ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1452/00

by Wolfgang Ilgenfritz (NI) to the Commission

(10 May 2000)

Subject: Distortions of competition on the Austrian livestock market

Since Austria's accession to the EU, national aid schemes have been used to support so-called producer groups and unions of such groups on the Austrian livestock market.

The private livestock trade is excluded from these aid schemes, in other words a farmer producing agricultural products receives no aid if he does not belong to a producer group.

In these producer groups products are bought in wholesale prices and offered for sale below the calculated wholesale price. The resulting loss is offset by the aid payments.

This disregard for standard commercial principles on the part of the producer groups makes it impossible for the private livestock trade to sell its products on a fair, competitive market.

In the light of this situation, and the opinion delivered by the Federal Committee for the Private Livestock Trade (which has been forwarded to DG D), I should like to put the following questions to the Commission:

1. What measures does the Commission plan to take to combat this distortion of competition?

2. If the Commission does not regard this as a breach of the principle of free competition, how does it justify that standpoint?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2000)

State aids to cover operating costs would normally not be compatible with Articles 87 and 88 (ex Arrticles 92 and 93) of the EC Treaty.

However, the Commission normally allows state aid for the starting up of producer associations if certain conditions are met(1). The costs eligible for such support are the administrative start-up costs of the group or association.

The Commission attaches great importance to investigating allegations that (illegal) state aids are being paid. However, in order to do so it would need to have more information about the nature of the aids which are being granted and about the Länder concerned.

(1) Point 10 of the Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector (OJ C 28, 1.2.2000).
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2530/00

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(25 July 2000)

Subject: Fires in southern Europe

Will the Commission release emergency appropriations to cover the damage caused by the widespread fires which have raged across southern Europe and Greece, in particular, in recent days, in view of the need for exceptional funding to compensate those affected by the disaster and to restore the natural environment?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 September 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-1160/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(11 April 2000)

Subject: White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority

The White Paper on Food Safety (COM(1999) 719 final) was published in January 2000. Chapter 4 is concerned with establishing a European Food Authority (EFA). Chapter 5 considers legislation on food safety.

The Commission wants to introduce a proposal to abolish the 25 % rule for compound ingredients (section 100). It also draws attention to the problem of the carry-over of additives and for indicating on the label the allergens, where at present only the name of the product category needs to be given.

1. Is the Commission prepared to carry out a preliminary investigation into the feasibility of indicating all ingredients? If not, does the Commission not wish to use the possibility of indicating all ingredients? What are the Commission's arguments for ruling out this possibility in advance?

2. Does the Commission seek the labelling of additives which are present as a result of carry-over? If not, why not?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1122/00, E-1127/00, E-1128/00, E-1140/00, E-1141/00, E-1142/00, E-1143/00, E-1144/00, E-1145/00, E-1146/00, E-1147/00, E-1148/00, E-1150/00, E-1151/00, E-1152/00, E-1153/00, E-1155/00, E-1156/00, E-1157/00, E-1158/00, E-1160/00, E-1161/00 and E-1162/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(9 June 2000)

The issues raised by the Honourable Member are being studied with a view to bringing forward proposals for legislation according to the time scale set out in the white paper on food safety.

It would be inappropriate at this stage to anticipate the details of each proposal.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2121/00

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

(30 June 2000)

Subject: Galician-funded Argentine fishing fleet

It is a well-known fact that Argentine vessels owned by companies financed by European, or in this case Galician, capital are finding it difficult to fish in the territorial waters of the country to which they legally belong because the authorities are favouring the interests of other sectors of the Argentine fleet. The discrimination has even led to protests in Puerto Madryn (Patagonia) and Buenos Aires.

Will the Commission lay down a permanent agreement with Argentina to protect investment and safeguard the interests and work of the Argentine fleet belonging to Galician-owned companies?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

The position of the Commission regarding various conservation measures adopted by Argentina to cope with the present situation of stocks remains unchanged.

In the talks which took place last February with the new Argentine administration, the Commission raised the position of the joint enterprises created under our fisheries agreement and asked for a review of some of the conservation measures in order to restore general balance to the agreement.

