ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1908/99

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 October 1999)

Subject: Fourth medium-term action programme on equal opportunities for men and women (1996-2000)

Will the Commission state what agencies (public or private), institutions, businesses, cooperatives and individuals have been allocated funding (specifying whether payments have already been made) under the fourth medium-term action programme on equal opportunities for men and women (1996-2000) (funds available for the period from 1 January 1996 to 31 December 2000: ECU 30 million, equal to LIT 58 billion) and how much each of them has been granted?

Has it checked how the amounts have actually been used and whether the proposed measures have been successfully implemented?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1999)

The Commission would inform the Honourable Member that the information requested can be found in the lists of projects funded in 1996, 1997 and 1998, and on the recapitulative list for 1999. The Commission will send copies directly to the Honourable Member, and to the Secretariat-General of the Parliament.

As regards the amounts involved, the sum of 4 098 268 was granted for the funding of relevant projects in 1996; in 1997, the sum increased to 4 927 598, and to 5 290 358 in 1998. As for 1999, the sum of 6 468 272 has been earmarked for the funding of projects. The above-mentioned documents will provide the Honourable Member with details of the funding granted for projects year by year.

Apart from the projects, the Commission has also funded other activities under the fourth programme. Specifically, it has provided the following sums for the preparation of the annual report on equal opportunities for men and women: 614 232 in 1996; 558 197 in 1997; and598 788 in 1998. As regards the studies carried out, the Commission allocated 902 014 in 1996, 515 910 in 1997 and 196 419 in 1998.

The use of funding under the action programme on equal opportunities for men and women is continuously monitored by the Commission. Each project must submit an interim and a final report before any payments are made.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2283/99

by Richard Howitt (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: Marketing practices

Could the Commission please indicate whether any of its delegations have received complaints about the implementation by local or national authorities or by NGOs of the Council Resolution of 18 June 1992 on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes in third countries by Community-based manufacturers(1) and, in particular, paragraph 2 and paragraph 5 thereof?

(1) OJ C 172, 8.7.1992, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Council Resolution of 18 June 1992 on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes in third countries by Community-based manufacturers(1) states that the Community will contribute to the application of appropriate marketing practices for breast-milk substitutes in third countries. In accordance with paragraph 2 of that Resolution, the Commission has instructed its delegations in third countries to serve as contact points for the competent authorities and receive any complaints or criticisms with respect to the marketing practices of a manufacturer established in the Community.

The Commission delegations have not to date received any complaints in the context of the Resolution from competent authorities of third countries. On one occasion a delegation received criticisms from a consumer organisation of a third country.

(1) OJ C 172, 8.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2270/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Increased ozone levels in Greece and other Mediterranean countries

The Commission's report concerning ozone indicates that, in Greece, greater concentrations of ozone in terms of quantity and duration have been observed this year. The Commission's proposals seek to achieve a 70 % reduction in ozone exposure compared with 1990. However, the southern Member States of the EU argue that account has not been taken of special geographical and climatic factors (high temperatures, sun, humidity) which aggravate the problem and maintain that any benefit is disproportionately outweighed by the cost.

Since it is imperative to take measures to reduce pollution levels, what does the Commission consider to be likely areas in which funding could be earmarked for measures to overcome the problem?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2000)

In preparing its proposal for a directive on national emission ceilings(1) the Commission performed an extensive analysis of costs and benefits of its strategy to combat ground-level ozone (and acidification). In the model simulations which were part of this analysis the varying natural factors influencing the ozone formation in particular in southern Europe were fully taken into account, as well as the country-specific costs for requisite emission control measures.

The cost-benefit analysis of the proposal showed that benefits were higher than costs for all Member States including Greece. If one takes account of cost savings for Greece because of further emission reductions by neighbouring third countries, as laid down in the recently signed protocol under the United Nations (UN) Economic commission for Europe (ECE) Convention on long-range transboundary air pollution, the surplus of benefits against costs would be even higher.

