ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0589/02

by Elisa Damião (PSE) to the Council

(6 March 2002)

Subject: The Lisbon strategy

The targets set by the Lisbon strategy for employment growth up to 2005 and 2010 were employment rates of 60 % for women and 70 % for the total workforce, in the expectation that growth would simultaneously be underpinned by technological innovation and social cohesion. However, the Prospective Analysis 2020 synthesis report by the European Science and Technology Observatory on the Impact of Technological and Structural Change on Employment contradicts this view and goes so far as to say that productivity will speed up, with a positive impact on the economy, but not on employment, which will continue to grow in the traditional business sectors.

What does the Council intend to do correct the Lisbon targets or adopt more realistic strategies for employment growth?

Reply

(26 June 2002)

At the Barcelona summit on 15 and 16 March 2002, the European Council reviewed progress made in the first two years of the Lisbon strategy. It noted that there had been important successes, but also that there were areas where progress had been too slow.

The Barcelona European Council confirmed the Lisbon objectives and gave a reminder that full employment is the essential goal of economic and social policies and that it is therefore necessary to continue paying special attention to the reform of policies aimed at a high level of employment.

The Barcelona European Council also asked the social partners to place their strategies in the various territorial (European, national, regional and local) and sectoral spheres at the service of the Lisbon Strategy and Objectives and to that end to produce an annual report on their efforts both at national level and at European level. The multiannual programme which they will submit in December 2002 should already include that contribution, particularly with regard to the adaptability of businesses in matters such as collective bargaining, wage moderation, improved productivity, life-long training, new technologies and the flexible organisation of work.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0355/02

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(14 February 2002)

Subject: Circular traffic with export refunds

The Court of Auditors Special Report 7/2001 on export refunds notes that the Commission will verify the products for which export refunds should not be paid if a preferential arrangement applies when the same products are imported into the EU.

For which products traded between the EU and the candidate countries have export refunds been paid to date, despite a preferential arrangement?

Which products in which non-member States are affected?

In Estonia, because of inadequate precautions with regard to export refunds and preferential arrangements, a case of fraud involving butter has already been uncovered. Is the Commission aware of other cases of what is known as circular traffic? If so, which products and which countries were involved?

What is the Commission's estimate of the financial damage that has been caused in this way?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2002)

The Community concluded in year 2000 with the candidate countries trade liberalisation agreements under which so-called double-zero-quotas were included, i.e. duty-free import quotas and removal of the export refunds. The sectors included in the double-zero approach were pig meat, poultry meat, cheese (except Slovenia), tomatoes and apples. Though not generally included, cereals and butter were also partially liberalised in this way with Poland.

A second round of trade liberalisation negotiations was launched between the Union and the candidate countries in December 2001. One of the main aims of the new round of liberalisation is to establish duty-free tariff quotas and to remove the export refunds also in the sectors which were not generally negotiated in the year 2000 (e.g. cereals, beef meat, sheep meat, eggs, dairy products, wine).

With regard to Estonia, the Commission has concluded on 31 January 2002 an agreement that pending approval by the Council will enter into force on 1 July 2002 and on the basis of which export refunds for this destination will be removed in basically most sectors.

As regards the Estonian butter case, recovery procedures are ongoing for an amount of 3,1 million of underpaid customs duties.

A possible abnormal movement of sugar from Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and of isoglucose from Bosnia-Herzegovina was recently detected, and a decision on the most appropriate course of action will be taken shortly by the services concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0844/02

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 March 2002)

Subject: Funding of renovation of the Berlaymont building

The company Berlaymont 2000 has been renovating the Berlaymont building for the Commission since 1995. The Belgian public buildings administration is the majority shareholder in Berlaymont 2000.

On 7 and 8 March 2002 the newspaper L'Echo reported that on 22 February 2002 Berlaymont 2000 had issued an invitation to tender for a new loan of approximately EUR 650 million for the future funding of the building project. This new loan is intended to replace the existing loan, which was negotiated in April 1998 to run until 31 March 2002.

Is the Commission Vice-President responsible for this matter satisfied that the provisions of Council Directive 92/50/EEC(1) of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts were respected during the tender process?

Can the Commission state which of the procedures provided for in Article 1 of the Directive was used: an open, restricted or negotiated procedure?

