ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3302/02

by Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 November 2002)

Subject: Bioterrorism Act

The complex procedure laid down in the Bioterrorism Act means that a given food product can be traced from the moment it is packaged until it is distributed on the US food market, the aim being to limit the possible impact on public health of terrorist acts carried via the food chain. The US took these steps for obvious reasons.

There is nevertheless a certain amount of concern about the effects these provisions may have on international trade and possible barriers which may jeopardise trade relations with the US, one of the most important markets for Italian quality food products (pasta, olive oil and cheeses).

The law directly affects the interests of the Italian agri-foodstuffs industry and may have negative repercussions, in particular for SMEs.

How does the Commission intend to prevent the creation of artificial barriers to trade and excessive complications for export firms?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(19 December 2002)

The Commission is aware of the procedures laid down in the American Bio-terrorism Act (BTA) signed into law on 12 June 2002. This legislation is part of the overall effort by the American government to provide appropriate prevention measures against terrorist threats using the food chain or other channels. On all these issues, including protection against bio-terrorism, the Commission has adopted a consistent approach with the American government based on the need to achieve an appropriate level of security in the least trade restrictive manner. This position is in line with the spirit of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreement and the trade facilitation objectives of the Doha Development Agenda.

On 30 August 2002, in view of the potential trade restrictiveness of the measures provided for in the BTA (registration of food facilities, establishment and maintenance of records, prior notice of imports, administrative detention), the Commission and Member States conveyed preliminary comments in writing to the American Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to express concern with respect to both content and procedure involved in this legislation and to highlight that some of the proposed precautions will substantially affect trade flows without necessarily achieving the expected result.

Ultimately, the BTA provides for implementing measures to be adopted by 12 December 2003. The FDA is currently in the process of drafting proposed regulations to be published by the end of 2002. The Commission will at that stage make full use of both the American formal rule making process and the WTO SPS procedure to make its views known further on the specific details of the FDA proposals.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/18

(2004/C 70 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3743/02

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 December 2002)

Subject: Executions of Tibetans in China

Is the Commission aware that on 2 December 2002 a Chinese Court sentenced two Tibetans, Tenzin Delek Rinpoche and Lobsang Dhondup to death for alleged involvement in a bomb attack?

Is the Commission aware that the evidence on the basis of which this sentence was made is extremely thin and has been called into doubt?

Is the Commission prepared to act at very short notice in order to bring pressure to bear on the Chinese authorities to prevent the executions, the first of which is planned to take place on 12 December and the second within two years?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2003)

The Commission has been informed of the death sentence imposed on the two Tibetans Tenzin Delek Rinpoche and Lobsang Dhondup on 2 December 2002, on the basis of their alleged involvement in a bomb attack. The Commission also took note that the proof on which the sentence was based and the way the trial has been carried out has been contested.

The Union immediately expressed its concern officially to the Chinese authorities within the time limit allowed by them so as to permit to the two Tibetans sentenced to death to lodge an appeal. Such appeals have since been lodged (in December 2002).
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/688

(2004/C 78 E/0734)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1287/02

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 May 2002)

Subject: The planting of oilseed rape

Is the Commission aware of any research into the effects on human health of oilseed rape cultivation — especially where it is grown in proximity to habitation?

Are there any plans to control the planting of this crop within close proximity of human habitation?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 June 2002)

Similar written questions were put in 1991, 1992 and again in 1996 (E-1452/91 by Mr McCubbin (1), E-2414/91 by Mrs Ewing (2), E-2415/91 by Mrs Ewing (3), E-611/92 by Mr Raffin (4), E-2146/96 by Mrs McNally (5)). The Commission is not aware of a consensus within the scientific community on the matter raised in the Honourable Member's question. The Commission knows that there is some concern about the possible links between allergic symptoms in humans and the crop of oilseed rape and can confirm that several studies have been carried out on this subject (6), in particular by the Scottish Crops Research Institute and the University of Dundee (7). Given the result of the published papers, no conclusive evidence is available to demonstrate a direct cause effect on human health from oilseed rape cultivation.

(1) OJ C 311, 2.12.1991.

(2) OJ C 159, 25.6.1992.

(3) OJ C 209, 15.8.1992.

(4) OJ C 32, 2.2.1994.

(5) OJ C 11, 13.1.1997.

