ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0088/99

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: Legal protection of designs

With regard to Directive 98/71/EC(1) on the legal protection of designs, the Council rejected Article 14 (repair provision) which had been proposed by the European Parliament, and replaced it with Article 14a which ultimately makes that provision optional.

As regards the Italian motorcycle market, where the use of second-hand spare parts and accessories is common, does the Commission consider that this:

1. Perpetuates protectionist policies which cancel the benefits of the existence of alternative markets?

2. Upsets the rules of the internal market by creating 15 different closed and protected national markets and plays into the hands of vehicle manufacturers who could have unlimited quantities of spare parts made in developing countries at extremely low prices and then resell them under their monopoly at very high prices?

3. Penalises consumers who are made to pay higher prices for spare parts and thus for repairs, and consequently for insurance premiums?

4. Will lead, for the above reasons, to the closure of a large number of small businesses producing spare parts?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 1999)

The Commission considers that the new Directive on legal protection of designs will make an important contribution to the smooth functioning of the internal market as regards goods embodying designs.

The Commission regrets that it was not possible to agree on the harmonisation of the protection of spare parts at this stage. However, it is important to note that a repair clause would only have had an effect on a part of the market for spare parts, namely the after-market.

The Directive harmonises certain important aspects of the legal protection of designs, but leaves the protection for spare parts at this stage non-harmonised. According to Article 14, Member States are to "freeze" their legal situation concerning spare parts except for those changes that will lead to a more liberalised market. The market will therefore, on this point, either remain unchanged or it will be more liberalised. Without changes in order to liberalise the market, consumers can expect to continue to pay the same prices as before the Directive came into force.

Furthermore, it should be recalled that, according to Article 18 of the Directive, the Commission is required, three years after the implementation date 28 October 2001, to submit an analysis of the consequences of the provisions of the Directive for Community industry. A year later, the Commission must present proposals for any necessary amendments to the Directive in relation to the sectors concerned. The Commission will carry out the above mentioned task and make every effort to enable the Council and the Parliament to reach an agreement on spare parts when the Directive is revised.

In the meantime, the Commission will also launch a consultation procedure with all interested parties, with the purpose of reaching a voluntary agreement among the parties concerned.

(1) OJ L 289, 28.10.1998, p. 28.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0313/99

by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission

(19 February 1999)

Subject: World Vision Austria

We have received information that World Vision Austria has concluded contracts with the Commission to the value of ECU 3,8 million for Phare and Tacis projects in Bosnia, Romania and Mongolia.

Have any irregularities - i.e. suspicions of embezzlement and corruption - arisen in connection with these projects?

Has the Commission performed audits?

Have there been systematic on-the-spot inspections of the work allegedly carried out?

If appropriate, were the projects cancelled promptly and repayment of funds demanded? If so, what amount was involved?

Was any offence reported to the police? If so, who was the suspect, and why? If not, why not?

Did the Austrian Public Prosecutor's Office keep the Commission informed about its investigations into World Vision Austria? When did it do so? What information does the Austrian Public Prosecutor's Office have about EU-funded projects?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0482/99

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(5 March 1999)

Subject: Deportation and residence of migrant workers

In contrast to the generous attitude of the Italian authorities when dealing with immigration, some European countries that pay lip-service to human rights and the right of asylum are in fact toughening up their immigration policies.

One example is Germany, where, according to reports from Italian emigrants' associations, first and foremost the Consul General's office in Stuttgart and the local Tricolour Committee for Italians in the World (CTIM), the national authorities are too frequently resorting to the drastic step of deporting workers from other Member States who have committed minor offences, often inevitably stemming from the failure to bring about the integration which all Member States profess to support.

Given that minor offences of this kind, though reprehensible, cannot be considered to constitute organised crime, pose no material danger to the interests of host States, must be counted among the inescapable evils of poverty, and should not, therefore, lead to outright deportation of the migrant workers involved, could the Commission make representations to the judicial authorities in Baden-Württemberg and Hesse with a view to upholding Community legislation on free movement of workers, respect for human rights, and the mobility and equal treatment of migrant workers already provided for in the Union?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-0481/99 and E-0482/99 given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 1999)

More than 60 petitions to Parliament have drawn the Commission's attention to the deportation measures passed by the authorities of the Land of Baden-Württemberg against Italian nationals on grounds of public policy.