Can it explain why the process was so rapid (invitation to tender on 22 February 2002, publication of expressions of interest on 6 March 2002)?

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(23 May 2002)

The Commission is advised that the call for tender launched on 22 February 2002 by S.A. Berlaymont 2000 aimed at the short-term financing of the modernisation of the Berlaymont. The Honourable Member should note that it was not published in the Official Journal of the Community. However, if the estimated value of this contract was to have been above the threshold of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts, this tender procedure would have been in breach of the Directive.

The Vice-President responsible for Personnel and Administration was surprised at the methods and terms of this call for tender and its result, and expressed his reservations to the relevant Belgian Minister, M. Daems, in a letter of 7 March 2002.

It transpired that, since the Belgian State decided at the end of March 2002 to ensure the short-term financing of the modernisation of the Berlaymont, this call for tender was unnecessary and was not pursued.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1438/02

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(15 May 2002)

Subject: Information concerning the partnership between the EU and EU-Student Vote in connection with the election of a European Student Council

The pilot project EU-Student Vote, www.eusv.org, is organising the first on-line European election between 9 and 23 May, to enable millions of European students to elect the first European Student Council, which will represent students in the European institutions.

One of the electoral lists, the European Antiprohibitionist Students, www.easyvote.tk, points out, in a reasoned report, the fact that because of the mechanisms used there is a real danger of false registration, there are no guarantees that those who vote will be entitled to do so and the lists of candidates cannot necessarily communicate with the electors, which means that the first great experiment in democratic on-line voting will actually be off-line and undemocratic.

Following this complaint, the European Antiprohibitionist Students list has been deleted from the website and in effect excluded from the election, whilst the forum for discussion between students has also been cancelled.

Since the European Union is a partner in this initiative, can the Commission say:

- what the terms of the partnership are, i.e. does the Union fund the pilot project EU-Student Vote or one of its partners for a project designed to elect European student representatives;

- whether the European Union has undertaken or intends to give any form of formal recognition, even if only symbolic, to the European Student Council which would be elected in these elections using the current procedures;

- what forms of control it has exercised or intends to exercise as partner in the EU-Student Vote project?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(10 June 2002)

The EUSV project is a private project that does not benefit from any financial support from the Commission.

In 2001 the EUSV submitted requests for financial support to the Commission. However, after careful assessment of the applications, both Directorate General (DG) Education and Culture and DG Information Society rejected it.

In April 2001, following regular and common procedures, the organisers were informed of the failure of their applications.

The European Student Council that would be elected by this project will not receive any form of recognition by the Commission.

In the Higher Education sector, the Commission intends to continue its dialogue with student associations which are members of the European Liaison Group, presently composed by the European Student Information Bureau (ESIB), l'Association des Etats généraux des étudiants de l'Europe (AEGEE) and the Erasmus Student Network (ESN). For questions linked to the youth policies in general, the Commission cooperates with the European Youth Forum, a platform gathering several European and national associations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0505/02

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council

(27 February 2002)

Subject: Sentence of death by stoning in Sudan

According to information from Human Rights Watch, on 8 December 2001, a criminal court in the town of Nyala in southern Sudan sentenced 18-year-old Abok Alfa Akok, who was pregnant at the time, to death by stoning for adultery, whereas the man with whom she had sexual relations was not convicted because of a lack of evidence. The Sudanese Government, it should be recalled, ratified the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights in March 1986 which prohibits the carrying out of the death penalty on a pregnant woman.

Will the Council exert pressure on the Sudanese Government to honour its international commitments, refrain from carrying out the death penalty by stoning and hold a new trial in accordance with legal procedures which ensure that Ms Abok Alfa Akok has legal representation in court and recourse to the language that she understands?

Reply

(26 June 2002)

The EU has repeatedly expressed its deep concern about the different forms of punishment (death penalty and amputation) and urged the Sudanese government to speed up the ratification process of the UN Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. To underline its concern with the human rights situation in Sudan the EU introduced a draft Resolution on this subject at the 56th UN General Assembly and has again presented a Resolution calling for a halt to human rights violations in Sudan in the United Nations Commission for Human Rights in Geneva. This Resolution was adopted in April 2002. With special focus on the situation of women the EU advocated the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) by the Sudanese government.

