ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0056/00

by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: The choice of cultural and ethnic categories on equal opportunities forms

What is the Commission's view of the contents of a recent Monitoring of EQUAL Opportunities Policy form, distributed by the European section of a large political party, which used the following classifications of cultural and ethnic origin as recommended by the (UK) Commission for Racial Equality: White, Black Caribbean, Black African, Black Other, Indian, Irish, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Chinese, Asian, Other; why there should be an Irish category distinct from the broad classification of white (whereas no other EU Member State is deemed different enough to warrant such a distinction) and whether requesting that citizens from Ireland should be asked to distinguish themselves differently on such a form is legally permissible?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2000)

As the Honourable Member will be aware, the choice of cultural and ethnic categories on equal opportunities forms is not in itself the subject of Community law. However, Directive 95/46/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data(1) expressly prohibits the processing of personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade-union membership, and the processing of data concerning health or sex life. This prohibition is lifted in a number of limited circumstances, including where the consent of the individual concerned has been given.

Subject to the conditions laid down in that Directive, the Commission believes that the collection of statistical information on discrimination related to racial and ethnic origin, whether real or presumed, can make a useful contribution to ensuring equality of treatment and opportunity. The proposal for a Council decision establishing a Community action programme to combat discrimination (2001-2006), adopted by the Commission on 25 November 1999(2), includes a strand devoted to the collection and analysis of data related to discrimination on the grounds covered by the programme, including racial and ethnic origin.

As regards the particular categories to be used in such monitoring, the Commission believes that this should be left to the particular Member States concerned, given the existence of different minority ethnic groups in the different Member States. The Commission cannot in any case comment on the choices made in the internal documents of political parties.

(1) OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.

(2) COM(99) 567 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0006/00

by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: Recognition of Commission President Romano Prodi

Is it true that when Romano Prodi, President of the Commission, arrived at the royal wedding on 4 December 1999, the Belgian television French language service (RTBF) introduced him as the Prime Minister of Portugal?

If so, what steps will the Commission take to ensure that Belgian television recognises the Commission President in future?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2000)

It is true that when Mr Prodi, President of the Commission, arrived at the Cathedral for the royal marriage on 4 December 1999, the commentator for the Belgian television channel RTBF referred to him as the President (not the Prime Minister) of Portugal.

The Commission does not feel that this slip, which was quickly corrected, constitutes a major incident. Moreover, the Belgian television subsequently showed pictures of the President sitting at the table of honour not far from the Belgian Sovereigns and the royal couple.

The Commission endeavours to develop a communication policy based on transparency and the right of the citizen to be informed on Community institutions and the Union's policies. In this, it cooperates fully with Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0144/00

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(20 January 2000)

Subject: Extension of European arms embargo against Indonesia

1. Could the Council confirm that the arms embargo imposed on Indonesia is due to expire on 17 January 2000 and that, in view of the optimism about Indonesia's future which prevailed until recently, it was not intended to extend this ban?

2. Does the Council recall the open letter of 27 November 1999 addressed by East Timorese Nobel prize winner José Ramos Horta to European governments and parliaments? In that letter, Mr Horta wrote that,

despite urging that all economic and financial sanctions imposed on Indonesia should be ended, he did not believe the time was right to lift the arms embargo. The last thing Indonesia needed was weapons. Selling arms to the Indonesian army, the TNI, would give the wrong signal. Mr Horta hoped that the greed and irresponsibility that had characterised the policy of certain countries which had sold arms to Indonesia were a thing of the past.

3. Does the Council agree that, in view of the role played by the Indonesian army following the referendum which resulted in independence for East Timor, in the fighting between Christians and Muslims over the Molucca Islands and in the suppression of the resistance engaged in by the people of Aceh over many years, the army may be seen as instigating conflict between sections of the population and threatening the existence of the democratic form of government introduced in Indonesia in 1999? And does the Council also agree that it is important to minimise this threat?

4. Would the Council be willing to take a decision at the latest at its meeting of 24 January 2000 to extend the arms embargo, which would allow the companies Hollandse Signaal Apparaten of the Netherlands and Thomson CSF of France not to go ahead on 1 February 2000 with the supply of equipment ordered earlier by Indonesia, without being open to the charge of breach of contract?

