ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2581/99

by Maurizio Turco (TDI) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Disciplinary inquiries concerning Community officials since 1 January 1998

With reference to Title VI and Annex IX of the Staff Regulations, can the Commission say how many disciplinary procedures have been initiated against officials of the European institutions since 1 January 1998 and specify, for each of them:

- the grade, responsibilities and duties of the official concerned;

- the type of charges brought;

- whether provisional measures were taken, and if so, what kind;

- if the charges were well-founded, what sanctions were adopted;

- if the official turned out to be innocent, whether the legal fees were paid in accordance with Article 10 of Annex IX to the Staff Regulations and, if so, how much they were?

Can the Commission also say how many requests have been submitted in accordance with Article 89, how many received a positive response and, in each case, what the penalty was and what the official's grade, responsibilities and duties were at the time the charges were brought?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(3 February 2000)

The Commission is forwarding directly to the Honourable Member and to the Secretariat General of the Parliament the details of the disciplinary proceedings for which a disciplinary measure has been adopted by the appointing authority for the period January 1998 to November 1999 included.

Concerning the temporary measures taken against officials involved in disciplinary proceedings, the Staff Regulations provide for the possible suspension of an official in cases where allegations of serious misconduct have been made. Since January 1998, four officials have been suspended. On 30 November 1999, only one official remained suspended.

The Disciplinary Board has not been consulted in 11 of these disciplinary proceedings.

Legal fees reimbursed in 1998 and in 1999 by the Commission in relation with disciplinary proceedings (Article 10 Annex IX of the Statute) were nil in 1998 and totalled 141 342 in 1999.

For the period January 1998-November 1999, one official submitted a request for deletion from his personal file of all reference to a disciplinary measure (relegation in step) as foreseen by Article 89 of the Staff Regulations. The request was accepted by the Appointing Authority.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2439/99

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Protection of European companies in Kosovo

In reply to my oral question H-0608/99 of 16 November 1999(1) to the Commission concerning protection of the interests of European Union companies in Kosovo, Commissioner Patten indicated that he had no information concerning pressure being brought to bear or threats being made against European companies in Kosovo. To fill the gaps in his information concerning the subject, I personally gave him a copy of correspondence between the Mytilinaios company and Mr Kouchner and Mr Dixon. I also asked him to investigate the current situation regarding the functioning of telecommunications in Kosovo in order to obtain a full picture.

Effective communications between the European Parliament and the Commission will help to protect the interests of the EU wherever they may be under threat. The sovereign rights of European companies are currently what is at stake in Kosovo. The Greek Telecommunications Organisation (OTE) and the Italian STET International, which have respectively a 20 % and 29 % holding in Srbija Telekom, are suffering losses as a result of non-payment of fees to Srbija Telekom for use of telecommunications services in Kosovo, while, at the same time, the UCK and its covert supporters are insisting on the restoration by the two companies of the damaged network and its subsequent nationalisation by Albania, in violation of international agreements. However the most serious breach of the law occurred recently when a special committee made up of UN representatives and Kosovar Albanians quite illegally transferred mobile telephony rights to the French company Alcatel. These rights are the exclusive property of the OTE and STET International, in accordance with international agreements currently in force, which state that Kosovo is part of the key area in which these two companies are entitled to operate and export their profits.

What action will the Commission take to protect the legitimate rights of European companies in Kosovo which at this moment are under threat by illegal networks in which even UN officials are starting to be involved, contrary to their instructions regarding observance of the law in this area?

(1) Verbatim report of proceedings of 16.11.1999, p. 60.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1932/99

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 October 1999)

Subject: Allegations in the Mitrokhin papers about an Italian spy network working for the Soviet Union's secret services

The Mitrokhin papers forwarded by the British Government have revealed that a dense spy network used to operate in Italy employed by the secret services of a foreign State hostile to Italy and free Europe. It used to monitor and put pressure on the institutions of the Italian State and even reached the highest political and government levels.

What steps will the President of the Commission, Romano Prodi, take to shed light on this affair as swiftly as possible?

