ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3044/02

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(24 October 2002)

Subject: Extra-budgetary expenditure in the Portuguese budget for 2003

The newspaper Diário Económico reported on 15 October 2002 that the budget deficit forecast for the public administrative sector in the Portuguese budget for 2003 is 3 % of GDP, and not 2,4 % (the figure stated in the budget report and hitherto always cited).

The same newspaper stated that the Secretary of State for the Budget has confirmed the above, justifying his position on the grounds that this additional expenditure of EUR 754 million, which is not mentioned in the official budget report, corresponds to spending which will only take place if the state receives extraordinary revenues which are not provided for in the budget.

Can the Commission state whether this method is in line with any guidelines which it has issued to the Portuguese authorities?

Can it state whether it has received similar explanations from the Portuguese authorities?

Can the Commission explain on what basis this notional deficit is taken into account in the definition of the deficit forecast for the public administrative sector, and, at all events, supply a reasoned answer based on the existing national accountancy standards?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3042/02, E-3043/02 and E-3044/02given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 2002)

On a national accounts basis and according to the European System of National and Regional Accounts (ESA 95), expenditure is recorded on an accrual basis and not on a cash basis, which means that expenditure shall be registered in the years when the commitment was made and not when the actual payment took place. In the economic report of the Portuguese rectifying budget for 2002, it is mentioned that the regularisation of expenditure arrears in 2002 on account of commitments made and recorded as expenditure in previous years amounts to EUR 2,1 billion, which represents 1,6 % of the estimated gross domestic product (GDP) for 2002.

Concerning the extra-budgetary deficit in the Ministry of Education, it should be highlighted that the focus of the Commission budgetary surveillance is the general government sector as a whole and not any of its constituent units or sectors in particular, unless the latter display uncommon features that might risk compliance of the general government sector with overall budgetary targets. Moreover, the deficit referred to by the Honourable Member seems to be on a public accounts basis and not according to the ESA 95 national accounts rules.

According to the economic report accompanying the Portuguese 2003 budget, the general government deficit target on a national accounts basis for 2003 is 2,4 % of GDP. National accounts budgetary figures are those relevant for budgetary surveillance, in particular, the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact. The Commission is not aware of any other official projection for the Portuguese government deficit in 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3555/02

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Council

(5 December 2002)

Subject: Right of regional and local authorities to bring proceedings

On 28 November 2002 the European Parliament's Committee on Constitutional Affairs adopted a report by Mr Giorgio Napolitano which demanded that the regional and local authorities which have legislative powers should be given the right to bring proceedings before the European Court of Justice in order to protect their rights.

Is the Council able to support this demand?

Reply

(3 March 2003)

As an amendment to the Treaties would be required, it is not for the Council to state a view on this matter, which is under discussion in the Convention on the future of the European Union.

The Council is kept regularly informed of progress in the Convention's discussions.

In accordance with Article 48 of the Treaty on European Union, it will be for the Intergovernmental Conference convened in 2004 to take the final decisions, taking as a starting point for its discussions the final document produced by the Convention at the end of its proceedings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3791/02

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 January 2003)

Subject: Collective redundancies

In her reply of 21 November 2002 to my question E-2883/02(1), Commissioner Anna Diamantopoulou referred to the fact that infringement proceedings (Case C-55/02) were currently in progress before the European Court of Justice against Portugal for failure fully to transpose Council Directive 98/59/EC(2) of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies.

Will the Commission provide further details regarding these proceedings, specifying in particular what aspects of the directive were not duly transposed into Portuguese law, thereby giving rise to the proceedings?

(1) See page 57.

(2) OJ L 225, 12.8.1998, p. 16.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2003)

The infringement proceedings(1) against Portugal to which the Honourable Member refers are concerned with the transposition into national law of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies.

More specifically, the Commission is rebuking Portugal for its failure to meet its obligations under the EC Treaty, and under Articles 1, 6 and 7 of the above-mentioned Directive, in that the relevant Portuguese legislation restricts the concept of collective redundancies to dismissals for structural, technological or economic reasons. In the Commission's view, this concept is defined more broadly in Directive 98/59/EC, which applies to dismissals effected by an employer for one or more reasons not related to the individual workers concerned. A consequence of the concept of collective redundancies being restricted under Portuguese law is that the protection of workers which the Directive aims to provide does not extend, for example, to instances of bankruptcy, expropriation or fire, or to cases where a firm ceases to operate following the death of the entrepreneur.