Human rights remain one of the main issues being discussed and followed up in the framework of the EU-Sudan political dialogue initiated in 1999. The EU has been stressing the importance that Sudanese law be consistent with international human rights instruments and that Sudan respect its commitments under the International Convention on Civil Rights (ratified on 23 March 1976). The Council continues to closely monitor the human rights situation in Sudan, in particular the case of Ms Abok Alfa Akok.

The Council would remind the Honourable Member that generally speaking, with a view to promoting respect for the right to life and other human rights, the EU uses all relevant international and regional fora to advocate the universal abolition of the death penalty. In countries where neither a de jure, nor a de facto moratorium on the death penalty is in place, the EU calls for the progressive restriction of its use and insists that it be carried out according to the minimum standards set out in the EU guidelines towards third countries on the death penalty, which were adopted by the European Council in June 1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0827/02

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 March 2002)

Subject: Staffing of Directorate-General for Education and Culture

In my question No. E-2810/01(1), I requested information concerning the staffing of the Directorate-General for Education and Culture. In her reply, Commissioner Reding provided some highly interesting information which did not, however, answer my questions. The distinguished Commissioner, who has had a very successful term of office to date, informs me that the Commission enlists the assistance of experts in various disciplines selected on the basis of lists provided by the Member States and that the Commission regularly consults cultural bodies throughout Europe. My request, however, was for information concerning the permanent and other staff (officials, temporary and auxiliary personnel) employed by the Education and Culture DG.

Will the Commission say how many ethnologists, historians, archaeologists, sociologists, anthropologists and philologists work in the Education and Culture DG as permanent and auxiliary staff? What is the proportion of experts in those disciplines in relation to the total number of permanent, temporary and auxiliary staff working in that DG? Is it a condition of employment in the Education and Culture DG to have an academic or professional background in the above disciplines?

(1) OJ C 134 E, 6.6.2002, p. 112.

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2002)

The Directorate-General for Education and Culture basically recruits its category A staff from among officials who apply for posts internally in response to notices of vacancies or, less often, from lists of persons who have passed competitive examinations. The job profiles published refer to various criteria and requirements, including specialisation in a particular discipline and professional experience.

The training and/or professional experience of category A staff in the Directorate-General is above all in the fields of law, social and political sciences, history, sociology, literature, languages and economics, and even information technology. However, there are no statistics which allow the percentage of specialists in a discipline referred to by the Honourable Member to be specified.

The total number of category A officials and temporary staff is 221, some of whom are of course working in interdisciplinary departments within the Directorate-General and are not concerned with political dossiers or the implementation of programmes.

Furthermore, the Directorate-General acquires the additional expertise it needs by drawing on the services of seconded national experts. For example, the Culture Unit is currently making use of the knowledge of a seconded national expert with a master's degree in anthropology.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0653/02

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Council

(19 March 2002)

Subject: Need for the EU to guarantee Mr Arafat full liberty

Following the arrest by the Palestinian National Authority of the person responsible for the assassination of the Israeli minister Mr Zeevi, in the wake of strong pressures from the Israeli government, it was universally assumed by world public opinion that the confinement of Mr Arafat would come to an end.

By contrast, the highly controversial decision by the Jerusalem authorities to continue confining Mr Arafat within the restricted territory of Ramallah cannot possibly be seen as a contribution to détente or to peace. It also prevents Mr Arafat from undertaking, on a basis of full personal liberty, the activities of monitoring the Palestinian terrorist fringes and engaging in political mediation, which are considered in all quarters to be essential if there is to be peace.

Does the Council not believe that there is an urgent need to intervene so as to ensure that the Palestinian leader has full freedom of movement to enable him pursue the activities of monitoring and prevention of terrorism, given also that such freedom is indissociable from the Palestinian Authority's demand for the right to exercise full sovereignty over even a comparatively small area of Palestine?

