2001)

By letter of 25 July 2000, Spain sent the Commission some items of descriptive socio-economic data on the situation in the Canary Islands and certain details concerning a new tax entitled Arbitrio sobre los Importaciones y Entregas de Mercancias en las islas Canarias (AIEM) - tax on the import and transfer of goods in the Canaries. The tax represents the implementation for tax purposes of Article 299(2) (former Article 227) of the EC Treaty.

Since the notification was incomplete, on 25 October 2000 Spain sent further particulars to the Commission, indicating the rates planned for this future tax. This enabled the Commission to start examining and evaluating this information. The provisions concerning the tax on production and imports (APIM) expired on 31 December 2000 and in order to ensure the necessary transition to the new tax arrangements, the Spanish authorities, in a letter of 31 October 2000 requested an extension to the transitional period laid down in Article 5 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1911/91 of 26 June 1991 on the application of the provisions of Community law to the Canary Islands(1). The Commission adopted a proposal to that effect(2), and it is at present before the Council and Parliament.

Simultaneously, the Commission continued its deliberations concerning the AIEM in conjunction with the Spanish authorities, to which it sent remarks and objections concerning the prop osal. The Commission is awaiting the answer to these comments in order to complete its evaluation and prepare a proposal pursuant to Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 171, 29.6.1991.

(2) COM(2001) 76 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0572/01

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 February 2001)

Subject: E-mail problems

The sending of electronic junk mail (e-mails which are completely useless to and unwanted by their recipients, often containing viruses) is a major problem world-wide.

1. Does the Commission have data on the number of junk mails handled daily by the e-mail system?

2. Has it calculated the cost to users of dealing with junk mail?

3. What ideas does it intend to put forward for tackling the problem of junk mail?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2001)

The Commission agrees that the sending of unsolicited e-mails causes important problems, to both users and internet service providers (ISPs).

A study was commissioned by the Commission on the subject matter of unsolicited commercial communications and data protection. This study was completed in January 2001 and provides useful information on issues raised in the question(1). The study refers for instance to a likely capacity of specialised companies to send in total 20 billion commercial e-mails per day. The study also indicates that the cost for users would amount to around

10 billion a year world-wide. It also mentions a clear shift from spam (unsolicited e-mails) towards marketing techniques based on the prior consent of e-mail addressees (permission-based marketing).

The Commission proposes to tackle this issue through its proposal for a Directive of the Parliament and of the Council on the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector(2), intended to modify and replace the existing 97/66/EC Directive of the Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997(3) in view of technological developments.

In particular, Article 13 of the proposal subjects the sending of e-mails to the prior consent of the subscriber. This so-called opt-in regime will bring e-mails under the same regime as the one applicable to faxes and automated calling machines. It will also harmonise existing approaches within the Community where some Member States have already implemented an opt-in system, while others have an opt-out approach.

(1) The report is available at the following URL address: http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/media/dataprot/studies/spam.htm.

(2) OJ C 365 E, 19.12.2000.

(3) OJ L 24, 30.1.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0730/01

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(7 March 2001)

Subject: Bonded labour in India

Will the Commission enquire as to the status of thousands of bonded labourers in Tamil Nadu state, India, who were formally identified in April 1997, but still had not been released as of August 2000?

Will the Commission enquire as to the number of people who have been charged and prosecuted under the 1976 Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act, along with the sentences given?

Will the Commission enquire whether the Government of India will, together with an independent body, undertake a comprehensive national survey to identify the total number of bonded labourers in India, as recommended by the International Labour Organisation's Committee of Experts?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2001)

In April 1997, 25 008 cases of bonded labourers were formally identified in Tamil Nadu. According to the government of India, they have all been released and the rehabilitation process is ongoing. By the end of March 2000, funds available for rehabilitation were released for 18 198 cases and the remainder of the funds has been released more recently.

Information received by the Ministry of Labour is not sufficient to provide a satisfactory picture of the implementation of the 1976 Bonded Labour System Abolition Act in Punjab. The Commission Delegation in New Delhi will undertake further research on this particular case, which will be transmitted in due course to the Honourable Member.

4 661 prosecutions have been brought in India under the 1976 Bonded Labour System Abolition Act. Statistics for the state of Uttar Pradesh indicate that 1 031 cases have been acquitted while sentences were delivered in 84 of the cases.

Finally, a national survey scheme to identify the number of bonded labourers was introduced last year. Funds are released to the State Governments on a demand basis. Each State has to introduce a demand to be granted funding. The total amount released as of mid April 2001 is INR 5 000 000 ( 116 099) to 4 States (of which INR 1 000 000 ( 23 219,8) for Punjab).

The Honourable Member is also referred to the Commission's replies to Written Question E-4104/00 by Mr G. Watson and Written Question E-4114/00 by Mrs G. Kinnock(1).

(1) OJ C 187 E, 3.7.2001, p. 134.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1011/01

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 March 2001)

Subject: Rules governing the minimum number of rooms available in rural-tourism properties

The leaders of the Andalusia Regional Government in Spain have proposed that rules should be laid down concerning the minimum number of rooms which properties are required to have if they are to qualify as being suitable for use as rural-tourism accommodation.