(6) Butcher RD, Goodman BA, Deighton N, Smith WH. Evaluation of the allergic/irritant potential of air pollutants: detection of proteins modified by volatile organic compounds from oilseed rape (Brassica napus ssp. Oleifera) using electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry. Cli Exp Allergy Oct 1995; 25(10): 985-92. Hemmer W, Focke M, Wantke F, Jager S, Gotz M, Jarisch R. Oilseed rape pollen is a potential relevant allergen. Cli Exp Allergy. Feb 1997; 27(2): 156-161Hemmer W. The health effects of oilseed rape: myth or reality? BMJ. 1998; 316: 1327-28 Soutar A, Harker C, Seaton A, Brooke M, Marr I. Oilseed rape and seasonal symptoms: epidemiological and environmental studies. Thorax, 1994; Vol 49: 352-56. Soutar A, Harker C, Seaton A, Packe G. Oilseed rape and bronchial reactivity. Occup Environ Med. Sep 1995; 52 575-580 Welch J, Jones MG, Cullinam P, Coates OA, Newman Taylor AJ. Sensitization to oilseed rape is not due to cross-reactivity with grass pollen Cli Exp Allergy. Mar 2000; 30(3): 370-375.

(7) McEvan M, Macfarlane Smith WH. Identification of volatile organic compounds emitted in the field by oilseed rape (Brassica napus ssp. Oleifera) over the growing season. Cli Exp Allergy. 1998; 28: 332-38 Parratt D, Macfarlane Smith WH, Thomson G, Cameron LA, Butcher RD. Evidence that oilseed rape (Brassica napus spp. Oleifera) causes respiratory illness in rural dwellers; Sco Med J. 1995; 40: 074-76.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/1

(2004/C 70 E/001)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2576/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(16 September 2002)

Subject: Reimbursement for Viagra

The sickness insurance scheme under which 45 000 European officials are covered has just decided to reimburse the cost of the impotence pill Viagra on certain conditions. It is the first sickness insurance scheme in Europe to do so. According to the French newspaper ‘Le Monde’, the decision was taken at a time when the scheme, which is two-thirds financed by the EU, is showing a deficit for the first time in its history.

How many European officials are eligible for reimbursement for Viagra?

Why does the Commission consider it necessary to include Viagra in its sickness insurance cover?

If erectile dysfunction is a problem, should the EU not take steps intended to lead to the introduction of reimbursement for Viagra by sickness insurance schemes in all the Member States?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/288

(2004/C 88 E/0294)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0811/02

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Subject: Harmonisation of rules on motor vehicles

News of delays to coach tours passing through Austria has recently provoked astonishment. On Sunday, 10 March 2002, the police in Kundl carried out checks and stopped coaches from Germany, Denmark and Belgium from continuing their journeys because they exceeded the maximum permissible length of 12 metres. Special authorisation is required so that such coaches can travel through Austria.

Does the Commission not take the view that rules on vehicles, in this case on the maximum length of coaches, must be brought into line and harmonised EU-wide? It is also incomprehensible that the special authorisations currently required cannot be obtained at all times, including on Sundays.

Will the Commission comment on this situation and explain what progress is being made in this area?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 2002)

The Commission is aware of the problem submitted by the Honourable Member.

Indeed, Directive 2002/7/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 18 February 2002 amending Council Directive 96/53/EC laying down for certain road vehicles circulating within the Community the maximum authorised dimensions in national and international traffic (1) and the maximum authorised weights in international traffic, has fixed the following maximum lengths for buses:

— 13,50 meter (m) for a bus with two axles;

— 15,00 m for a bus with more than two axles;

— 18,75 m for an articulated bus;

— 18,75 m for a bus with trailer.

Member States shall bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with this Directive by 9 March 2004 at the latest. Until the transposition of this Directive by the Austrian authorities, the current national restrictions would remain applicable.

(1) OJ L 67, 9.3.2002.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/297

(2004/C 88 E/0304)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3566/02

by Freddy Blak (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 December 2002)

Subject: Contracts between Eurostat and Eurogramme

On 14 November 2002 I sent the following letter to Commissoner Pedro Solbes: ‘I have been informed that the contracts of the company Eurogramme Ltd, with which Eurostat has several contracts, have been moved from this company to a new company simply called Eurogramme. Can you confirm this and if so, could you please explain how this is compatible with the rule that Eurostat only enters into contracts with companies that can show three years' full and correct accounts?’

In his answer Commissioner Solbes writes: ‘Thank you for your letter of 14 November concerning the contracts of Eurostat with the company Eurogramme. This issue has been transmitted for investigation to OLAF, and I am therefore not in a position to comment until the investigation has been completed.’

My questions to the Commission are now:

1. What rules determine that the Commission cannot answer a question about its present contractors only because there is an ongoing OLAF investigation into its former contractors?