Results of a case study on the situation in Athens show that implementation of the emission ceilings would bring tangible reductions of ozone concentrations by 2010, despite the special climatic conditions in this area. If accompanied by additional efforts on the local level further improvements can be achieved in terms of even lower ozone concentrations.

As part of regional programmes in the framework of the Community structural funds financial aid for measures to control emissions of pollutants could be provided. There have been examples of financing such measures in Greece. The Commission is currently negotiating the new Community support framework for Greece under which funding of control measures against air pollution is considered.

(1) COM(1999) 125 final, completed by SEC(1999) 2004.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2117/99

by SIR Robert Atkins (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 November 1999)

Subject: Air Traffic Control

What is the European Commission's policy on the liberalisation/privatisation of state-owned Air Traffic Services amongst European Union Member governments?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2106/99, E-2107/99, E-2108/99, E-2109/99, E-2110/99, E-2111/99, E-2112/99, E-2113/99, E-2114/99, E-2115/99, E-2116/99 and E-2117/99 given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 1999)

The Commission has issued a communication(1) on the current situation of air traffic delays and on new initiatives to be taken to provide the Community with the air traffic management (ATM) system it needs to ensure the proper functioning of its internal market. Most questions raised by the Honourable Member are answered in this document which has been adopted on 1 December 1999 and communicated to the Council and the Parliament.

When preparing this communication the Commission worked in close cooperation with interested parties, in particular airspace users, airports, workers, and air traffic services providers, through their representative organisations. It also consulted the civil aviation authorities of all Member States on the various actions to take to rectify the situation.

Reduction of air traffic delays is primarily a responsibility of Member States and their co-ordinating body, Eurocontrol. In this context operational procedures and technical improvements are for specialists to define and implement. The role of the Community is essentially to create the organisational framework at national and European level so as to ensure that such solutions are universally agreed and implemented in a co-ordinated and consistent manner. This is why the Community decided in 1998 to join Eurocontrol so as to exercise political control on this organisation. Negotiations to that end are nearly completed, but ratification procedures may take several years. The Commission therefore will ask early implementation of Community membership.

The ATM 2000 strategy is a document produced by Eurocontrol and it is the responsibility of that organisation to adopt and implement the proposals contained in the strategy. The Commission has contributed to the production of this document along with aviation users, Member States, and international organisations. The Commission supports the general objectives and strategic principles as indicated in the strategy, but wonders whether more work is required in order to develop a mature, reliable and robust plan which addresses the technological developments necessary to meet the estimated doubling of traffic by 2015.

(1) COM(1999) 614.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1866/99

by Cristina García-Orcoyen Tormo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 October 1999)

Subject: Directive 96/61 on integrated pollution prevention and control

1. What is the situation concerning incorporation of Directive 96/61(1) in the Member States?

2. Is the agreed timetable being respected? What means are being used to identify the best available techniques referred to?

3. What are the next targets for improving compliance with the principles of Directive 96/61?

(1) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 1999)

The deadline for the transposition of Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC Directive) has just expired (30 October 1999). At present some Member States have communicated national implementing measures to the Commission, others not. Among the measures there is more or less complete legislation as well as legislation which apparently needs still to be amended or completed. Some Member States are in the course of adoption or publication of their legislation.

The Commission will open infringement proceedings under Article 226 (ex-Article 169) of the EC Treaty for non-communication against those Member States which have not communicated their national implementing measures. The Commission also has the possibility to open proceedings for non-conformity, at a later stage, if necessary to ensure full application of the IPPC Directive.

Article 11 of the IPPC Directive clearly requires the Member States to ensure that their authorities follow or are informed of developments in best available techniques (BAT). In parallel, the Commission has to organise an exchange of information between Member States and the industries concerned on best available techniques, associated monitoring and developments in them. This information exchange is under way, and will result in the issuing of reference documents describing, in a general sense, the best available techniques for each of the sectors covered by the IPPC Directive. The emission levels and techniques mentioned in these BAT reference documents (BREFs) will not have a legally binding character, but are intended to provide guidance for bodies involved in the identification of BAT. The information contained therein must be taken into account, in accordance with Annex IV of the IPPC Directive, when determining best available techniques generally or in specific cases.