This proposal has taken the sector by surprise since in rural areas the characteristics of such properties vary immensely and cannot be made to fit models which have been defined in advance.

Would the Commission say whether or not rural-tourism properties (such as exist in the various EU Member States) are required to have a minimum number of rooms in order to be able to provide accommodation in accordance with the traditional accommodation criteria prevailing in rural areas?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2001)

The Commission provides part-financing for regional development programmes in Andalusia, with a large proportion being earmarked for the development of rural areas.

Measures that may qualify for funding under the Guidance Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) include incentives for tourism activities. These take the form of schemes which must comply with the requirements set out in the operational programme or in the document known as the programme complement or in mandatory provisions laid down by the authorities responsible for administering the tourism facilities.

Examination of the operational programme and the programme complement reveals no special requirements regarding tourism activities attracting funding from the EAGGF. The rules referred to by the Honourable Member must comply with the administrative rules for which the Member State alone has responsibility.

On the specific question put by the Honourable Member the answer is as follows: the Commission has no responsibility in this area and accordingly has no information about the minimum number of rooms that must be available in rural tourism properties in the various Member States if accommodation is to be provided. This type of information can be obtained direct from the Member States and in some cases from the regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0597/01

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

(1 March 2001)

Subject: The standing of the EU fisheries sector in the globalised economy

The fisheries sector is more open than most in the Community economy to globalisation the extension across the board of exclusion zones around continental shelves to 200 miles in the 1970s led the Community fisheries sector to actively seek resources in third-country waters, given that Community production alone had failed to supply even 50 % of the demand for fisheries products. The role played by the fisheries sector in the economy of Europe and of the world as a whole extends beyond the purely economic. The sector also influences lifestyles, population patterns, employment and the survival of those industries on which we depend for the safety of our food, and for these reasons it must be protected.

Can the Commission provide specific and up-to-date figures on:

- the current contribution of the EU fisheries sector in the strict sense (i.e. extractive fishing practices) towards Community GDP?

- the current contribution of the EU fisheries sector in the broad sense (i.e. extractive fishing practices, processing industry, marketing, allied industries and specialised shipbuilding) towards Community GDP?

- the current contribution of the EU fisheries sector in the strict sense (i.e. extractive fishing practices) towards the global economy in comparison with its counterparts in other world powers such as the USA and Japan?

- the current contribution of the EU fisheries sector in the broad sense (i.e. extractive fishing practices, processing industry, marketing, allied industries and specialised shipbuilding) towards the global economy in comparison with its counterparts in other world powers such as the USA and Japan?

- the current contribution of the EU fisheries sector in the strict sense (i.e. extractive fishing practices) towards employment in the EU by Member State?

- the current contribution of the EU fisheries sector in the broad sense (i.e. extractive fishing practices, processing industry, marketing, allied industries and specialised shipbuilding) towards employment in the EU by Member State?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2001)

In 1998, catches to a value of 7,3 billion were landed in the Community, accounting for about 0,1 % of Community GDP (gross domestic product).

The total value of output in the Community fisheries sector (extractive fishing, aquaculture, processing and marketing) was 20 billion in 1998, 0,28 % of Community GDP.

Japan's landings in 1998 valued 9,6 billion, and the United States' 2,9 billion, i.e. the Community was situated in between. The value of output of Community aquaculture amounted to 1,4 billion, compared with 4,3 billion for Japan and 837 million for the United States.

The Commission has no data on the turnover of the processing and marketing segments of the fisheries sector in Japan and the United States.

The following table shows employment in the fisheries sector, in absolute and percentage terms, in the Member States.

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2164/01

by Colette Flesch (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 July 2001)

Subject: Brussels: a capital for Europe?

According to press reports, the Belgian Prime Minister and the Commission President have organised a discussion forum on the role of Brussels as capital of Europe.

1. Does the President's involvement stem from a Commission decision?

2. If so, does the Commission think it right to intervene in this way regarding the seat of the institutions by coming out on the side of Brussels? Can it justify its attitude?

3. If not, should the Commission President be considered to be acting in a personal capacity?

4. Is he willing to show the same kind of support for Luxembourg and Strasbourg?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Mr Prodi, President of the Commission, took part in the discussion forum referred to by the Honourable Member as a follow-up to Declaration No 22 annexed to the Treaty of Nice relating to the venues for European Councils. The Commission recalls that the Declaration states that As from 2002, one European Council meeting per Presidency will be held in Brussels. When the Union comprises 18 members, all European Council meetings will be held in Brussels.

The discussions at this event sponsored by Mr Verhofstadt and Mr Prodi were purely an intellectual exercise with a view to clarifying the image and role of Brussels in the light of the European Council Declaration: there was no intention of calling into Question the decisions on the seats of the institutions, determined by the EC Treaty.

Thus the last Question is superfluous.