2. What is the name of the Eurostat contractor? Is it Eurogramme Limited or Eurogramme? And if it is Eurogramme, could you please then tell me how this change of contractor is compatible with the rule that Eurostat only enters into contracts with companies that can show three years' full and correct accounts?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2003)

As a matter of principle, the Commission does not wish to comment on this file which is subject to investigation by European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF). Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 concerning investigations conducted by OLAF (1), governing the investigations of OLAF, the information obtained in the context of OLAF investigations is subject to confidentiality and the protection of data rules.

The name of the contractor is Eurogramme SARL. This company signed an Addendum with the Commission at the end of 2001, by which it succeeded to all contractual rights and obligations of Eurogramme Limited Succursale Luxembourg.

There is no rule that the Commission may only enter into contracts with companies that can show three years' accounts. Article 31 of Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 (2) relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts sets out a number of alternative methods for proving financial capacity. Such alternative methods are appropriate, for example, in the case of newly created companies.

(1) OJ L 136, 31.5.1999.

(2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
Management of contracts is the responsibility of the local contract managers within each Directorate-General (DG). The decentralised organisation of contract management has proved to be the most efficient approach as local managers have the information on requirements and conditions that govern the execution of individual contracts. Each service is responsible for ensuring that proper tendering procedures are adhered to.

In view of the volume of information requested and the time needed to analyse the files, the data requested by the Honourable Member are not currently available.

However, the Commission has decided to develop a central contracts and contractors database, Interactive Contracts Network Database (ICON-DB). The work is progressing well. Centralised and consolidated statistics, broken down by Commission department, will thus be available, in due course, more rapidly.

The Honourable Member may be aware of the tight staffing situation in the Commission.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/350

(2004/C 78 E/0367)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3630/02

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 December 2002)

Subject: Limit to the number of cigarettes one may take out of Spain

My constituent and his partner were on holiday last May in Spain. At the end, they left from Malaga airport, where the local Customs said they could not take more than four cartons of cigarettes out of Spain. A friend in Spain was obliged to come to the airport to collect their remaining 32 cartons of cigarettes. They were obliged to sign a form in Spanish which they did not understand in order to be able to catch their plane at the last moment.

Now they have received in the mail a document in Spanish which mentions a figure of EUR 601 and which they suspect might be a fine.

Is it legal, under EU law and under the principle of free movement of people and goods, for Malaga Customs to impose a limit on how many local cigarettes a visitor may take out of Spain?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2003)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that it has received complaints relating to seizure of tobacco products by Spanish authorities from outbound travellers. The Commission is investigating these complaints to ensure that Spanish law and practice are in line with Community single market law and, in particular, with Council Directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (1).

(1) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/2

(2004/C 33 E/002)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1285/02

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(7 May 2002)

Subject: East Timor

What plans does the Commission have to open a delegation in Dili, East Timor? Has a timetable been set?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 May 2002)

After the events of 1999, the Commission established an office of the Humanitarian Aid Office (ECHO) in Dili to help to manage the ongoing emergency aid actions in the territory. Since February 2001, a Community Correspondent Technical Assistance office has been established in Dili which, for reasons of economy and efficiency, is sharing office facilities with ECHO. The Commission plans to continue this Community Correspondent Technical Assistance office in Dili until the end of 2004. It is funded from budget line Β7 304A to provide project management and local technical assistance support to the ongoing Community rehabilitation, reconstruction and development programmes and actions in East Timor.

The Commission's Head of Delegation based in Jakarta is presently in process of being formally accredited to the United Nations Transitional Administration for East Timor and is proposed to be accredited to East Timor after its independence on 20 May 2002. Given that the Community Correspondent Technical Assistance Office funding provides for a local presence until the end of 2004, and that the Commission's budget for Delegations in third countries is committed to the maximum, the Commission does not currently have any plans to open a Community Delegation in Dili, since to do so would require closing on scaling back another delegation.
2.

Is the Commission aware that the Canadian mining company Gabriel Resources, in cooperation with the state-owned mining company Minvest as part of the Eurogold joint venture, is looking for investors for a large-scale mining project in the valley near Rosia Montana (known as Verespatak before 1918) to the east of Cimpeni and Abrud in the Romanian ‘judetul’ or province of Alba and the flood plain of the Mures/Maros river, in which a 600 hectare cyanide pond is being built without a concrete floor and an area of 1600 hectares of age-old mountain villages is being evacuated, and that work on the project has now started?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/7

(2004/C 33 E/008)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2495/02

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(9 September 2002)

Subject: EU aid to countries practising sharia

In November 2001 in Nigeria, a woman was sentenced to be stoned for infidelity. In March 2002, the woman was freed after immense international pressure. A similar situation has now arisen again. On 19 August 2002, Amina Lawal was condemned to death by stoning for having engaged in extramarital sex. Such barbaric and medieval methods of punishment are unacceptable to the international community.