Reply

(13 March 2000)

The restrictive measures taken against the previous Indonesian Government in September 1999 did indeed expire on 17 January 2000. They were not extended. The EU noted, however, that EU policy regarding arms exports would be governed by strict implementation of the EU Code of Conduct. The EU also echoed the honourable member's concern at the appalling violence in the

Moluccas and the persistent conflict in Aceh, as well as the tensions in Irian Jaya. The EU is determined to support the efforts of the new democratically-elected Indonesian Government to strengthen the country's democracy, reform its military and judicial systems, restore the vitality of its economy and solve its internal conflicts through dialogue rather than force.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0163/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 January 2000)

Subject: Mr Fischler's visit to Morocco on 17 January

The fisheries agreement with Morocco expired on 30 November 1999. As a result, the fleet operating in Moroccan waters has been laid up, leading to all the inevitable socio-economic consequences. The fleet includes about 30 Portuguese vessels, which employ some 700 fishermen and provide 3 000 spin-off jobs, primarily in two communities dependent on the fisheries sector, Sesimbra and Olhão/Fuzeta. It is specialised to enable it to operate in the Moroccan fishing grounds and would therefore be quite difficult to convert to other uses.

According to an Agence Europe report dated 18 January 2000, it emerged from the meeting between the Member of the Commission concerned, Franz Fischler, and the Moroccan State Secretary Taieb Fassifihiri that the agreement will not be renewed. To quote the bulletin, The EU notes the fact that cooperation based on extraction activities mldr is now over and plans to explore other solutions.

1. How much credence should be attached to the above report? Has the Commission now ruled out the possibility of renewing the fisheries agreement?

2. What steps has it already taken in view of the fact that the fleet has been laid up because the agreement has expired?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2000)

The Commission confirms that it is liaising with the Moroccan authorities in exploring all possible forms of new partnership that could be established with Morocco in the fisheries sector which would be mutually advantageous to both sides.

The Commission position remains unchanged from that set out over recent months, which is based essentially on the negotiating brief approved by the Council on 15 October 1999.

Financial support measures for shipowners and crews affected by the non-renewal of the agreement with Morocco have been authorised by the Commission already. As from 1 January 2000 these will be financed as part of programmes under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) 2000-2006 for Spain and Portugal, in accordance with the conditions laid down in the new FIFG Regulation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0797/00

by Lousewies van der Laan (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 March 2000)

Subject: Requirement that Dutch citizens return to the Netherlands in connection with sudden claims to benefits from certain types of collective insurance

1. Is the Commission aware of the practical effects on Dutch citizens of KB 746, which requires them to move back to the Netherlands if they wish to continue to benefit from certain types of collective insurances?

2. Does the Commission agree that this constitutes a de facto restriction on the free movement of persons in the European Union?

3. What steps will the Commission take to ensure that Dutch citizens can continue to reside in the place of their choosing in the European Union without incurring undue and unforeseen costs as a result of the new legislation?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question P-0706/00 by Mr Staes(1).

(1) See page 207.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0166/00

by Rosa Díez González (PSE), Fernando Pérez Royo (PSE) and Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(31 January 2000)

Subject: Effects of state aid on the Spanish electricity sector

Given the enviable economic and financial situation of Spanish electricity companies receiving competition transition costs (CTC), what measures will the Commission take to link the payment of eligible CTC to the financial and economic viability of companies? Does it plan to assess the impact of and need for CTC at the level of consolidated companies or by individual assets?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(9 March 2000)

The Commission takes the view that, to rank as a stranded cost, a given investment or contract must become uneconomic as a result of the liberalisation of the electricity market provided for in Parliament and Council Directive 96/92/EC of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity(1) and must significantly affect the competitiveness of the company concerned. The Commission analyses stranded costs on an asset-by-asset basis before determining their impact on the competitiveness of consolidated companies.

