ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1404/98

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(11 May 1998)

Subject: Bureaux de change

With the introduction of the single currency the estimated volume of foreign exchange transactions should fall, reflecting the disappearance from the market of the currencies absorbed by the Euro. Bureaux de change authorized to carry on their business by national central banks will therefore be forced to reduce the scale of their business and many of them will cease trading altogether.

In the same way that provisions were made for customs officers when the single market was introduced:

1. Has the Commission planned measures aimed at dealing with the phenomenon?

2. Does the Commission not consider it advisable to envisage an incentive in the form of compensation for people who, because of this situation, would be willing to take early retirement?

3. Could the Commission not prevail upon the Member States to ensure that any "authorizations" that are no longer used because the operator has ceased trading are not put back on the market but made available to operators still trading, thereby giving them the right of pre-emption?

4. Does the Commission not consider it appropriate to use the Social Fund for projects aimed at retraining staff employed in this particular sector, whose trade association, the Associazione Italiana Cambiavalute (AIC) [Italian Association of Bureaux de Change], could perhaps collaborate on developing such a project?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(22 June 1998)

1. The Commission presented a green paper on the practical aspects of the introduction of the single currency in May 1995. This document together with a number of subsequent recommendations, sets out the Commission's proposals for the organisation of the transition to the euro. In particular, it has been clear since at least December 1995 that euro-denominated bank notes and coins will be introduced at the start of 2002.

All the Commission's preparatory work has been based on the principle that the necessary changes should be the responsibility of the individual sector concerned. While the introduction of the single currency will bring substantial overall benefits for the European economy, the transition will clearly involve bigger changes in some sectors than others.

2. The Commission is fully aware that bureaux de change will face greater challenges than many other businesses in adapting to the introduction of the euro. However, there is at present no legal or regulatory basis for the Commission to propose specific action to assist this sector. The measures taken in 1992 in favour of customs officials were based on a specific Council decision.

3. Member States have sole responsibility for authorization of bureaux de change.

4. The Commission believes that projects for retraining staff in bureaux de change could be eligible for support from the European social fund. However, the selection of projects which benefit from aid from the fund is a matter for national authorities in Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1237/98

by Allan Macartney (ARE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Insurance Premium Tax in the United Kingdom

Has the Commission considered the impact of higher rate Insurance Premium Tax on the electrical rental and retail sector, the travel industry and the motor vehicle sector in the United Kingdom?

Insurance Premium Tax was introduced to avoid so-called value shifting. Has the Commission assessed the impact on the travel insurance market by the introduction of higher rate Insurance Premium Tax where there appears to be no possibility of value shifting? Is the Commission aware that since the introduction of this higher rate tax there has been a decrease in the number of people taking out travel insurance?

Furthermore, is the Commission aware that higher rate Insurance Premium Tax has led to an increase in non-insurance based warranties for motor vehicles and thus lower protection for car owners in the UK?

Is the higher rate Insurance Premium Tax for these sectors in conformity with the principle of freedom to provide services and EC competition law?

Has the Commission responded to complaints about the Insurance Premium Tax by the affected sectors and if so, what has been the response?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 1998)

In 1997 the Commission received several complaints concerning the tax on insurance premiums in the travel industry and the electrical retail sector, and these are currently under examination, particularly in the light of Article 92 of the EC Treaty. The rates of the tax were increased by the United Kingdom authorities on 1 April 1997 as part of the effort to combat VAT fraud.

Following discussions between the United Kingdom authorities and the Commission in late 1997, the United Kingdom authorities informed the Commission, by letter of 6 May 1998, that the increased tax on insurance premiums would be extended to all trades selling travel insurance. This measure will take effect on 1 August 1998. In the Commission's view, this decision removes the discriminatory effect of the increased tax on travel insurance introduced in 1997 and any aid it might have given to trades not subject to the tax.

The Commission is still considering the measures to increase the insurance tax on electrical goods.