Will Mr Prodi use his influence with the Italian Government to ensure that all the information needed to ascertain the truth is made known and, if necessary, call on the governments of other Member States to supply any documentation connected with the revelations contained in the Mitrokhin papers?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 1999)

The Commission feels that the question raised by the Honourable Member is primarily a matter for the Member State concerned, which is responsible for justice on its territory. Under Title IV of the EC Treaty, measures may be taken to facilitate cooperation in criminal matters. Work is currently under way on finalising a Convention on mutual assistance between the Member States in criminal matters(1). When the Convention enters into force, it should simplify and speed up cooperation, irrespective of the crimes or infringements being prosecuted. For its part, the Commission has no plans to take any initiative in this context relating specifically to counter-espionage.

(1) OJ C 251, 2.9.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2231/99

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 December 1999)

Subject: Estimate of the black economy

Please give estimates or a range of estimates of the size of the black economy for each of the Member States and briefly describe the methodological basis of calculation.

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1999)

The concept of the black, hidden or underground economy is not well defined. The Commission is not directly engaged in measuring it and has no estimates of its size.

A large number of transactions and activities are in fact not recorded by administrative processes or by statistical enquiries for a wide range of reasons (including fraud, but also absence, exemptions, size thresholds). These transactions or activities are not necessarily in any sense hidden.

To ensure exhaustiveness of the data on gross national product (GNP) and other national accounts aggregates used for Community purposes (especially in determining Member States contributions to the Community budget), the Commission has worked intensively with the statistical services of the Member States for the last ten years to ensure that all activity that should be included in GNP is in fact included, regardless of whether or how it is declared to the authorities. A description of this work can be found in the report from the Commission to the Council and the Parliament the application of the Council Directive on the compilation of gross national product at market prices(1).

In the context of the European employment strategy, the Commission has issued a communication on undeclared work(2) addressing policy options in this area. In this communication, undeclared work is defined as any paid activities that are lawful as regards their nature but not declared to the public authorities, bearing in mind that differences in the regulatory systems of Member States must be taken into account.

(1) COM(96) 124 final.

(2) COM(98) 219 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1801/99

by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(12 October 1999)

Subject: Lindane

The monograph produced by the Austrian authorities on the health and environmental effects of the pesticide lindane has been forwarded to the competent authorities of the Member States so that their views may be taken into account before the Commission brings forward a proposal on the use of this product.

Given the huge number of pesticides and other chemicals for which safety data is lacking, is the Commission happy with the present slow and cumbersome review process? How does it intend to speed up this process without lowering safety standards?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1801/99 and E-1802/99 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(15 November 1999)

For the current state of the examination of the dossier concerning lindane, the Commission would refer to its answer to Written Question E-154/99 of Mrs Pollack(1).

The Commission will follow the procedures established in Commission Regulation (EEC) 3600/92 of 11 December 1992 laying down the detailed rules for the implementation of the first stage of the programme of work referred to in Article 8(2) of Council Directive 91/0414/EEC concerning the placing

of plant protection products on the market(2) and will as soon as possible, and after all consultations are finalized, forward a proposal to the standing committee on plant health. This may require a review of the classification and labelling of lindane under Directive 67/0548/EEC of 27 June 1967 on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances(3).

A lot of progress has been made since the adoption of Directive 91/0414/EEC of 15 July 1991(4), in particular the development of implementing legislation, technical background documents and confidence building between Member States. The Commission however shares the view that the review process should be speeded up.

Therefore a new strategy, within the possibilities for Commission action provided in Directive 91/0414/EEC, is under discussion. It is expected that this would result by the end of 1999 in the adoption of further implementing measures for the review of the remaining existing active substances. The Commission has no intention to lower the safety standards of the Directive.

(1) OJ C 325, 12.11.1999, p. 76.

(2) OJ L 366, 15.12.1992.

(3) OJ L 196, 16.8.1967.