(1) Case C-55/02, currently pending before the Court of Justice.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3732/02

by Philip Bradbourn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 December 2002)

Subject: Galileo

Would the Commission confirm that it has received a copy of the recent statement by the Royal Institute of Navigation which expresses concern as to the risks posed to the Galileo satellite system by natural and man-made interference, such as EMP, and would it provide details of what contingency measures are proposed in the event of such occurrences to ensure the safety of aircraft and other users of the system once it is operational?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2003)

The Commission can confirm that it has received a copy of the recent statement of the Royal Institute of Navigation on Global navigation satellite system (GNSS) vulnerability.

The Commission has well taken note of the recommendations of the Report by the US Volpe National Transportation Research Centre.

From the initial phase, the Galileo design took account of the potential threats. The Galileo security board is overseeing the Galileo design in a way to accommodate any security or safety concerns.

The system is designed as to minimize the potential vulnerability, notably with the following features:

- Galileo will transmit all its services on a variety of different and separated frequencies thus eliminating most of the concerns expressed in the Volpe report. In this respect, Galileo will be far less vulnerable than the current single frequency GPS system;

- it will offer multi-frequency signals for civilian users much earlier than currently envisaged for Global positioning system (GPS) thus providing the user with a reliable radionavigation service.

The Commission notes that not only the Galileo system but all navigation and communication systems using radio wave technology are, in principal, subject to interference and vulnerability. The necessity for appropriate and adequate alternative systems need to be assessed on a case by case basis by the relevant user community. It needs to be noted that currently most radionavigation services are being used without an alternative radio-navigation system. The Commission will assess the necessity of an optimal mix of radionavigation systems for Europe within the establishment of a European Radionavigation Plan in 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3629/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 December 2002)

Subject: Implementation of Community health and safety legislation in Greece

In relation to the investigation of complaint 00/4404 SG (2000) and the most recent question concerning that complaint (E-2773/02)(1), the Commission has shown real interest and organised meetings in Greece to collect more information. At the meeting between the Commission representative and the complainant, the latter presented information providing evidence of the complaints relating both to the undertaking where he works (a written admission by the undertaking's departments that nothing was done in relation to workers' health at work during the period under consideration) and the annual report of the Greek inspection authorities (report of the activities of SEPE 2001).

Since the above information provides incriminating evidence with regard to the application of Community legislation on the health and safety of workers, such as the total failure of SEPE to deal with occupational illness, inadequate processing and recording of occupational accidents and a failure to record employers' liability:

1. What are the initial conclusions from the investigation and the complaints and information which the Commission has received, including the revealing details provided by the General Confederation of Greek Workers?

2. On the basis of Articles 140, 211 and 226 of the Treaty, will the Commission formulate an opinion or recommendation regarding the implementation of Community legislation on the health and safety of workers in Greece?

(1) OJ C 52 E, 6.3.2003, p. 215.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2003)

1. The Honourable Member refers to complaint 2000/4404 and to his most recent question concerning this matter (Written Question E-2773/02); in this connection, the Commission would refer him to its answer to that question. As the Honourable Member notes, the Commission got in touch firstly with the complainant and then with the Greek authorities with a view to clarifying the matter. At the meeting with the complainant on 5 November 2002 in Athens, the Commission representative was given a large dossier in Greek by the complainant. A meeting with the Greek authorities was held on the same day. As part of its investigation of complaint 2000/4404, the Commission is currently examining the dossier from the complainant and will take appropriate measures in the light of the findings of this examination, and on the basis of its examination of information obtained from the Greek authorities.

The Commission will, of course, keep the complainant informed of any developments.

2. If it were to emerge from the information in its possession that the Greek authorities have failed to comply with Community law, the Commission would consider whether it would be appropriate to institute infringement proceedings pursuant to Article 226 of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2883/02

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Community support

Less than a year after another identical situation, almost a thousand workers employed by the multinational footwear company Rohde in Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal, are again facing the prospect of being laid off for three weeks. The situation is especially serious given the very low wage levels in Portugal, and not even these low wages will be paid during this period.

