ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2531/01

by Fernando Fernández Martín (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 September 2001)

Subject: Application of an ecotax on the island of Lanzarote

According to information to which I have had access, the Commission is studying the feasibility of introducing an environment tax (ecotax) on the island of Lanzarote which would be financed from the Life programme. That initiative would be part of a package of 20 environmental projects to be carried out in Spain, which the Commission might fund to the tune of EUR 8,6 million.

If this information is accurate, what objectives would the introduction of an ecotax in Lanzarote have, and what technical fiscal conditions would apply?

What are the remaining 19 projects under consideration for possible Commission funding in Spain, apart from the Lanzarote project?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(7 November 2001)

The project Eco-standard Lanzarote appears in the list of projects approved for the Life exercice for the year 2000 by the Life Committee held on 18 June 2001, and by the Commission on 14 August 2001. The beneficiary, and, therefore executor of the project, is the Municipality of Lanzarote. Although co-financed by the Commission, this is not a Community study.

The aims of the project in question, as they are collected in the form submitted to the Commission, are: to explore the viability and implementation of a model of ECO-standard (environmental tax) for the island of Lanzarote that permits directing a change of model towards sustainable tourism, with a view to:

- Giving to the Island a new financial tool that, besides other stimulated measures of management of territorial use of the island and regional government, helps to limit human pressure on the Island's system, in particular resulting from tourism. To avoid a greater overload of the Island's capacity, so responding to the demands of the Island's population;

- Creating a channel of awareness, and trying to compromise formulas of tourism within the Island;

- Trying guarantees of participation and social control in the use of the received funds.

Technical fiscal terms are not defined in the project.

A list of the 19 remaining projects approved to be co-financed in Spain are sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3443/01

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

(21 December 2001)

Subject: The communal woodlands of Galicia and Galician government initiatives for forestry

Has the Galician government submitted specific tree-planting programmes for the communal woodlands of Galicia, to be granted European Union support for the period 2000-2006? Can these plans be made public?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3440/01, E-3441/01, E-3443/01 and E-3444/01given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 February 2002)

The Commission contributes through the Structural Funds to various regional development programmes in Spain. Galicia has a number of agricultural and rural development programmes in receipt of Community funding.

However, there is no specific programme for the common lands that the Honourable Member refers to.

Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund and amending and repealing certain Regulations(1) lays down all the criteria under which Community funding can be granted.

That said, if these lands are deemed eligible under the Regulation, then the Structural Funds, including the EAGGF Guidance Section, could finance measures.

The Commission invites the Honourable Member to contact the regional and/or national authorities for further information on this matter.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2689/01

by Mario Mauro (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 October 2001)

Subject: Funding from Energy and Transport DG

Will the Commission provide a list of the projects which, in 2000 and 2001, were submitted by the Italian Regions of Liguria, Lombardy, Piedmont and Valle d'Aosta for financing from the funds administered by the Energy and Transport Directorate-General, and the names of those which were subsequently approved?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2002)

Requests for financial support for Trans-European Network projects in the areas of Transport and Energy are submitted by the official authorities of Member States, not directly by Regions.

Information concerning the projects, located in the Italian Regions of Liguria, Lombardy, Piedmont and Val d'Aosta, submitted by the Italian authorities in 2000 and 2001 and subsequently approved, in the field of transport and energy are directly sent to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3463/01

by Enrico Ferri (PPE-DE) and Guido Podestà (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 January 2002)

Subject: Air safety checks

The collision at Milan's Linate airport on 8 October 2001 between an SAS MD-87, which was about to take off, and a private plane (a German Cessna), which was on a side runway, killed 118 people and caused great alarm worldwide.

After the impact the Scandinavian airliner crashed into the hangar which houses the baggage handling centre, cutting it in half. This started a fire involving both the wreck of the aircraft and the hangar.

The mistake and faulty information seem to have been caused not only by the fog, but also the ground radar, which had not been working since November 1999 and therefore contributed substantially to the human error.

Although the SMGCS (Surface Movement Ground Control System) at Linate was considered antiquated and it had been decided to replace it two years before, it was actually never replaced.

Such inefficiencies happen not only at Milan, but also a large number of other airports in Europe.