(4) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1622/99

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 September 1999)

Subject: Infringement proceedings against the Italian government for the sale of the Rome Central Dairy

Can the Commission provide the results of the investigation carried out in the context of the infringement proceedings against the Italian government and the Rome City Council in respect of the sale of the Rome Central Dairy?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 1999)

The comments of the Italian authorities which they sent under the procedure provided for in Article 88(2) (formerly Article 93) of the EC Treaty have now been studied and the Commission has requested additional information from the Italian authorities on the measures taken by the City of Rome.

At this stage, the Commission is awaiting this additional information. After analysing all the comments received, the Commission will be able to take a final decision on the measures in question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1558/99

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Regional funding

Is it really the case that Luxembourg, the richest Member State in per capita terms, has had the largest percentage in regional fund allocations under Agenda 2000? Does the Commission think this is justified?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 1999)

Following the adoption of the new Structural Fund regulations (i.e. Council Regulation (EC) 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(1), Regulation (EC) 1261/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 June 1999 on the European Regional Development Fund(2) and Regulation (EC) 1262/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 June 1999 on the European Social Fund(3) the Commission decided on 1 July 1999 how the commitment appropriations would be divided up among the Member States under Objectives 1, 2 and 3 of the Structural Funds and the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance outside Objective 1 regions in the period 2000-2006. These Commission decisions cover 183 564 million of the 195 010 million overall appropriation for the Structural Funds, at 1999 prices.

Of that amount, Luxembourg will receive 0,04 %, which is the smallest share of the 15 Member States.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(3) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1963/99

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council

(9 November 1999)

Subject: Impact of the Schengen visa on competition

In recent years, it has become increasingly common among Austrian haulage companies to employ citizens from central and eastern Europe holding a six-month Schengen visa but no work permit as drivers for journeys within Europe for financial reasons. As a result of this common practice, Union citizens have found it increasingly difficult to find employment in this sector.

In view of this, can the Council answer the following questions:

1. Has the above-mentioned problem been discussed within the EU Council of Ministers?

2. Approximately how many people from central and eastern European countries are granted six-month Schengen visas both in Austria in particular and in the EU as a whole?

3. What measures does the Council consider to be appropriate to curtail this practice which is detrimental both to the labour market and to competition in the Union?

4. Has the Council investigated this matter?

5. Does the Council consider that this practice is compatible with EU competition law?

6. If not, what measures does the Council intend to take to curtail this practice?

7. If so, how does the Council justify its position?

Reply

(9 December 1999)

The Council is not aware of the practices mentioned by the Honourable Member.

The Council would draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that, for the purposes of the Schengen Convention, a visa for a stay of more than three months is a national visa issued by each Contracting Party in accordance with its own legislation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1940/99

by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission

(4 November 1999)

Subject: Measures implementing the new ultraperipheral policy pursuant to Article 299(2) of the Amsterdam Treaty

Implementing Article 299(2) of the Amsterdam Treaty, the new legal basis of the arrangements for integrating the ultraperipheral regions, will require a considerable initial effort, coordination of the various services involved, and ongoing adaptation of the arrangements to match Community policies as they develop in the future.

Does the Commission intend to implement the new policy by setting up an independent specific, horizontal unit responsible for following up and monitoring the measures adopted, or does it intend to upgrade the existing Interservices Group and endow it with the fresh powers and specific resources called for by the task in question?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(1 December 1999)

In line with the conclusions of the Cologne European Council, the Commission will transmit to the Council and Parliament by the end of 1999 a report on the measures to implement Article 299(2) (former Article 227(2)) of the EC Treaty with regard to the outermost regions. The report will provide answers to the questions put by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1925/99

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(4 November 1999)

Subject: Inclusion of specific data in the state aid proceedings relating to the Spanish electricity sector

In its answer to the Socialist MP Juan Manuel Eguiagaray on 17 September 1999, in the Chamber of Deputies, the Spanish government stated that, in its opinion, the sixth transitional provision of Electricity Sector Law on costs of transition to competition (CTCs) for Spanish electrical companies does not, with respect to the wording of Regulation 50/1998, contain any element of state aid within the meaning of Article 92 (1) of the EC Treaty.