The management's justification, based on an alleged lack of orders, is not credible given that work has remained at an extremely high level. The business association Appicaps itself states that Portugal again stands out against the remaining Community countries with footwear exports reaching a new historic high, increasing by 36 % according to INE figures, a trend which has continued in 2002.

Bearing in mind that the company has received around EUR 500 000 in state incentives,

can the Commission provide information on any Community support which the German multinational Rohde has received in Portugal and in other EU Member States, and on the measures adopted with a view to safeguarding the rights of its workers?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(21 November 2002)

With regard to protection of the rights of the workers concerned, the Commission would refer in particular to Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies(1).

This Directive has been largely transposed into national law in Portugal. Although an infringement procedure(2) is currently under way against Portugal to ensure that this Directive is fully transposed into national law, it does not seem that Portugal's non-compliance can in this particular case affect the rights guaranteed to workers under Community law.

It is therefore up to the relevant national authorities to check whether they are properly implemented in this case.

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that, to its knowledge, Rohde has not received any Community funding, and certainly not from European Social Fund money for Portugal.

(1) OJ L 225, 12.8.1998.

(2) Case C-55/02 pending before the Court of Justice of the European Communities.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2538/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(5 September 2002)

Subject: United effort by EU Member States to support the International Criminal Court by ending the exemption granted by Romania

Does the Council intend temporarily to suspend the current negotiations with Romania as an applicant country for accession to the European Union until the latter revokes the agreement recently concluded with the United States to exempt American citizens from extradition to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague, with a view to clearly demonstrating to the whole world and in particular to other applicant countries that there can be no doubt as to the united will of the European Union to enable the ICC to fulfil its function fully, unimpeded and without privileges being enjoyed by any state?

Reply

(3 March 2003)

The Council is aware that on 1 August 2002 Romania signed an agreement with the United States on this matter, ratification of which is pending. While stressing that Romania has the right as a sovereign State to sign any such agreement, the Council draws attention to its Common Position on the International Criminal Court of 11 June 2001, as amended on 20 June 2002, on which Romania has aligned itself. The Council also invites the Honourable Parliamentarian to refer to the conclusions it agreed upon on this matter on 30 September 2002. The Council expects Romania to comply with the obligations it assumed when it endorsed the Statute of the International Criminal Court and to take account of the EU position with regard to ratification.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2522/02

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Commission

(11 September 2002)

Subject: Police wiretapping of Jyllands-Posten

Is it compatible with EU rules for the police to wiretap Jyllands-Posten and attempt to force a journalist to reveal his sources?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 2002)

The Commission has no information on the case to which the Honourable Member refers.

On the subject of wiretapping made by the police of the Member States, the Commission would like to point out that this falls under the exclusive competence of the Member States.

It should be added that Directive 97/66/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the telecommunications secto(1) provides for an obligation for Member States to ensure the confidentiality of communications by means of a public telecommunications network and publicly available telecommunications services. Article 14 of this Directive allows Member States to adopt legislative measures to restrict the scope of this obligation when such a restriction constitutes a necessary measure to safeguard national security, defense, public security, the prevention, investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences or of unauthorized use of the telecommunications system. Moreover, this approach is confirmed by Article 15(1) of Directive 2002/58/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications secto(2).

(1) OJ L 24, 30.1.1998.

(2) OJ L 201, 31.7.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2960/02

by André Brie (GUE/NGL)and Joost Lagendijk (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(22 October 2002)

Subject: Minefields on the (eastern) border between Greece and Turkey

Referring to an article in the Athens News (30.8.2002) according to which an illegal immigrant was killed and two others injured after straying into a minefield near Greece's northeastern border with Turkey, we would like to draw the attention of the Council to this persistent problem. Although there has been a considerable number of mine victims (especially immigrants) over the last couple of years, the most recent Landmine Monitor Report 2002 (http://www.icbl.org/) maintains that there appears to be no comprehensive report on the mine problem in Greece.

Since the border between Greece and Turkey is also an external border of the EU, we ask the Council:

- Is it aware of this problem?

- What is its position towards this anachronistic and inhuman border regime?

- How does it interpret this situation in the light of Parliament's resolution on anti-personnel landmines (B5-0802/2000(1)) in which Parliament asks the EU to commit itself to work towards the total elimination of anti-personnel landmines?

- What political, financial or other measures have been (or will be) taken to support Greece in the necessary demining activities?

