ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1513/03

by Helle Thorning-Schmidt (PSE) to the Council

(5 May 2003)

Subject: The sentencing to death by stoning of Amina Lawal

On 22 March 2002 in Nigeria, Amina Lawal Kurami was sentenced to death by stoning on the grounds that she had given birth to a child outside marriage. Amina Lawal Kurami appealed against the verdict, which was to have been reviewed on 25 March 2003 by the sharia court of appeal in the state of Katsina. However, the case was postponed until 3 June 2003.

What is the Council's position on this particular sentence and others like it? What steps does the Council intend to take to have Amina Lawal Kurami's death sentence quashed?

Reply

(29 September 2003)

The EU monitors closely the case of Amina Lawal on the basis of its declaration of 21 August 2002 in which it expressed its deep concern about the decision of the court of appeal dismissing the appeal lodged by Amina Lawal.

The Council, following the advice of Amina Lawal's defence lawyers that supportive actions should be taken in a discreet and confidential manner, considers that it is not advisable or appropriate to interfere in Amina Lawal's case as long as the case is sub judice. At this stage it seems to be more supportive to follow a general approach, i.e. not to individualise the case. In the context of the political dialogue with Nigeria at different levels, in particular through Heads of Mission in Abuja, the EU has reiterated its position on the death penalty and encouraged the Government of Nigeria to continue working towards the abolition of the death penalty and the prevention of all forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. With regard to this particular sentence the EU is stressing the need for Nigeria to guarantee that the constitution remains the supreme law in the country, given the constitutional problems arising from the application of the sharia in certain states.

The Council continues urging the Nigerian authorities to fully respect human rights and human dignity with particular reference to women(1).

(1) Nigeria has ratified the Convention on Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women without reservations. The EU has therefore reminded the Nigerian Government that Parties to the Convention on Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women condemn discrimination against women in all its forms, and agree to pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating discrimination against women.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2021/03

by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Council

(17 June 2003)

Subject: Support scheme for producers in the fisheries sector

In 1992, to compensate for the fact that certain outermost regions are islands, a support scheme was adopted for producers in the fisheries sector, providing for contributions to offset the additional marketing and transport costs that they were incurring because there were no regional markets near at hand and the cost of transport from the regions concerned to the mainland was high.

New regulations were adopted in 1994, 1995, and 1998 in order to continue the measures laid down in the initial regulation. The last of these regulations (Regulation (EC) No 1587/98(1)) remained in force until 31 December 2002.

Although the Commission has always proposed that a permanent scheme be established, given that remoteness and the other specific characteristics affecting the outermost regions (small size, the fact of being islands, difficult topography and climate, etc.) are factors which cannot be altered, the Council's decision to date has been that the scheme should be limited in time.

What is the reason for this attitude?

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1998, p. 1.

Reply

(13 October 2003)

The Council is aware of the specific handicaps affecting the structural economic and social situation of the outermost regions, and which exist in various areas, in particular the fisheries sector.

In this connection, the Council has given special attention to the problem of the additional cost involved in transporting fishery products to markets as a result of the outermost regions' remoteness and isolation. Thus, it adopted on 17 July 1998 Regulation (EC) No 1587/98 introducing a scheme to compensate for the additional costs incurred in the marketing of certain fishery products from the Azores, Madeira, the Canary Islands and the French departments of Guiana and Réunion as a result of those regions' remoteness. That scheme expired on 31 December 2001.

The Honourable Member is doubtless aware that Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1587/98 provided for a detailed evaluation of the impact of the implementation of the special measures adopted for the fisheries sector in those regions to be made by 1 June 2001.

To date, that evaluation has not yet been placed before the Parliament and the Council.

Pending the relevant report the Council, acting on a Commission proposal, has seen fit to extend the scheme by one year, i.e. until 31 December 2002 (Regulation No 579/2002), in order to ensure the continuity of its legal framework.