After examining the documents attached to these petitions, the Commission has decided to initiate infringement proceedings against Germany. The proceedings will examine the conformity with Community law (Council Directive 64/221/EEC of 25 February 1964 on the coordination of special measures concerning the movement and residence of foreign nationals which are justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health(1)) of both the deportation measures themselves and the German legislation on foreign nationals on which these measures are based.

The Parliament will be informed of the progress of the infringement proceedings in the communications issued by the Commission in connection with the above-mentioned petitions.

(1) OJ L 56, 4.4.1964.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0774/99

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(29 March 1999)

Subject: Tacis project A2.01/96 concerning the provision of a training simulator for the No 2 unit of the Medzamor nuclear power establishment (Armenia)

The Commission has issued an invitation to tender for the provision of a training simulator for the no. 2 unit of the Medzamor (Armenia) nuclear power station. However, the possibility has been mooted of awarding the tender directly to a consortium which does not have the relevant product ready and which indeed has yet to develop the product. The development of an appropriate programme will take years.

The APROS programme was planned in Finland from 1986. APROS is a versatile programme which has been widely used in training simulator applications. At least 50 different APROS applications have been in use.

The APROS programme's credentials are supplied by the power stations at Kozloduy, Paksi and on the Kola Peninsula. The Kola power station in particular is very similar to the one at Medzamor. APROS has been in use in incident analyses since January 1995 and as a training simulation application since December 1997. The completed and tested training simulator on the Kola peninsula proves that a training simulator based on APROS is a powerful and cost-effective alternative for Medzamor too.

An invitation to tender will at least guarantee that all sides' strong points are taken into account, that resources are used for this project in a cost-effective manner and that aid money is not spent on product development. A tender procedure will also ensure that the EU's principles of competition and transparency are put into practice.

Does the Commission intend to put this project out to tender so that all interested parties may participate?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(5 May 1999)

The Phare and Tacis programmes for nuclear safety have supplied multi functional training simulators for all reactor sites of the type VVER 440 in the New independent states (NIS) and the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs). The project was awarded by a tendering process in 1994. The Armenian plant of Medzamor was in the beginning not incorporated from that supply due to the fact that it was shut down at the time after the 1988 earthquake.

When the Armenians decided to restart the plant, the international community decided to try to get an urgent commitment on behalf of the Armenian authorities to shut the plant down as soon as possible, while at the same time assisting Armenia in operating it as safely as possible during the remaining operation time.

It was in this context that the supply of a simulator for Medzamor was decided. The basic software was already developed for other relevant plants. Due to the urgency of the situation, the most practicable solution was to supply the equipment and software from the same supplier of all other VVER multifunctional simulators. Hence the Commission took the decision to proceed in that way.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0300/99

by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission

(17 February 1999)

Subject: Subsidies for pig farmers

Can the Commission confirm whether the French and Spanish governments have decided to grant "funding facilities" to pig farmers to enable them to survive the crisis affecting that sector?

If so, does the Commission agree that this form of aid encourages unfair competition in that other countries whose pig-rearing sectors are facing similar problems are not assisting their producers by the provision of special funding?

Can the Commision state whether such differences in treatment are permissible under current rules to ensure the smooth functioning of the internal market?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 1999)

The Commission can confirm that the French government has granted certain aids to pig producers. The Commission has launched a formal investigation into these aid measures in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 93(2) of the EC Treaty. The Commission's letter to the French authorities is published in the Official journal(1), in order to provide an opportunity for interested parties to comment.

In Spain, it appears that certain aids may have been granted in favour of the pig sector by the central government and by certain regional authorities. The Commission is in contact with the Spanish authorities to clarify the nature of the measures concerned.

Article 92(1) of the EC Treaty provides that any aid granted by a Member State or through state resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort the conditions of competition in the common market by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the common market.

However, the prohibition is not absolute. In particular, Article 92(3)(c) of the EC Treaty provides that aid to facilitate the development of certain economic activities may be considered compatible with the common market, provided that it does not affect trading interests to an extent contrary to the common interest.