Experience shows that people who are condemned to such insane punishments can only be saved by the international community. However, the international community should not have to be mobilised on an ad hoc basis every time such a case occurs in a country which practises sharia. The author of this question takes the view that systematic sanctions against and constant pressure on such medieval regimes would have a far more beneficial effect than the method used hitherto which has principally consisted in the international community reacting only after extreme pressure from various interest groups.

Will the Commission therefore provide figures to illustrate the extent of EU aid to countries practising sharia? If the EU does give aid to such countries, will the Commission say whether such aid, which is provided with no human rights conditions attached, is consistent with the Commission's understanding of law and order, and whether it should be withdrawn immediately?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0153/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: EU-São Tomé and Príncipe international fisheries agreement and development cooperation

In the context of the current EU-São Tomé and Príncipe international fisheries agreement, can the Commission indicate:

1. how much the EU has earmarked for the development of the fisheries sector on São Tomé and Príncipe?

2. how much the EU pays by way of a financial contribution in exchange for fishing rights for the Community fleet?

3. how much Community shipowners have to pay in fees for fishing licences and fishing rights?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2003)

1. Article 2 of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Agreement between the Community and the Democratic Republic of São Tomé and Príncipe(1) fixes the level of financial compensation at EUR 2 250 000/three years. Out of this amount, the Protocol foresees EUR 370 000 (year one), EUR 382 500 (year two) and EUR 382 500 (year three) for the measures in support of the São Tomé fisheries sector specified in Article 4 of the Protocol. In addition, the Commission shall also provide financing of EUR 50 000, in the first year, for an evaluation study on deep-water crab.

2. The financial compensation of EUR 2 250 000/three years represents the amount that is paid in exchange for the fishing opportunities made available to the Community fleet.

3. The amounts paid by the vessel owners are fixed in the Annex to the Protocol. The licence fees for the tuna vessels are EUR 25 per tonne of tuna caught within São Tomé and Príncipe's waters. The licences are delivered after advance payments of EUR 3 750 for tuna seiners, EUR 1 375 for surface longliners and EUR 625 for each pole and line tuna vessel. The deepwater fishing vessels targeting crab shall pay a quarterly fee of EUR 42 per gross registered ton per year.

(1) OJ L 351, 28.12.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0183/03

by Jean-Louis Bernié (EDD) to the Commission

(24 January 2003)

Subject: Derogations concerning migratory birds

In the accession negotiations now under way the Commission has reportedly granted Malta derogations concerning the spring hunting of migratory birds.

Is this true?

If so, on what terms have the derogations been granted?

Has France sought derogations concerning the hunting of migratory birds?

If so, what derogations are they and when can it hope to obtain them?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2003)

The implementation of Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(1), hereafter referred to as the Birds Directive, has been negotiated in the framework of the accession negotiations on the environment chapter with Malta. As regards spring hunting of migratory birds, it has been agreed that Malta will fully implement, as from accession, the relevant parts of the Directive. However, Article 9 of this Directive allows for exceptions under certain very stringent conditions. If Malta wishes to allow spring hunting, it would need to ensure that all the requirements of Article 9 are met and that any permitted hunting is carried out under strictly supervised conditions and limited to small numbers only. Furthermore, the use of Article 9 is subject to monitoring by the Commission and Malta is committed, where it chooses recourse to this Article, to report each year on its possible use.

Therefore, bird hunting in Malta can, as from accession, only take place within the limits provided for by the Directive.

As regards the questions of the Honourable Member whether France has sought derogations concerning the hunting of migratory birds, it should be recalled that Member States do not have to seek derogations concerning hunting of protected birds. However, for the fixing of hunting seasons, France has based its legislation on the provisions of Article 7(4) of the Birds Directive rather than making use of Article 9 to derogate from the hunting provisions of Article 7 of the Birds Directive.

However, in France's decree No 2000-754, Article 2 introduces the possibility to extend the period of capture, keeping or other judicious use of certain birds in small numbers. In its ruling, the French Conseil d'Etat did not come to a conclusion about the legality of Article 2 of decree No 2000-754. It considered that an answer to this question is contingent on knowing if it is possible to use Article 9(1)(c) of the Birds Directive to derogate in relation to hunting, and especially to proposed extensions of hunting seasons.

This is why the French Conseil d'Etat, in January 2002, has referred several questions to the European Court of Justice regarding interpretation of the possible use of derogations for hunting. Further clarification is likely only when the Court of Justice pronounces on a recent preliminary reference from the French Conseil d'Etat.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.