Accordingly, the Commission would like to stress the need to meet with the Argentinian authorities to examine the current situation and find an arrangement which, while taking into account the state of stocks, will guarantee a degree of legal and commercial stability to the joint enterprises formed under the fisheries agreement.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1208/00

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council

(27 April 2000)

Subject: Persecution of 13 Iranians of the Jewish faith in Iran

For approximately one year, 13 Iranians of the Jewish faith have been imprisoned without trial on charges of spying and have been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment on a daily basis. The latest reports indicate that most of them are not being allowed to choose a lawyer to defend them at their trial, which is scheduled for 13 April. In the light of the critical dialogue that has been initiated between the Union and Iran, will the Council say what measures it will take to obtain guarantees of a fair and open trial and the safeguarding of the right to choose a defence lawyer?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1208/00 and E-1250/00

(28 September 2000)

The question of the 13 Iranian Jews has been raised in talks, on all possible occasions and at all levels, between EU representatives and Iranian official representatives, notably during the visit of the Iranian Foreign Minister Kharrazi to Helsinki in September 1999 and at the EU-Iran dialogue meeting in December.

In response to these representations and to such representations undertaken by the Member States of the European Union the Iranian Government assured and re-assured the European Union that the detained Jews would get a fair and transparent trial.

In April, just before the opening of the trial, the European Union expressed again to the Iranian authorities the importance the EU attaches to this issue and recalled the Iranian commitments as to the conduct of the trial.

The European Union has learnt with concern of the verdict pronounced by the revolutionary court in Shiraz. It is disappointed that the trial was held in camera despite the assurances given by the Iranian authorities. The European Union notes that the decision is open to appeal. In view of the significance it attaches to this issue, it strongly hopes that the court of appeal will overturn the convictions. The European Union will continue to express its concern to the Iranian authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1687/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: EU standards versus local food production

In the spring of 1998, an ICA retailer in Torsås, southern Sweden, sold eggs which he bought from a local farmer. On 1 January 1998, however, the EU introduced standards for trade in eggs which were interpreted to mean that eggs which local producers were unable to candle and pack themselves must be transported to an approved egg-packing plant. This meant that the ICA retailer in Torsås could no longer sell eggs from local farmers. Instead, the eggs had first to be transported 250 km to the egg-packing plant at Hässleholm and then be transported back packed. The effect of this is to curb the development of local production. What are the Commission's views on this situation? Must eggs sold in shops have been candled and packed by an authorised egg-packing plant?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2000)

Council Regulation (EEC) No 1907/90 of 26 June 1990, on certain marketing standards for eggs(1) is applicable in Sweden since 1 January 1998. It provides that eggs shall not be marketed by way of business or trade unless they satisfy the provisions of that regulation stipulating that: eggs shall be graded by quality, and grade A eggs also by weight; only packing centres may grade eggs, producers may not deliver eggs to anyone but collectors, packing centres, certain wholesale markets and industry.

The Commission therefore confirms that, in order to ensure quality eggs for consumers, eggs cannot be sold directly from farmers to retail trade without being candled and graded in a packing centre. Regarding the case in Southern Sweden referred to by the Honourable Member, about 20 packing centres are situated within a radius of 150 kilometres around Torsås according to the Swedish board of Agriculture, partly much closer. Furthermore, producers may be approved as packing centres if their premises and technical equipment for candling and grading of eggs comply with the conditions laid down in the common egg marketing standards.

(1) OJ L 173, 6.7.1990.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2265/00

by Nirj Deva (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 July 2000)

Subject: ACP States

How many full-time EU officials are employed in each EU office in each ACP State?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2265/00, E-2266/00, E-2267/00 and E-2268/00 given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 August 2000)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2597/00

by Pervenche Berès (PSE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: EU-Tunisia relations

Human rights violations in Tunisia are a source of great concern. It is incumbent on the international community and in particular the EU to encourage the Tunisian Government to greater tolerance and respect for freedoms.

The recent hunger strike by the journalist Ben Brik has highlighted the pressures on those campaigning for greater democracy in Tunisia.

On 15 June Parliament adopted a resolution calling for a greater openness on the part of the Tunisian authorities, and asking the EU-Tunisia Association Council to carry out a joint evaluation of respect for human rights in Tunisia, in the spirit of Article 2 of the Agreement.