Does the Commission not consider it appropriate to adopt stricter Community legislation for safety checks at airports, obliging Member States to adopt appropriate provisions, including some designed to reveal the malfunctioning of safety instruments, which, in the event of an emergency, would be capable of preventing disasters on this scale?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2002)

Considering the continuous increase of air traffic and the necessity to operate in any weather conditions, improving safety at all the Community airports was already felt necessary even before the Linate accident.

During the last ten years, the Commission has funded a series of research activities to support the preparation of a European ICAO A-SMGCS (Advanced Surface Movement Guidance & Control System) Manual. This Manual is intended to provide necessary inputs both to airport authorities and to the providers for the installation of systems that would ensure a high level of safety for airport surface operations.

At present, this Manual is being finished. The Commission will assess whether all or part of it should be made mandatory on the basis of the Single Sky proposals presently under consideration in Parliament and Council(1).

Furthermore, the Commission would expect that the development of satellite-based positioning devices (Galileo) will also contribute to improving the safety of airport operations.

(1) COM(2001) 564 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3634/01 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council. History textbooks.



Official Journal 160 E , 04/07/2002 P. 0156 - 0157



WRITTEN QUESTION E-3634/01 by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council (11 January 2002) Subject: History textbooks Can the Council state whether steps have been taken to coordinate the content of the history textbooks used in schools in the Member States? Reply (25/26 March 2002) No steps are, or could be taken by the Council to coordinate the content of history textbooks used in schools in the EU, being expressly excluded by Article 149 paragraph 1 of the Treaty which states that Member States are responsible for the content of teaching.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3578/01

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

(9 January 2002)

Subject: Galicia and motorways of the sea

In view of Galicia's strategic position within Europe's network of seas and the Atlantic routes which provide a link between Europe and the other continents, how (in terms of timetable and funding) is Galicia to be involved in the development of the infrastructure which is needed if the motorways of the sea which feature as priority measures in the White Paper on European transport policy(1) are to be created?

(1) COM(2001) 370 final.

Reply

(25/26 March 2002)

The Council recalls that in the Commission's view as expressed in its White Paper motorways of the sea should be created in the context of a regulatory framework based on the following elements: legislative proposals in the field of maritime and port policy, the Marco Polo programme for the promotion of intermodality(1), and the larger revision of the Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network due in 2004.

The Council is fully aware of the geo-strategic position of Galicia in this respect. Nevertheless, and in the absence of any of the legislative proposals as referred to above, the Council is not yet in a position to give a concrete answer to the question regarding the inclusion of Galicia in the development of the infrastructure needed to create the motorways of the sea.

The Council furthermore underlines that the actual implementation of such projects to create motorways of the sea will depend on a final decision by the national authorities. Issues such as the timetable for the construction work and the allocation of funds fall equally under the competence of the national authorities.

(1) This programme, for which the legislative proposal is due to be presented by the Commission shortly, would allow a co-financing for the creation of new services of short-distance maritime transport. Requests for co-financing would have to be addressed to the Commission by the national authorities of the Member State.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3048/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Lloyd's and Directive 73/329/EEC

According to information received by associate members of the Lloyd's of London insurance market, Lloyd's is holding its approximately 30 000 associate members responsible for losses incurred in the wake of the 11 September terrorist attacks in the US. The latter consider that this position to be unacceptable and that it arises from an incorrect application of Directive 73/239/EEC(1).

Can the Commission state its position on the matter and indicate whether there is a possible failure to comply with Directive 73/239/EEC?

(1) OJ L 228, 16.8.1973, p. 3.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2002)

The Commission is taking very seriously the many complaints it has received regarding alleged infringements of the Community insurance directives with respect to Lloyd's. The Commission has now completed its preliminary analysis and has decided to launch formal proceedings under Article 226 (ex-Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

These complaints arose primarily as the result of claims for asbestosis liabilities in the 1980s in the United States. As far as the events of 11 September 2001 are concerned, the Commission is not aware of any potential infringements of the Community insurance directives.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3403/01

by Thierry Jean-Pierre (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 December 2001)

Subject: Information on EU external aid

It was emphasised in the annual report on implementation of the Commission's external aid programmes in 2000 that reform of the management of EU external aid was under way and would begin to bear fruit in 2002.