Where aid is being granted to producers in financial difficulty, the Commission will permit such aid only if it is granted in accordance with the criteria set out in the Commission's guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty(2).

(1) OJ C 61, 3.3.1999.

(2) OJ C 283, 19.9.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0261/99

by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission

(5 February 1999)

Subject: Publicising national indicative programmes and calls for tender under the Lomé Convention

The management of some aspects of the European Development Fund has to date been lacking in transparency and potential participants have experienced difficulties in obtaining the necessary information in time to enable them to take part on an equal footing in calls for tender for the implementation of projects provided for in the national indicative programmes.

This problem could easily be resolved through the use of modern information technologies, for instance by publishing the texts of the national indicative programmes, the calls for tender and the final outcome of the tender procedure on the Commission's Internet sites.

The Commission:

1. Will it say if and when it intends to publicise properly all the information on national indicative programmes and calls for tender for projects funded from the EDF?

2. What obstacles (within the Commission and/or Council) have so far prevented this elementary step from being taken?

3. What possible legal obstacles might arise requiring express authorisation to be obtained from ACP countries in order to publish information relating to the EDF?

Answer given by M. Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 1999)

1. The Commission publishes calls for tender for projects funded by the European Development Fund (EDF) both in the Official Journal and on the Internet site. Calls for tender for works of more than 5 million euros and for supplies of more than 100 000 euros, and prequalification notices for service contracts of more than 2 million euros are published in the "S" series of the Official Journal. They are also available on-line via the "DET" (daily electronic tenders) database and on the Web site of the Directorate General for Development. Calls for tender for works and supplies of less than these amounts are published in the Official Journal or in the local press of the beneficiary country.

Furthermore, a Web site grouping together calls for tender for all aid programmes to third countries is being prepared and will soon be available on the Joint Relex Service (SCR) Internet site. The SCR has also begun work on harmonising the procedures for service, supply and works contracts concluded in the context of Community aid to non-member countries.

The list of tenderers is not published. Regarding the results of calls for tender the Commission publishes an annual report which, for each call for tender, indicates the number of tenderers, their nationality and who the successful tenderer is.

2. There are no obstacles within the Commission or the Council preventing the publication of contracts. International invitations to tender have been publicised via Community channels since the EDF began.

3. In the interests of transparency the Commission has decided to put all the necessary documentation on national indicative programmes on the Internet, subject to agreement with the authorities of the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0405/99

by Riitta Myller (PSE) to the Commission

(1 March 1999)

Subject: Project for the renovation of the sewage treatment plant of Sortavala (Russia)

The renovation of the sewage treatment plant at Sortavala (Russia) is of vital importance to the town of Sortavala in the interest of improving the water quality in Lake Ladoga. The sum of ECU 2 million from Tacis funds was promised for the project as long ago as 1996. However, there have been delays in the timetable for the project. In September last year a group of experts went to acquaint themselves with the project and map out its requirements. Then again the documents were redrafted and it was promised that the project would be put out to international tender. Since then, nothing has been heard of the matter.

Why has the project been delayed? Has the invitation to tender been published, what further measures are planned and what is the timetable for their completion?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

The renovation of the sewage treatment plant of Sortavala is of great importance both to the town of Sortavala and for the improvement in the quality of the water of Lake Ladoga. The project aims to improve sewage treatment and renovate and where necessary rebuild, if funds are available, the Sortavala sewage works to serve the whole population of that town.

The delay in the implementation of the project has been caused because it has been difficult to determine the exact role of the three parties involved: the Commission, the government of Finland and the municipality of Sortavala.

The tender was published in 1997 following the adoption of the relevant programme after a positive opinion of the TACIS Committee. The possibility to apply remained open until October 1998. A short-list for a restricted tender will be drawn up soon. The terms of reference have however yet to be completed in detail, and the formal approval (statement of endorsement) of the beneficiary (municipality of Sortavala) has still to be obtained. It is hoped to complete all the necessary procedures during the next two or three months. Much depends on how swiftly the necessary consents from third parties can be obtained.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0255/99

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(12 February 1999)

Subject: The euro

Can the Commission say whether account has been taken of the visually handicapped in the design of the new euro notes and coins, and if so, how?