The Government further claims that it has forwarded the information requested by the Commission and that negotiations on calculating the amount of the CTCs are proceeding, yet fully admits that during these talks, the concept of CTCs is not discussed.

In the light of these surprising remarks, I would ask whether:

- the Commission agrees with the Spanish government's criterion whereby CTCs do not constitute a state aid?

- had the Spanish government submitted, by 17 September 1999, all the information requested by the Commission?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(19 November 1999)

As the Commission has already had occasion to point out to the Spanish Government, its preliminary assessment is that costs of transition to competition or CTCs do indeed constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) (formerly Article 92(1)) of the EC Treaty. As a result, the case has been entered in the register of non-notified aid, and points 2.2.3 and 3.2 of the Decision of 8 July 1999 concerning the application for a transitional regime submitted by Spain under Article 24 of Parliament and Council Directive 96/0092/EC of 19 December 1996 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity(1) stipulate that CTCs must be examined in the light of the competition rules, and in particular Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty. However, this is a preliminary assessment; the Commission's definitive view will be confirmed in its final decision.

The Commission is in regular contact with the Spanish authorities on CTCs. On 17 September 1999 it had not received all the information necessary to adopt a decision on the case.

(1) OJ L 27, 30.1.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1587/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Restoration of historic monuments damaged by the war in Yugoslavia

In June 1999, the Ministers of Culture of the Member States meeting in Weimar decided to call on the Commission to take measures for the restoration of historic monuments in Kosovo. According to the studies by the Icomos, the 160 damaged sites belonging to the European cultural heritage include 13 archaeological sites, 60 monasteries and churches, 1 mosque and many historic buildings and market squares.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. What funding does it intend to earmark for the restoration work?

2. Have specific restoration programmes been drawn up on the basis of scientific studies, timetables and priorities?

3. Does it intend to cooperate with organisations such as the Icomos and Unesco which are already aware of the issues involved?

4. Will it also provide funding for the restoration of monuments in the remainder of Yugoslavia?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 1999)

The Commission shares the concern of the Honourable Member about the destructive consequences that the conflict in Kosovo has had on its civil and religious heritage.

As the Honourable Member is aware, the Commission does not itself have competence to take any measures for the protection of Kosovo's cultural heritage. It is of course willing to consider cooperation with the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (Unesco) or the International Council of monuments and sites (COMOS) should they undertake any initiative in this regard.

At this time, the priority areas for reconstruction in Kosovo are demining, procurement of essential supplies for rehabilitation of housing and public buildings, customs, village employment and the rehabilitation of Mitrovica hospital.

As for the remainder of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, there has been no destruction of monuments in the territory of the Republic of Montenegro. For the Republic of Serbia, only humanitarian assistance or support for democratisation and independent media is presently available.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2029/99

by Béatrice Patrie (PSE) to the Commission

(3 November 1999)

Subject: Community subsidies for school milk

The press and various associations are currently drawing attention to the present and planned further reductions in Community subsidies for school milk following a decision by the Commission.

Child nutrition experts and specialists argue that milk is essential for children's growth and that school milk schemes make it possible to reach sections of the population which, even today, do not have a sufficiently rich or balanced diet.

The Commission's plans, which are worrying both from a farming point of view and with regard to public health, raise a number of questions:

1. The Agriculture Council of 14 and 15 June 1999 took the view that the consumption of milk should be encouraged because of its high nutritional value, particularly for children and young people.

Why, then, has the Commission gone against the general opinion of the Member States and taken a decision that could jeopardise school milk schemes?

2. Just as the Treaty of Amsterdam has elevated public health policy to the rank of a horizontal Community policy, how can the Commission, in the name of narrow budgetary considerations, risk endangering the health of European children who benefit from the nourishment that school milk provides?

3. From a financial perspective, how can the consumption of milk be encouraged in a cost-effective way, taking account of the overall availability of budgetary resources? Could the subsidies concerned conceivably be transferred from the CAP budget to the health budget so that school milk schemes may continue with due regard for the budgetary constraints?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2029/99 and E-2054/99 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 December 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.