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0284/00

by Hans-Peter Mayer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 February 2000)

Subject: Principle of equality in the British nationality acquisition criteria

The British nationality acquisition criteria are such that children of a British mother and a foreign father cannot lay claim to British nationality if they were born before 1 January 1983, because up to that time only the father's nationality could be passed on to children.

Does this arrangement contravene the principle of equality implied in Community law?

Could any steps be taken under Community law to change the provisions?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2000)

Rules on acquiring or losing nationality are governed exclusively by the national law of each Member State.

This was made quite clear in Declaration No 2 annexed to the Treaty on European Union, which states that the question whether an individual possesses the nationality of a Member State shall be settled solely by reference to the national law of the Member State concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0285/00

by Claude Desama (PSE) to the Commission

(11 February 2000)

Subject: Proposed merger between Worldcom and Sprint

The proposed merger between Sprint and MCI Worldcom constitutes a market threat to the European Internet backbone network. Together, the two companies would hold a dominant position in the USA, enabling them to charge increased fees to network operators and users. The new merged company would be able to take advantage of its control over critical intersections to make a profit from the provision of data transmission and data switching services worldwide on Internet.

How does the Commission intend to respond to this anti-competitive arrangement?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2000)

The proposed merger between Spring and MCI WorldCom was notified to the Commission on 11 January 2000 so that it could be scrutinised for compatibility with the common market. As in 1998 when examining the merger between MCI and WorldCom, the Commission will carefully study the effects of combining the respective activities of Sprint and MCI WorldCom on the Internet market. If the Commission found that the proposed merger would create or reinforce a dominant position, the parties concerned would have to suggest appropriate ways of resolving the competition problems which this would pose.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0598/00

by Hervé Novelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 February 2000)

Subject: Refusal by France to pay housing benefit to a student on the grounds that she should have been living in France

France has refused to pay housing benefit to a French student studying in Belgium for the sole reason that she should be resident in France in order to receive this allowance.

This provision, which discriminates significantly between students of the same nationality according to whether they are studying in France or another EU country, is certainly not conducive to achieving a united Europe!

Can the Commission say whether provisions of this kind are not contrary to the various treaties and subsequent texts which underlie European integration and determine how it works in practice?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 2000)

Under Community law as it currently stands, the Member States are free to decide on their own authority whether their nationals who wish to pursue studies in another Member State should continue to receive grants or other financial assistance in the host country. They are also free to provide financial assistance and grants specifically for the purpose of enhancing student mobility. This decision is a matter for the Member States alone.

Although the provisions of French law referred to by the Honourable Member represent an obstacle to student mobility, they do not constitute an infringement of Community law.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0025/00

by Manuel Pérez Álvarez (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: Safety of toys

All the year round, and particularly at this season, the media in general and television in particular invade our lives and homes with advertising for toys, targeted mainly at one particular audience, namely children.

However, as we know, much of this advertising provides very little real information as to the nature and qualities of the products being marketed.

Given that much of this advertising is simply misleading, what measures have been taken to prevent or eliminate its pernicious effects?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(24 March 2000)

The television without frontiers Directive, (TVWF) Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities(1) as amended by Directive 97/36/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997 provides the legal framework for television broadcasting within the Community.

The TVWF Directive, as adopted in 1989, contained certain provisions relating to television advertising. In particular, Article 16 specifically provided that television advertising should not cause moral or physical detriment to minors. When the Directive was reviewed, the Commission undertook to carry out a study on the impact of television advertising and teleshopping on minors, in the context of the next review of the television Directive, in accordance with Article 26. This study was launched in January 2000, and should be finished before the end of the year 2000.

In addition to the television Directive, Council Directive 84/450/CEE of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising(2) applies in a horizontal manner to all advertising.

It should be noted that the Commission is currently encouraging a dialogue between consumer associations and industry about marketing practices targeting children.

(1) OJ L 202, 30.7.1997.