On 23 June 2000 the Commission met a Tunisian delegation in the framework of the association committee to study the cooperation agreements between Tunisia and the Union. The day before, Commissioner Fischler had talks with Mr Rabah, the Tunisian Minister of Fisheries. From the information that has emerged on these two meetings, it would appear that only economic matters were discussed.

Without denying the importance of the latter, I am surprised at the one-sided nature of these talks.

Economic development will be of benefit to Tunisian society only if it is accompanied by the establishment of a genuinely democratic regime.

What is the Commission's explanation of this attitude which is contrary both to the spirit and the letter of the Association Agreement?

What action does the Commission intend to take to comply with the requirements made by Parliament in its resolution of 15 June?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2000)

As the Commission announced during the debate preceding the vote in part-session of the resolution of 15 June on Tunisia, and in line with the content of the resolution, action will be taken under the EU-Tunisia Association Agreement. The Agreement has two instruments which can be used as a priority, to bring both partners closer together, political dialogue and financial cooperation. The first instrument has, among other things, already led to an exchange of views on respect for human rights at the Association Committee meeting on 23 June. Consultations are also being held under the second, to create two programmes to support non-governmental organisations and the media.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3888/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Subject: Protection for shipwrecks

British Navy ships that were lost at sea during the war are nowadays often looted for souvenirs by commercial operators and used as playgrounds by leisure divers.

What plans does the Commission have for protecting these shipwrecks from such activities?

Would the Commission consider giving them the same status as war graves?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2001)

The matter to which reference is made does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2551/00

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 July 2000)

Subject: European Social Fund resources allocated to the Autonomous Community of the Canaries

Is the Commission aware of any irregularities affecting the granting or use of European Social Fund resources allocated to the Government of the Autonomous Community of the Canaries during the period from 1993 to 1999 and, if so, has it been informed of any complaints lodged with OLAF?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2331/00 and E-2551/00 given by Ms Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

The last check by the Commission on the use of aid from the European Social Fund (ESF) in the Canary Islands took place in May 1998 and revealed none of the facts referred to by the Honourable Member in Written Question E-2331/00.

Following complaints made to the Commission, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) wrote to the Spanish authorities on 6 March 2000 to remind them, for general information purposes, of the Member States' reporting obligation under Commission Regulation (EC) No 1681/94 of 11 July 1994 concerning irregularities and the recovery of sums wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the structural policies and the organisation of an information system in this field.(1) So far, no such reports have been received. The Office is also awaiting the results of an investigation into the management of ESF funding in the Canaries which the Spanish authorities say they have begun.

The Commission would like to thank the Honourable Member (the author of Written Question E-2331/00) for supplying certain information to OLAF, which has promised to examine it.

(1) OJ L 178, 12.7.1994.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2891/00

by Stefano Zappalà (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 September 2000)

Subject: Società Autostrade

In Italy, Società Autostrade S.p.A. is the contractor responsible for managing most of the country's motorways. Customer relations are handled by the company's local branches. Amongst the services provided are the Viacard and Telepass systems, which are based upon a contractual relationship between the company and motorway users.

In order to use such services, a deposit is required, as is authorisation to debit the customer's bank account directly.

Despite this commitment by the user, the agency can discontinue the service of its own accord, without even using up the credit available or using the direct debit facility.

Users of this service (access to and use of infrastructure) who have Viacard and Telepass contracts pay nearly three and a half times as much as those who pay directly.

Given the above, can the Commission, in particular the Commissioner responsible for health and consumer protection, Mr David Byrne, say what action it intends to take against the Italian Government, once it has ascertained that the above statements are true, to ensure that European citizens can have an honest, transparent, non-discriminatory and non-coercive relationship with the agencies responsible for public services and with Società Autostrade S.p.A in particular?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 2000)

The Commission has submitted a request for information to the Italian government, so as to establish whether the facts referred to in the question are true and whether they are compatible with Community regulations, in particular those concerning toll roads and consumer protection.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3152/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 October 2000)

Subject: Barriers to exports to Germany owing to type-approval problems

ReCoDrive AB, a Swedish firm which manufactures control systems for lorries, says that its products have been banned in Germany despite having been approved in another Member State.

It says it is now being forced to apply for type approval in each German Land, which, moreover, have differing opinions, for a product that was approved in Sweden over ten years ago.