(1) OJ C 197, 12.7.2001, p. 193.

Reply

(20 February 2003)

1. The Council is fully aware of the problem posed by the existing minefields, a legacy of past conflicts, along the Greek-Turkish border, where exploding mines regularly claim victims, in particular among illegal immigrants.

2. The Council is generally committed to the goal of total elimination of landmines. This is reflected in a number of legislative acts such as, in particular, the CFSP Joint Action of 1997 on anti-personnel landmines and the two Regulations of 2001 on anti-landmine action in developing countries and in third countries other than developing countries. The latter are a direct response to the Convention on the prohibition of the use, stockpiling, production and transfer of anti-personnel mines and on their destruction (Ottawa Convention or Mine Ban Treaty), while the CFSP Joint Action i.a. allows for specific actions and contributions of the EU in the field of mine clearance and relief for victims.

3. As regards specifically Greece and Turkey, both countries have come close to depositing jointly their instruments of ratification (for Greece) or accession (for Turkey) to the Ottawa Convention. Marking and protection of Greek minefields along the Turkish border have, according to Greek sources, already resulted in a reduction of accidents by almost 90 % (cf. Landmine Monitor Report 2002 of the International Campaign to Ban Landmines).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3155/02

by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 November 2002)

Subject: Pension rights

Is it acceptable that a primary school teacher who gives 40 years unbroken service in two European Member States, namely the UK and the Republic of Ireland suffers from discrimination in contrast to other workers in a similar situation, in that the teacher will not receive the full pension and end-of-service gratuity to which forty years' unbroken service should entitle him/her?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 2002)

The question raises two separate issues:

1. Entitlement to Pension:

- It is not clear from the information provided whether the person concerned is having problems with his/her state pension, or with an occupational pension. As regards the former, Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71(1) aims to ensure that people who move do not lose out on their social security rights. When a person reaches pensionable age he/she will receive an old age pension in respect of each Member State where he/she has paid social insurance contributions for at least 12 months.

- On occupational pensions, Council Directive 98/49/EC(2) offers some protection. However, it does not stipulate minimum vesting periods, nor are occupational pension schemes obliged to allow members who move to another Member State to continue to make contributions. Further information is required in order to give more specific advice.

2. Entitlement to end-of-service gratuity:

- The Commission considers that migrant workers' previous periods of comparable employment acquired in another Member State must be taken into account by Member States' administrations for determining professional advantages (e.g. salary, grade) in the same way as applies to experience acquired in their own system (Article 39 of the EC Treaty and Article 7 of Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68(3));

- In the view of the Commission an end-of-service gratuity could be considered as such a professional advantage; more information about this gratuity would be necessary in order to evaluate this in-depth;

- From the information provided in the written question it is not clear in which of the two Member States mentioned the person concerned has encountered the described problems. The Commission, therefore, suggests that the Honourable Member or the concerned citizen provide additional information direct to the services of Directorate General Employment and Social Affairs. On the basis of that information the Commission will evaluate if further investigations will be undertaken.

(1) Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of the Council of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community, OJ L 149, 5.7.1971.

(2) Council Directive 98/49/EC of 29 June 1998 on safeguarding the supplementary pension rights of employed and self-employed persons moving within the Community, OJ L 209, 25.7.1998.

(3) Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 of the Council of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community, OJ L 257, 19.10.1968.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3450/02

by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 December 2002)

Subject: Uranium in public drinking water

Can the Commission explain why there are no parametric values for uranium 238 in either EU or WHO guidelines, and is there any evidence of physical side-effects on humans or animals from ingesting uranium 238?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2003)

At the time of negotiating and of adopting Council Directive 98/83/EC of 3 November 1998, on the quality of water intended for human consumption(1), it has been agreed to make a distinction between the chemical toxicity of uranium and its radio-toxicity and to retain only the radio-toxicity; a parametric value has been fixed for the total indicative dose.

This was in line with the conclusions from the World Health Organisation (WHO) acknowledging that no adequate short- and long-term studies on the chemical toxicity of uranium were available and that a guideline value for uranium in drinking water couldn't be defined at that time. Once a guideline will be set by WHO on the basis of additional information, the Commission will make the necessary proposal for amendment of the Directive in the frame of the five years review process foreseen in Article 11.1 of the same Directive.

(1) OJ L 330, 5.12.1998.