The IPPC Directive is based on the concept that both the operators of industrial installations and their regulators should have an integrated view of the different environmental impacts of the installation before making decisions on how it should be designed, built and operated. Such an integrated approach should avoid the shifting of pollution between various environmental media. However, the IPPC approach will only be successful if it forms part of a comprehensive and ambitious environmental policy that adequately addresses all the key environmental concerns.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2067/99

by Carmen Fraga Estévez (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 November 1999)

Subject: Compliance with the regulation intended to ban the use of driftnets

In Commissioner Fischler's reply of 8 October 1999 to two earlier questions (P-1937/99 and E-1561/99(1)) from the present author, the purpose of which was to monitor compliance with the plan laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1239/98(2) concerning a ban on the use of driftnets, it is stated that the figures submitted by the Member States concerned indicate that the plan (which stipulates that, in 1998, only 60 % of the fishing vessels authorized for the 1995-1997 reference period will be allowed to operate) is being followed. However, the numbers of vessels which have been authorized to operate using driftnets are (by Member State) 43 French, 18 Irish and 6 UK in 1998 and 41 French, 18 Irish and 6 UK in 1999. Except in the case of Ireland, the number of vessels authorized exceeds 60 % of the number authorized in the reference period.

In view of the above, how can the Commission maintain that the driftnet eradication plan is being complied with when the figures supplied by the Commission itself demonstrate that this is not the case? What action is the Commission intending to take in order to remedy the situation and to ensure that the rules are complied with?

(1) OJ C 170 E, 20.6.2000.

(2) OJ L 171, 17.6.1998, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1999)

Article 11a(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1239/98 of 8 June 1998 amending Regulation (EC) No 894/97 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources(1) stipulates that the maximum number of vessels which may be authorised by a Member State to keep on board, or use for fishing, one or more drift-nets must not exceed 60 % of the fishing vessels which used one or more drift-nets during the period 1995 to 1997.

The lists of names of the vessels authorised in 1998 and 1999, which were forwarded to the Commission, were checked against the information concerning all the vessels which used one or more drift-nets, if only for one trip, in each year of the period mentioned. This check showed that the provision referred to above has been complied with. Accordingly, and on the basis of all the information which the Commission possesses, it does not have any grounds for drawing contrary conclusions.

Following the checks carried out under Article 29 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12 October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the common fisheries policy(2), and on the basis of all the information to be provided by the Member States concerned, the Commission is currently drawing up a report on the application of the Community legislation concerning the use of drift-nets in the North-East Atlantic and the Mediterranean, which will be forwarded to the members of Parliament's Committee on Fisheries as soon as it is finalised.

(1) OJ L 171, 17.6.1998.

(2) OJ L 261, 20.10.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1584/99

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Industrial fishing

In view of the recent explosion in industrial fishing in the North Sea for example, Denmark increased its fishmeal production from 16 000 tonnes in 1986 to 320 000 tonnes in 1994 does not the Commission feel that, on environmental and ecological grounds, the quotas should be reduced?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 October 1999)

The Commission does not consider that there has been an outburst of industrial fisheries from 1986 to 1994. Figures submitted by the International council for the exploration of the sea (ICES) indicate a rather stable fishery, only subject to natural fluctuations in the availability of target stocks.

Since the inception of the common fisheries policy, industrial fisheries by Community vessels in the Northeast Atlantic have always been subject to management rules. These rules include nowadays limitation of catches by TACs (total allowable catches), covering all species targeted for industrial purposes. TACs are fixed annually by the Council, on a proposal by the Commission which is based on the most recent and relevant scientific advice. Scientific advice takes into account environmental and ecological aspects.

Whenever scientific evidence will suggest that TACs should be reduced in order to ensure that fishing activities are carried out at a sustainable level, the Commission will certainly issue a proposal for a Council regulation to adapt TACs and quotas accordingly. The Commission will also evaluate in parallel the need to propose further management measures as appropriate.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1842/99

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

(13 October 1999)

Subject: Amount of financial compensation for loss of office

How much financial compensation was paid to the outgoing Commissioners who resigned in March 1999:

1. to those who did not return?