If not, is the Commission to prepared to have measures taken to enable the visually handicapped and blind citizens of Europe to recognize the notes and coins and to tell one from the other in each case?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 1999)

The Commission attaches great importance to the interests of the blind and visually handicapped and it consulted them at each stage in the design of the euro coins. The European Blind Union expressed its preference for the series of coins eventually selected.

Euro coins are differentiated by their size, composition, weight, colour and thickness. Several characteristics will make it easier for the blind and visually handicapped to identify the coins: different edges for each pair of consecutive coins, a smooth edge with a groove for the two cent coin, coarse milling for the 20 cent coin ( the form called "the Spanish flower").

The European Monetary Institute, the forerunner to the European Central Bank co-operated closely with the European Blind Union on the design of the notes. On 16 December 1996, the European Monetary Institute issued a press release entitled "The euro banknotes and the visually handicapped" which describes the technical specifications of the notes in order to facilitate identification by the blind. Euro banknotes will be characterised by the following: different sizes, increasing according to the face value of the note; different colours, each denomination having a single predominant colour (grey, red, blue, orange, green, yellow-brown or purple); good tactility with deep engraving and intaglio printing so that the symbols are recognisable by touch; clearly legible numerals, located in a standard position on each note throughout the series.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0025/99

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(15 January 1999)

Subject: Accession of Cyprus to EU

On 31 December 1998, the authoritative news bulletin Agence Europe reported that at a congress on Germany and the EU organised by TEPSA (Trans-European Policy) ahead of the German Presidency of the EU, the Director of the Rome Institute of Foreign Affairs proposed that Cyprus should be asked to seek a form of federation in exchange for membership and Turkey be told that it could enter the group of 11 applicants provided it satisfied the Copenhagen criteria. If this strategy were not adopted, the EU would have to reject the accession of Cyprus and seek a different form of relationship with Turkey on the basis of clearly defined common interests. As the report presents the situation, the "proposals" would entail an exchange of "offers" from the EU to Cyprus and Turkey, though the acceptance of the offers would depend on the will of Turkey. However, whatever form of federation Cyprus might offer has already been officially rejected by the Turkish side and the possibility of Turkey joining the 11 other applicant countries has also been rejected because of the linkage with acceptance of the Copenhagen criteria. In other words, the proposal is undermined from the outset. However, as it was put forward at a congress with a view to the German Presidency by a reputable organisation which frequently advises the Community institutions, will the EU Presidency say what view it takes of the proposals concerned, which are completely contrary to the position adopted by the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee, which expressly decided that the accession of Cyprus to the EU is in no way connected with the search for a political settlement in Cyprus?

Reply

(26 April 1999)

It is normal that a subject such as the future enlargement of the European Union should give rise to a wide-ranging public debate. However, it is not for the Council to comment on the proceedings of a seminar or on information appearing in the press.

The position of the European Union on the accession of Cyprus has already been set out on several occasions by the Council, most recently at its meeting on 5 October 1998. The Council's conclusions have been published.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 143/99 by Brigitte LANGENHAGEN EU aid to Osterholz-Scharmbeck



Official Journal C 370 , 21/12/1999 P. 0020



WRITTEN QUESTION E-0143/99 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE) to the Commission (11 February 1999) Subject: EU aid to Osterholz-Scharmbeck During the 1994-99 parliamentary term, what European Union grants, broken down by aid area, and for what amounts, were made to Osterholz-Scharmbeck?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0032/99

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(20 January 1999)

Subject: Viagra and the ill-treatment of animals

Reports have recently appeared in the European press that the company which manufactures the well-known drug Viagra carried out experiments on dogs in its laboratory in the Sandwich area in the United Kingdom.

During these experiments many of the dogs were killed and scores of others suffered appallingly.

Will the Commission say whether its services were informed about the ill-treatment and killing of scores of innocent dogs and, if so, what action it has taken to identify those responsible so as to prevent anything similar occurring in future?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-3349/98 by Mr Tamino(1).

(1) OJ C 297, 15.10.1999, p. 66.