(2) OJ L 250, 19.9.1984.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0545/00

by William Newton Dunn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 February 2000)

Subject: British stamp duty discriminating against British businesses

Bearing in mind one of the principles of the treaties, i.e. that there must be no discrimination between citizens of the European Union, is it legal for the British Government to levy stamp duty on individual transactions in shares in British companies but to allow transactions in shares in non-British companies to be exempt from stamp duty?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0045/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(20 January 2000)

Subject: Cologne process: adjustment of the Poseima programme in the Azores with regard to incentives for vegetable farming

Title II of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92(1) introduced measures of potentially significance for agricultural development in the Azores and Madeira, but which have been relatively little exploited because of the high proportion of co-funding required (20 % from private and 30 % from public authorities respectively).

Does the Commission envisage introducing lower rates of co-funding?

(1) OJ L 173, 27.6.1992, p. 1.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0038/00, E-0043/00, E-0044/00, E-0045/00, E-0046/00, E-0047/00, E-0048/00, E-0049/00, E-0050/00, E-0051/00 and E-0052/00 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2000)

The Honourable Member has put a whole series of questions regarding the Poseima Programme for the Azores.

The Commission is currently drafting a report on the measures to implement Article 299(2) (ex Article 227) of the EC Treaty.

At this stage, before the Commission has adopted that report, it is not able to reply to the Honourable Member's questions concerning its content.

Lastly, the Commission's Work Programme for 2000 provides for a report to be presented to the Council and Parliament on the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Azores and Madeira relating to certain agricultural products(1) (Poseima), together where appropriate with proposals for any adjustments that prove necessary to achieve the programme's goals. The set of measures relating to agriculture in the Azores will be considered in that connection.

(1) OJ L 173, 27.6.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0674/00

by Marit Paulsen (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 March 2000)

Subject: Free movement of workers

I Sweden, repayment of State study loans is governed by the Study Finance Act (1973:349) and the Study Finance Decree (1973:418).

People residing in Sweden are required to repay study loans at an annual rate of 4 % of their combined income from service, employment and capital. However, people residing abroad, including therefore in other EU Member States, are required to repay them at an annual rate of 1/20 of the debt.

Admittedly, these rules apply to all, irrespective of nationality, but in reality they make it unaffordable for those on low or middle incomes, or part-time workers, who have studied for a medium length of time (four to five years) to live and work in another Member State, as they are required to repay a considerably larger amount per annum than they would if they remained in Sweden (for those on high incomes, the situation may of course be reversed). Person A has a debt of about SEK 300 000 from a study loan (a normal amount for a person who has studied for four or five years) and an annual income of SEK 168 000 (SEK 14 000 per month). If this person lives and works in Sweden, he/she will have to repay SEK 6 720 per annum. However, if the same person happens to live and work in France, the annual repayment will be more than twice as much: SEK 15 000. Thus Sweden's repayment rules favour those in high income groups, while those on low or middle incomes or who work part-time cannot afford to take advantage of the fundamental freedom to live and work in another Member State (cf. ECJ judgment in the case of Kraus, C-19/92).

Do these repayment rules violate the fundamental freedom to seek employment and to live and work in another Member State (Article 39 of the EC Treaty)?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 2000)

The Commission has asked the Member State concerned for information regarding the facts raised to by the Honourable Member. It will inform her of its findings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0356/00

by Elisa Damião (PSE) to the Commission

(14 February 2000)

Subject: European list of occupational diseases

The European list of occupational diseases, which is supposed to be open-ended, should take into account the new risks related to insecurity, the pace of modern life, constant changes in people's jobs and working environments, and technological development, which all have psychosomatic effects (commonly referred to as stress) on the quality of life and health of workers.

In the light of various studies on the subject, will the Commission state to what extent this list of occupational diseases and new risks has been updated in recent years?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2000)

The European schedule of occupational diseases was adopted in the form of Commission Recommendation No 90/326/EEC of 22 May 1990(1).

On 20 September 1996 the Commission produced a Communication(2) examining the extent to which the Recommendation on the European schedule of occupational diseases had been implemented in the Member States.

In 1999 the Commission, in collaboration with the Member States, embarked on technical studies with a view to updating the aforementioned European schedule. Particular attention is being paid to the emergent risks to workers' health, such as psychosocial risks.

Once this work has been completed, the new European schedule of occupational diseases is expected to be adopted in the first half of 2001.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1990.

(2) COM(96) 454 final.