The Commission will reply to the complainants as soon as it has come to a conclusion on the effects of the measures in question.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 237/98 by María ESTEVAN BOLEA to the Commission. Biological diversity



Official Journal C 386 , 11/12/1998 P. 0006



WRITTEN QUESTION E-0237/98 by María Estevan Bolea (PPE) to the Commission (13 February 1998) Subject: Biological diversity Is the Commission analysing the current situation as regards the conservation of biodiversity, in order to direct the changes in the processes which have an adverse effect on it? Will the future action plans and measures which the Community strategy presumably contains be linked to an analysis of the current situation and the need to make changes?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0970/98

by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 March 1998)

Subject: Delays in ESF payments for 1996

Can the Commission confirm that it is taking action to speed up final payment on outstanding ESF claims for 1996? Some project managers in my constituency are still awaiting final payment of their 1996 ESF claims which they submitted in December 1996 - a 15 - month delay!

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 1998)

The Commission is pleased to confirm that it has taken all necessary action to speed up final payments on outstanding European social fund (ESF) claims for 1996. Moreover, the Commission welcomes the recent statement from the Minister for employment, welfare to work and equal opportunities, announcing the decision to pre-fund receipts from the Commission. The new arrangements will apply to all valid claims from the 1997 programme to the second payment for 1999 programme.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2036/98

by Klaus Hänsch (PSE) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: Allocation of EU resources to Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia

Regarding the allocation of EU resources to the city of Duisburg in North Rhine-Westphalia, can the Commission indicate:

1. the sum of EU structural resources received and their breakdown by Funds and the various Community programmes and initiatives and of EU resources allocated to Duisburg from other budget lines since 1994 for pilot projects, measures or - as direct allocations - universities, research establishments, undertakings and other bodies,

2. the number of jobs created or preserved with the aid of these resources?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(6 July 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1084/98

by Nel van Dijk (V) to the Commission

(30 March 1998)

Subject: Possible fraud in connection with Dutch beef exports

Is the Commission aware of reports that Dutch meat exporters are involved in the wide-scale misuse of certificates and stamps of origin, in order to pass off imported beef and imported cattle after slaughter as meat of Dutch origin, so as to evade the restrictions on re-exports agreed between the Netherlands and Russia(1)?

Is the Commission aware of evidence that officials in the Central Organization for the Meat Industry are encouraging this fraud, that the Netherlands Government Meat and Livestock Inspectorate (RVV) has been permitting such practices for as much as three years, and that they are known to the Ministry of Agriculture at the highest level?

1. Does the Commission have information confirming these reports?

2. What steps has the Commission taken or will it be taking to ensure as soon as possible that fraud of this kind ceases to undermine its BSE policy and put public health at risk?

3. Does the Commission see any opportunities for stepping up its own checks on Dutch slaughterhouses and beef exporters, particularly since doubts have been raised about supervision by the RVV?

4. Will the Commission claim back export refunds that have already been paid if meat fraud is proved to have taken place?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 1998)

The Commission is aware of the press reports referred to by the Honourable Member. The facts reported by the Dutch media concern the failure to comply with a bilateral agreement between the Netherlands and Russia, under which only meat from animals raised and slaughtered in the Netherlands can be exported to Russia.

On the basis of the information available, it does not appear that Community policy on BSE has been jeopardised by the failure on the part of the Netherlands authorities to comply with the bilateral agreement with Russia.

Similarly, as regards export refunds, the practices reported have not given rise to any undue payments.

Nevertheless, as part of its on-the-spot checks, the Commission will pay special attention to the way in which the Netherlands authorities apply the relevant Community legislation. The responsibility for day-to-day controls in this matter rests with the national authorities.

(1) De Limburger newspaper, 13 and 14 March 1998; Netwerk television programme, 13 March 1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1563/98

by Antoni Gutiérrez Díaz (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 May 1998)

Subject: Projects under the URB-AL programme

It appears that four local authorities were nominated as candidates to act as head-city for Telematics Network No 3, "Democracy in the City", as part of the URB-AL programme co-financed by the Commission. These four candidates were: Issy-les-Moulineaux (France), Porto Alegre (Brazil), Salt (Spain) and Villa María (Argentina).

Of these four cities, only the first two met the criteria for eligibility and were retained for the purposes of a technical proposal.

The city of Porto Alegre has received international recognition as a model of civic participation through the "participative budget" experiment, which has attracted the attention of the main international cooperation organizations (World Bank, IDB, UNDP and others). The network of local authorities submitted by Porto Alegre also included some of the most outstanding experiments in civic participation in Latin America, such as Villa Salvador in Peru.