The Council has not yet received an appropriate proposal from the Commission concerning arrangements for the scheme with effect from 1 January 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1012/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(27 March 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the Daphne programme by the municipality of Pisa

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Pisa, urgently need to use European funds to combat the abuse of women and children,

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Pisa has submitted projects for the Daphne programme?

2. whether the municipality of Pisa has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1004/03, E-1005/03, E-1006/03,E-1007/03, E-1008/03, E-1009/03, E-1010/03, E-1011/03,E-1012/03, E-1013/03, E-1014/03, E-1015/03 and E-1016/03given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

The Daphne programme received the following proposals in 2003 alone:

- two proposals from the muncipality of Florence Assessorato Pubblica Istruzione e Politiche Giovanili, Direzione Istruzione;

- one proposal from the muncipality of Pesaro Servizio sociale;

- one proposal from the muncipality of Siena Comitato di ente per le pari opportunita.

The Commission has not yet assessed these proposals and is, therefore, unable to provide the Honourable Member with details of the selection or funding at this stage. Information on the outcome of the assessment process will be sent in July 2003 to all parties which applied to the Daphne programme in 2003.

No proposal was received between 1997 and 2003 for the other municipalities referred to by the Honourable Member (Ancona, Livorno, Macerata, Massa, Perugia, Pisa, Pistoia, Prato and Terni).
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1603/03

by Hans-Peter Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(6 May 2003)

Subject: Identification of police officers

French police officers assigned to duties in the vicinity of the European Parliament in Strasbourg repeatedly refuse to identify themselves upon request or even to make known their service number. This practice is followed even towards Members of Parliament. It is therefore impossible to attribute any abuse or excess to individual police officers, which is contrary to the democratic principle of accountability to which executive activities must be subject.

Is the Commission aware of this deplorable state of affairs?

Does the Commission intend to work towards the introduction of uniform rules for all Member States so that police officers on duty can be identified?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(26 May 2003)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that it is not aware that any problems have arisen in Member States due to police officers refusing to identify themselves vis-à-vis citizens. It is important to recall that the maintenance of law and order and internal security, including the organisation and the management of the police, are the sole responsibility of the Member States.

The Commission is therefore of the opinion that any difficulties identified should be brought to the attention of the authorities of the Member State where they have occurred.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2108/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Council

(18 June 2003)

Subject: Temporary Agency Workers Directive

Will the Council please give its view on the failure to reach agreement on the Temporary Agency Workers Directive on 3 June?

Reply

(13 October 2003)

In response to the Honourable Parliamentarian the Council would like to underline that, on 3 June 2003, substantial progress has already been made by the Council on this dossier on a common position with a view to reaching political agreement as soon as possible.

On 6 March 2003, the Council identified the three key elements necessary for a balanced political compromise. The Greek Presidency consequently elaborated a compromise package comprising Article 1(3), Article 4 and a new Article 11(3) containing a transitional period, along the lines proposed by the European Parliament in its 1st reading, to replace the exemption in Article 5(4).

This compromise package was discussed in a public session at the Council on 3 June but, as the question of the transitional arrangements concerning the exemption to the principle of equal treatment, still continued to be unsolved, the Council concluded that political agreement was not achievable at this stage, despite the willingness shown to make progress on this dossier. The Council has mandated Coreper to pursue its work on this Directive.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1009/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(27 March 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the Daphne programme by the municipality of Massa

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Massa, urgently need to use European funds to combat the abuse of women and children,

can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Massa has submitted projects for the Daphne programme?

2. whether the municipality of Massa has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1004/03, E-1005/03, E-1006/03,E-1007/03, E-1008/03, E-1009/03, E-1010/03, E-1011/03,E-1012/03, E-1013/03, E-1014/03, E-1015/03 and E-1016/03given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

The Daphne programme received the following proposals in 2003 alone:

- two proposals from the muncipality of Florence Assessorato Pubblica Istruzione e Politiche Giovanili, Direzione Istruzione;

- one proposal from the muncipality of Pesaro Servizio sociale;

- one proposal from the muncipality of Siena Comitato di ente per le pari opportunita.