2. to the four who returned as Commissioners in September 1999?

3. to those who were elected as MEPs in June 1999?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 1999)

1. and 3. Sixteen commissioners terminated their office. Two of those took up positions as elected members of the Parliament. All of the 16 retired commissioners receive a monthly transitional allowance. This allowance is based on the duration of their office at the Commission according to Article 7 of Regulation No 422/67/EEC, 5/67 Euratom of the Council of 25 July 1967 determining the emoluments of the President and members of the Commission and of the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of justice(1) and subsequent amendments, which stipulates that:

For three years from the first day of the month following that in which the ex-member of the Commission ceases to hold office, he or she receives a monthly transitional allowance determined in accordance with the following procedure:

- 40 % of the basic salary which he/she was receiving when he/she ceased to hold office if his/her period of service is less than 2 years;

- 45 % of the same salary if the period is over 2 years but less than 3 years;

- 50 % of the same salary if the period is over 3 years but less than 5 years;

- 55 % of the same salary if the period is over 5 years but less than 10 years:

- 60 % of the same salary if the period is over 10 years but less than 15 years;

- 65 % of the same salary in other cases.

Entitlement to this allowance shall cease if the former member of the Commission is appointed to office in the Commission or the Court of Auditors or upon his/her death. In the event of such appointment, the allowance shall be paid up to the date of taking up his/her duties; in the event of death the payment for the month in which death occurred shall be the last. Furthermore in case of election as member of the Parliament, the accumulation rule applies (Article 7 paragraph 3 of the Regulation).

If during this three-year period the former member takes up new gainful employment, the gross monthly salary (ie before deduction of tax) received from the new employment will be deducted from the allowance, in as far as this income, added with this allowance, exceeds the amount (before deduction of tax) that the former member received whilst in office. All forms of remuneration received from new employment have to be taken into account, except those representing reimbursement of expenses.

2. No such payment was made.

(1) OJ 187, 8.8.1967.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2210/99

by Gérard Caudron (PSE) to the Council

(30 November 1999)

Subject: Bank charges on cross-border payments

I wish to voice my exasperation to the Council at the attitude of some banks which continue to apply scandalously high bank charges on cross-border payments in euros, with an intolerable lack of transparency.

The Commission is itself seriously concerned with these problems, which jeopardise the proper integration of the euro into our citizens' daily lives, and which show a lack of public-spiritedness among the banking institutions.

The Commission has accordingly been carrying out a number of investigations since the beginning of the year, and their results are to say the least unsatisfactory.

It is true that some banks have reduced their costs, but they are still the exception. This is why the Commission is continuing to carry out surprise investigations, as it did a fortnight ago in the Netherlands, Ireland and Belgium.

It is clear that there is a lack of will in the banking sector, and also among the Member States. Directive 97/5/EC(1) on cross-border transfers, which provides that costs should be transparent, should have been transposed into national law by 14 August 1999. However, if one wishes to consult the national transposition measures, the reply from all the Member States is the same: no reference available! And yet the Member States had two years to transpose the directive into their legal systems. The deadline has passed, and they are therefore liable to proceedings for failing to carry out their Treaty obligations. When do the Member States propose to comply with their obligations under Community law?

(1) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 25.

Reply

(31 January 2000)

According to Article 11 (1) of Directive 97/5/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 January 1997 on crossborder credit transfers Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 14 August 1999 at the latest. They shall forthwith inform the Commission thereof. According to (2) of the same Article they shall also communicate to the Commission the text of the main laws, regulations or administrative provisions which they adopt in the field governed by this Directive.

As for the specific question raised by the Honourable Parliamentarian, it is not for the Council to collect that type of information. As a matter of fact, according to Article 211 of the Treaty it is the task of the Commission to ensure that the provisions of the Treaty are applied, and, according to Article 226, to take the necessary measures if it considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under the Treaty.