Can the Commission provide information on:

1. The criteria used by the high-level technical committee in analysing the proposals put forward by the various networks and the suggestions which it forwarded to the Commission with a view to selecting the head of the corresponding network?

2. The Commission's criteria for taking the final decision and, in particular, for rejecting the city of Porto Alegre, given that this is one of the most acclaimed experiments in Latin America?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 1998)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for his interest in the Community URB-AL programme.

The criteria used by the URB-AL high-level technical committee to analyse the proposals put forward by candidates for coordinating a thematic network include the number of partners in the network and the quality of the technical and financial proposal. These criteria are set out under point 9 of the specifications sent to preselected candidates. The proposals are assessed solely on their technical content.

The work (deliberations and recommendations to the Commission) of the URB-AL high-level technical committee is treated as confidential. This measure is understandably designed to guarantee the committee members' independence and impartiality.

The town of Porto Alegre's application was examined very carefully. The Commission recognises the value of Porto Alegre and Villa de Salvador's experiment on the theme of democracy. Indeed, these towns were asked by the Commission to form part of URB-AL Network No 3, coordinated by Issy-les-Moulineaux, precisely so that they could share their experiences with the all the European and Latin American towns involved. Membership of the network is free-of-charge and simply requires a letter to the network coordinator. Membership enables towns to submit proposals for a common project on the theme of the network.

The Commission also wishes to inform the Honourable Member that Porto Alegre will take part in network No 5 on urban social policies, coordinated by the city of Montevideo.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1399/98

by José Apolinário (PSE) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Specific characteristics of the outermost regions in the energy sector

In response to the specific characteristics of the outermost regions in the energy sector, the European Union has established Posei-Energy as part of the Community actions geared to those regions, outside and independently of the respective Community support frameworks. Given that these specific characteristics continue to apply, what is the current approach to this issue, in particular as regards the Azores?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 1998)

The energy activities under the Poseima programme were carried out by the Commission during a three-year period: in order to implement these funds amounting to a total of ECU 15 million were transferred to the Azores autonomous region and allocated to energy-saving and renewable-energy projects. The final annual instalment was paid in 1994.

The Commission has not proposed that the energy section of the Poseima programme be renewed for 1995-1999. Conversely as part of Portugal's Community support framework (CSF) and of the REGIS project for the ultra peripheral regions, the Commission has adopted programmes providing for energy-investment support in the Azores for the period 1995-1999.

In view of the underprivileged situation of the Azores in terms of conventional energy supplies, but also of the energy-saving potential and that of certain renewable sources, the energy sector in the Azores should continue to receive financial support from the Structural Funds during the new financial programming period.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1145/98

by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(2 April 1998)

Subject: Market prices for training activities cofinanced under the ESF

Further to written question P-0352/98(1) dealing with training activities cofinanced under the ESF and managed by local development agencies set up as consortia and/or associations and to Commissioner Flynn's reply, would the Commission clarify the following matter:

- given that training agencies cannot seek to make a profit, is it considered acceptable, in cases where training activities are delegated by an agency to a partner or associate company in accordance with Commission Decision 97/322/EC(2) (with particular regard to datasheet No 4), for the associate or partner company concerned to charge market prices for its services, as long as they do not exceed the limits laid down?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 1998)

In its answer to the Honourable Member's written question P-0352/98, the Commission already emphasised the fact that it "does not give preference to any particular body, since it is not involved ex ante in the selection and evaluation procedure. The Commission confines itself to laying down - in a general manner, and in partnership with the Member State - the criteria and guidelines which the final beneficiaries must observe in implementing actions that are co-funded by the European Social Fund (ESF)".

In response to the follow-up written question from the Honourable Member, the Commission would like to confirm that services for which training bodies pay an associate or partner company the market price (within the limits laid down) are still eligible, provided they can be verified by a checkable method in conjunction with the final declaration of expenditure.

It should also be borne in mind that the Commission remains bound by Article 2 (1) of regulation (EEC) 4255/88 (as amended(3)) on the European Social Fund, which states that:

"Without prejudice to checks by the Commission, the Member States shall ensure that the cost of individual operations is kept within limits appropriate to each type of operation".

(1) OJ C 310, 9.10.1998, p. 58.