The main objectives of this reform are to reduce the time lapse between commitments and payments and to decentralise responsibilities from the Commission to the Delegations in the beneficiary countries and territories.

In addition, the Commission's EuropeAid Agency has published its first Annual Report, which includes details of a reform process consisting in the establishment of a single agency with responsibility for managing the whole operational cycle of the EuropeAid projects and the granting of specific powers to the active Delegations, with a view to improving the Commission's overall capacity in managing programmes on a country-by-country basis.

In order to give greater visibility to the impact of aid on its beneficiaries, I should like to have a complete list for 1997-2001 of the associations and NGOs involved in EU external aid to the following countries: the Barcelona Process countries, Libya, Mauritania, Sudan, Nigeria, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, the Philippines and Indonesia.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2002)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question properly. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2016/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR)and Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Difficulties in progressing bi-communal projects on Cyprus

Will the Commission list by name, nature of scheme, and estimated cost, every bi-communal project proposed, however tentatively, since an allocation of funding was first agreed, to which the Government of Cyprus, or any official body associated with it, has raised an objection? Will it summarise the nature of each objection?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2001)

There has never been such a case, since bi-communal projects are most of the time the initiative of the Government of Cyprus.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3064/01

by Jan Andersson (PSE) to the Commission

(8 November 2001)

Subject: Dispute concerning port dues

There has been a long-standing dispute between the port of Helsingborg and Scandlines over the level of port dues. Four years ago, the two parties turned to the Commission for a decision, though none has been forthcoming yet, which is unacceptable. The Commission's decision will be important as it will not only affect the port of Helsingborg but also the tariffs set in other ports.

1. When can the two parties expect a decision from the Commission in this matter?

2. Is the Commission's position, in principle, that market principles should apply in setting the level of port dues?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2002)

The Honourable Member refers to complaints by two ferry-operators alleging an abuse of a dominant position by the Port of Helsingborg that would consist of excessive and discriminatory pricing. The Commission is continuing to examine these cases, which, however, raise many complex factual and legal issues, as the Member of the Commission responsible for Competition explained before the Parliament in the reply to oral question H-535/01 during question time at Parliament's July 2001 session(1). In particular, as the markets are not static, it has been necessary to examine the potential impact of the Øresund bridge on the case.

The Commission is fully aware of the consequences of the situation on the parties (the Port and the ferry operators) and is actively pursuing the investigation. In this regard, another round of fact-finding has been carried out in the last few months, including further meetings with all the principal parties involved. The case has been given top priority and the Commission intends to come to a position in this matter as soon as possible.

According to existing jurisprudence, ports are considered as undertakings within the meaning of the competition rules of the EC Treaty, which therefore also apply to ports, notably Article 82 (ex Article 86) of the EC Treaty which prohibits abuse of dominant position. It is not the existence of dominance but the abuse of such a position by the undertaking in question that is prohibited. The Commission examines each case individually in order to determine whether there is such an abuse. While market principles should, in principle, apply in setting the level of port dues on the basis of demand and supply, the market forces may occasionally be disturbed. This may indeed be the case where a dominant undertaking is abusing its dominant position by charging excessive or discriminatory prices. Such situations may well justify an intervention by the Commission in order to restore the market conditions.

In view of the above, and in parallel with the ongoing investigation, the Commission has encouraged the parties to explore again whether a settlement was possible for instance on future port fees, thereby putting an end to the ongoing effects of their dispute, without Commission involvement. Such a settlement would not prevent the Commission from continuing its investigation, if necessary.

(1) Oral reply, 3.7.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3627/01

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Measures to support crisis distillation in Sicily

The wine-growing sector in Sicily is going through a serious crisis because of the problems facing cooperative wine-growers' associations and individual producers.

Distillation can provide an immediate, albeit temporary, solution to the problem that will ward off a total collapse of the sector pending the necessary specific and definitive measures to secure the future of wine-growing in Sicily, which can compete in terms of quality but is penalised by fierce competition from Spain in terms of cost and quantity.