Reply

(27 June 2002)

The Council shares the concern of the Honourable Member. It, like the European Council meeting in Barcelona, has made quite clear its wish to see President Arafat enjoy full freedom of movement. It is a position that the Council has also made clear in its contacts with the Government of Israel, through the Presidency and High Representative.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1433/02

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

(23 May 2002)

Subject: Major shortcomings in the implementation of the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology's research budget

The Spanish Government has informed the Spanish Parliament that the Ministry of Science and Technology failed to pay out 70 % of the budgetary allocations for research projects in 2001. Were these projects possibly co-funded by the European Union? If so, what measures does the Commission intend to take to demand that the Spanish Government meet its commitments?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(25 June 2002)

The information provided by the Honourable Member is insufficient to determine which projects might have received Community part-finance under the Structural Funds. The Commission would therefore ask him to specify them more clearly.

In any case, all assistance part-financed by these Funds is thoroughly monitored by the Commission to ensure that it is implemented in accordance with the rules and in a satisfactory way. The ways in which this is done include meetings of the Monitoring Committees, annual meetings with the managing authorities and consideration of the annual implementing reports.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2413/02

by Michiel van Hulten (PSE) to the Commission

(7 August 2002)

Subject: Further questions concerning the agricultural subsidy granted to Queen Beatrix

On 18 July 2002 I put questions to the Commission concerning the subsidy which Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands reportedly received in connection with the establishment of an olive grove at the Netherlands Royal Family's foreign residence in Porto Ercole, Italy. In the meantime, the Royal Family has informed me that this project was carried out at the Queen's farm in Tavernelle, Italy, and I therefore ask the Commission to take account of that fact when answering my questions of 18 July 2002.

In response to press reports concerning my questions, a spokesman for the Queen has stated that she tried to turn down the subsidy, but was unable to do so because of its more or less automatic nature.

1. Can the Commission state what procedure was employed in connection with the grant of the subsidy? Could the Queen have refused the subsidy? Are subsidies granted which are more or less automatic in nature?

2. Can the Commission confirm that the subsidy in question was a European one, and not a subsidy granted under a national scheme and approved by Brussels, as suggested by a Commission spokesman on 19 July 2002?

3. What sum of money was granted per olive tree and how many olive trees did the Queen plant?

4. Was it a one-off subsidy, or did the Queen also receive similar subsidies in subsequent years?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 September 2002)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0127/02

by Rolf Berend (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(31 January 2002)

Subject: CREAM, a firm with its registered office in Luxembourg

CREAM (Community Research European Aid Management), which has its registered office in Luxembourg, is apparently offering to arrange EU funding for other firms for a fee of 100 000, plus 1,5 % commission if successful. Its contract forms are signed CREAM EuropeAid. However, inquiries with Creditreform revealed its business object to be sales and technical advice in the field of waste gas technology using infrared measuring devices.

Is the Commission aware of this firm's activities, and is this type of business legal?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(5 April 2002)

According to the inquiries made, the Commission is not aware of the firm referred to by the Honorourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1861/02

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 June 2002)

Subject: Working conditions of seasonal workers

In a Portuguese television broadcast of 16 June 2002, it was stated that farmers in the Basque Country (Spain) are exploiting temporary seasonal workers from Portugal who come to pick strawberries, in conditions which in some cases even verge on slavery.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Has it asked for information on the predicament of Portuguese workers employed in conditions of near-slavery in the Basque Country?

2. What action does it intend to take to deal with this problem?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 2002)

1. The Commission has no specific information on the working and living conditions of Portuguese workers, which the Honourable Member describes.

However, there are minimum requirements and provisions on working conditions set out by Community legislation in order to provide appropriate protection for employees' health and safety. For example, under Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time(1), Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that every worker is entitled to a minimum daily rest period of 11 consecutive hours per 24-hour period and the average of working time for each seven day period does not exceed 48 hours. Member States shall also ensure that employers fulfil their obligations to inform employees of the conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship (Council Directive 91/533/EEC of 14 October 1991 on an employer's obligation to inform employees of the conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship(2)). Moreover the posting of workers Directive (Directive 96/71/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services(3)) lays down certain conditions of employment, including minimum rates of pay, health, safety and hygiene at work, which must be observed in the Member State where the posted worker performs his work. It also states that undertakings established in a non-Member State must not be given more favourable treatment than undertakings established in a Member State.

2. Any alleged breach of the Member States' legislation implementing the provisions of Community legislation in a particular Member State is a matter to be addressed to the competent authority of the Member State concerned.

(1) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.

(2) OJ L 288, 18.10.1991.

(3) OJ L 18, 21.1.1997.