(2) OJ L 146, 5.6.1997, p. 11.

(3) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1047/98

by Josu Imaz San Miguel (PPE) to the Commission

(6 April 1998)

Subject: Vignemale tunnel

The Commission will shortly be updating the list of European transport infrastructure priority projects in the light of their Community interest, funding potential and social and economic impact.

One of the projects that is being put forward at present for the rail link between the Iberian peninsula and the rest of Europe would cross the Pyrenees in a low-altitude tunnel in the region known as Vignemale, thus linking up the Autonomous Community of Aragón and France.

Has the Commission considered including this project in its list of priorities? Is the Commission considering funding it from the Cohesion Fund?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 1998)

In June 1996, when Decision No 1692/96/EC of the Parliament and the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network(1) was adopted, the Commission committed itself to re-examine a number of projects identified by the Parliament in the second reading but not included in the Decision. This examination is being undertaken in the framework of the revision of the guidelines scheduled in 1999.

The Commission recently received from the Midi-Pyrenees Region, supported by the Autonomous Community of Aragon, a document that sets out the broad outline of the project referred to by the Honourable Member.

The Commission intends to carry out an examination of this project on the basis of the information now available.

The Cohesion fund finances trans-European network projects located in eligible Member States. To date, the Commission has not received any application for assistance from the Spanish authorities for the project in question.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1229/98

by Marie-Paule Kestelijn-Sierens (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: European standards on the restriction of night flights

In its resolution (A-0183/97)(1), adopted on 10 June 1997, on the Commission Green Paper on future noise policy, the European Parliament calls for night flights to be reduced (para. 31). A ban on night flights is being introduced for major airports which have no need to fear competition, with the result that more and more night flights are being diverted to smaller airports which cannot afford to impose such a ban. Local residents in the area of smaller airports are thus faced with an additional burden of noise pollution.

Does not the Commission consider it necessary, in the light of this situation which constitutes a distortion of competition, to harmonize national and regional legislation on the reduction of night flights?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Noise conditons differ significantly from one airport to another depending on the proximity of the airport to residential areas and the volume of traffic. To date, the Commission has, therefore, not envisaged a harmonisation of national and regional regulations on the limitation of night flights. The Commission will, however, continue to monitor closely market developments in this area with a view to re-assessing the need for action at Community level while, at the same time, ensuring that Community law is respected whenever noise bans are imposed.

The Commission intends to issue a communication on Air Transport and the Environment by the end of the year. Environmental issues arising in and around airports will be among the matters dealt with in that document.

(1) OJ C 200, 30.6.1997, p. 28.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1008/98

by Ernesto Caccavale (UPE) to the Commission

(6 April 1998)

Subject: Levy of a charge on the pharmaceutical sector in the event of spending limits for 1998 being exceeded

The Italian Parliament has adopted a Government amendment to the 1998 budget bill to the effect that if by the end of the year national expenditure on pharmaceuticals exceeds the limits set in the fifteenth paragraph of Article 36 of the bill (i.e 10 % more than the Lit 11 091 billion provided for), firms authorized to trade in medicinal products (the manufacturers), distributors (the wholesalers) and retail chemists will have to pay the national health service a charge equivalent to 60 % of the surplus and will also have to make a provisional payment covering the remaining 40 %, which will be refunded to them subsequently by the State.

It should be pointed out that retail chemists are already obliged to pay the national health service a percentage contribution (ranging from 3.75 % to 12.5 %) determined by the price of medicinal products dispensed at the expense of the Italian State to persons eligible for such assistance.

Does the Commission agree that the rules in question, by transferring part of the financial burden of national expenditure on pharmaceuticals to manufacturers, wholesalers and retail chemists, could so alter the overall balance of national finances as to call into question Italy's compliance with the Maastricht convergence criteria, since they have the effect of unfairly making the private sector meet the cost of a public sector obligation?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(13 May 1998)

Choices about funding public expenditure on health care fall under the full responsibility of the Member State in the same way as, more generally, any other decision concerning the distribution of the fiscal burden among tax-payers.

The payment in question originates from a safeguard clause in the budget, which specifies how to finance a possible excess of health care expenditure on pharmaceuticals over the targeted amounts, in the years 1998, 1999 and 2000. Accordingly, it is not certain that the payment will be due.