The Italian government has asked the European Commission for authorisation to introduce crisis distillation for 8 million hectolitres of wine.

Does the Commission not consider that it should authorise the Italian Ministry of Agriculture to supplement the intervention price with a national subsidy to bring it up to the price for optional distillation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2002)

The Commission has already been informed of the difficulties on the wine market in Sicily and thanks the Honourable Member for drawing its attention to the seriousness of the situation. On 17 January 2002 the Italian authorities asked the Commission to open crisis distillation. This request will be closely examined in the light of the information needed to take a decision on the matter.

As regards the state aid referred to by the Honourable Member, designed to increase the Community distillation price should crisis distillation take place, the Commission can only take a decision after considering the facts of the case. As a general rule the Commission considers aids of this kind to be an operating aid, i.e. one that is incompatible with the single market and interferes with the mechanisms governing the common organisation of the markets.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2699/01

by Mario Mauro (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 October 2001)

Subject: Funding from Information Society DG

Will the Commission provide a list of the projects which, in 2000 and 2001, were submitted by the Italian Regions of Liguria, Lombardy, Piedmont and Valle d'Aosta for financing from the funds administered by the Information Society Directorate-General, and the names of those which were subsequently approved?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2002)

The Honourable Member will find below an overview of the programmes concerned of DG Information Society programmes.

As regards projects funded through TEN Telecom and involving entities from the Italian regions Liguria, Lombardia, Piemont and Val d'Aosta, a statistical review will be sent directly to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat general.

Concerning the projects funded under the Information Society Technologies of the 5th Research and Technological Development Framework Programme, the projects concerned have been integrated in the reply given to the Honourable Member on the overall figures for the Framework Programme (written question E-2697/01(1). More information about contracts, including abstracts and details on partners can be found in the CORDIS database accessible on Internet (http://www.cordis.lu or http://dbs.cordis.lu/search/en/simple/EN_PROJ_simple.html).

Finally there were no calls for proposals during 2000 and 2001 for the Promise programme and therefore so there were no submissions by any organization.

(1) See page 33.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3150/01

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 November 2001)

Subject: Company taxation

Despite the single market, despite the euro, differences in company taxation in the 15 Member States persist and are even increasing. This trend is likely to become even more marked with the enlargement of the Union. Significant disparities of up to 30 % exist in the effective rate of company taxation at EU level. Econometric modelling suggests that these disparities are mainly attributable to deviations in national statutory tax rates rather than to differences in the tax base.

1. Given the persistence of these disparities which cost economic operators a great deal and undermine their competitiveness, does the Commission envisage presenting a proposal?

2. Does the Commission intend to tackle the most blatant obstacles to the single market, i.e. the network of bilateral double taxation agreements, rising administrative costs and the absence of tax rules which make the European company, adopted last month after three decades of negotiation, an empty shell?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 2001)

In its Communication Towards an Internal Market without tax obstacles A strategy for providing companies with a consolidated corporate tax base for their EU-wide activities(1) of 23 October 2001 the Commission sets out a comprehensive strategy to overcome the existing problems for the Internal Market due to the co-existence of 15 different tax systems in the Community. This Communication supplements and builds on the Commission's study Company taxation in the Internal Market(2).

In this Communication, the Commission draws attention to the fact that effective tax rates' differentials are high inside the Community and the main tax driver for these differentials is the overall national tax rate. At the same time, the Communication underlines that the Commission's study has not analysed the evolution of effective tax rates over time and the effects of tax competition. Neither has the computation assessed the size of possible welfare losses associated with the existing differences in effective tax rates of corporate taxation in the Member States. Therefore, at this point in time, there is no convincing evidence for the Commission to recommend specific actions on the approximation of the national corporate tax rates or the fixing of a minimum corporate tax rate.

The above-mentioned Communication sets out in detail which actions need to be and can be realistically carried out in order to tackle the company tax obstacles to cross-border economic activity in the Community. These cover, inter alia, all the problems singled out by the Honourable Member. The Commission will pursue these actions as a matter of priority, which, unless enhanced co-operation is eventually applied, all require unanimous approval by Member States.

(1) COM(2001) 582 final.

(2) SEC(2001) 1681.