What view does the Commission take of this case of type approval problems?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2000)

Having received a complaint from the Swedish National Board of Trade on behalf of the company ReCoDrive AB, the Commission is aware of the problems encountered by the Swedish company in marketing its out-of-cab driving system intended for use in lorries in Germany.

In order to take the appropriate measures, the Commission needs detailed information on the product, on the CE-marking, on the certificates of Swedish authorities or of authorities of other Member States, on the steps already taken by the company to market the product and on the measures taken by the German authorities to ban the product. Contact has been established between the Commission and the company. As soon as the required information, which is essential for the assessment of the complaint, has been received, the Commission will take appropriate measures (contacting the German authorities or opening proceedings under Article 226 (ex Aticle 169) of the EC Treaty).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2673/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Fuel from sustainable raw materials

Can the Commission indicate the extent to which it has already put in hand EU-wide studies into the production of fuel from sustainable raw materials (e.g. sunflower and rape seed) and the results thereof?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

Since the 1990s the Commission has been examining the options for expanding the biofuel sector, including those referred to by the Honourable Member.

One may mention the Biomass A new future study (Commission 6 January 1992) which constituted a major working document for a proposal for a Directive on tax exemptions for biofuels put forward by the Commission in 1992,(1) together with an amendment in 1994.(2) One may also mention the Euro-biodiesel, research project receiving 16 million (AIR programme), demonstration projects supported by the Thermie programme, several projects supported by the FAIR and JOULE programmes, and roughly 20 pilot projects or studies and dissemination activities funded under the Altener programme; One may also mention the biodiesel standardisation activities carried out at European level by the CEN (European Standardisation Committee) to the order of the Commission. Finally, a European biofuels network bringing together the national associations involved in developing biofuels has been set up, using Altener appropriations.

It is necessary to remind you of the detailed rules provided for by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2461/1999(3) for the use of land set aside for the production of raw materials for products not directly intended for consumption. One may state, against this backdrop, that 90 % of the raw materials grown under those rules are vegetable oils, a large proportion of which are used in producing biodiesel (roughly 500 000 tonnes per year).

Among these initiatives the most important is without doubt the 1992 proposal for a Directive referred to above authorising the Member States to award substantial tax abatements to biofuels.

Despite the Commission's efforts it has not been possible to adopt that proposal owing to a lack of unanimity within the Council, as required by the EC Treaty in terms of harmonising tax law, because of opposition from a limited number of Member States. Nevertheless, the Commission has incorporated scope for the Member States to introduce tax exemptions or total or partial reductions in the level of taxation applying to biofuels(4) into its proposal restructuring the Community taxation framework for energy products put forward in March 1997. Those tax exemptions or abatements will take the form of a total or partial repayment of the excess paid.

(1) OJ C 73, 24.3.1992.

(2) OJ C 209, 27.7.1994.

(3) OJ L 299, 20.11.1999.

(4) OJ C 139, 6.5.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2201/00

by Sebastiano Musumeci (UEN) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Damage caused by showers of ash from Mount Etna

For the past few months the eruptive activity of Mount Etna, in Sicily, has caused constant showers of ashes and small stones to fall over areas up to tens of kilometres away from the volcano, causing severe damage to villages and to fruit and vegetable production on the surrounding farms.

This is an extraordinary and exceptional state of affairs which, according to vulcanologists, can be expected to continue for some considerable time. It is a genuine natural disaster that further exacerbates the precarious economic circumstances of this Objective 1 region.

Could the Commission state whether it intends to intervene, as it has done previously in other Member States in similar circumstances, to assist the communities that have been so seriously affected by the unaccustomed activity of Mount Etna, Europe's highest active volcano?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2000)

The operational programme for Sicily for the 2000-2006 programming period under Objective 1 of the Structural Funds is being drawn up at present and is expected, once the Commission has examined it, to receive its formal approval in the months ahead.

It will be recalled that the regional authorities are responsible for the implementation of the programme, and consequently for any decision on measures that are to be part-financed. Under the programme, Sicily has proposed a measure to assist the prevention of natural disasters and to compensate for damage caused to agricultural production, similar to those referred to by the Honourable Member.

Investments in these areas could qualify for Community part-financing, provided the region makes provision for this in the programme complement.