The Commission has not yet assessed these proposals and is, therefore, unable to provide the Honourable Member with details of the selection or funding at this stage. Information on the outcome of the assessment process will be sent in July 2003 to all parties which applied to the Daphne programme in 2003.

No proposal was received between 1997 and 2003 for the other municipalities referred to by the Honourable Member (Ancona, Livorno, Macerata, Massa, Perugia, Pisa, Pistoia, Prato and Terni).
AstheCommissionisnotgatheringdataonthiskindofincidents,itcannotstateanycorrelationbetween
the increase in violent incidents and the increasing availability offlights at low prices. It is to note,however,thattheInternationalAirTransportAssociation(IATA)hasconfirmedthatincidentsofairragehaveincreasedbyalmost500%inthelasthalfofthe1990s.AccordingtoIATA,thisincreaseisduetomorepeoplebeingabletotravelascomparedtothepastwhereairjourneyswerefortheprivilegedfew.
Thelinktoonlycheapflightsbeingusedbyyoungstersseemsnotrelevant,asairrageistheproductof
several factors, which unfortunately occasionally collide. Reasons may include excessive alcoholconsumptioncombinedwithafeelingofhelplessness,bothwithinthecabinandthroughbeingexposedtolongdelays,aswellasgeneralpsychologicalfeelingsoflostcontrolduetothestressandanxietycertainpeoplefeelwhenflying.Surprisingly,alcoholisnotthemaincauseofairrage,withdrunkennessonlyaccountingfor25%ofallincidents.Insteadanxietythroughdelays,crampedconditionsandrestrictionssuchasbannedsmokingaretheleadingcauses.
The European airline companies have not brought to the attention of the Commission any data on
(general)deniedboardingnordeniedboardingbecauseofover-consumptionofalcohol.TheonlyfiguresavailabletotheCommissionarethoseincludedintheproposalforaRegulationoftheParliamentandoftheCouncilestablishingcommonrulesoncompensationandassistancetoairpassengersintheeventofdeniedboardingandofcancellationorlongdelayofflights(
1).
(1) OJC103E,30.4.2002.
(2004/C58E/171) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2339/03
byIldaFigueiredo(GUE/NGL)totheCommission
(16July2003)
Subject:RelocationoftheAmericanToolcompanyawayfromAlbergaria-a-Velha
ThemultinationalcompanyAmericanToolhasafactoryinAlbergaria-a-Velha,whereitproducessawsof
varioustypesandothercuttingtools.On27June2003itnotifieditsworkforcethatitintendstoclosedownitsoperationsinPortugalwitheffectfromSeptember,towhichendithasalreadylaunchedtheprocesswhichwillresultinthecollectivedismissalofall74ofitsemployees.
Inalettertothoseemployeesthecompanyhascited‘reasonsrelatingtotechnologyandtothecurrent
economic situation’ asgrounds for closing its factory in Albergaria-a-Velha and relocating part ofitsproductiontoDenmark.
AmericanTool’sannouncementhascomeasacompletesurprise,sincethecompanyandthegroupto
whichitbelongswerenotknowntobeinfinancialdifficulty.InadditiontoitsfactoryinDenmark,thegrouphasseveralplantsinotherEUcountries,inparticularSpainandItaly.
WouldtheCommissionsaywhetherornotthecompanyhasreceivedEUsupportand,ifso,howmuch?
Supplementaryanswer
givenbyMrsDiamantopoulouonbehalfoftheCommission
(8October2003)
FollowingcommunicationsbetweentheCommissionandthePortugueseauthorities,thelatterconfirm
thatthecompanyinquestionhasneverreceivedassistancefromtheEuropeanSocialFundorfromotherCommunitysources.C58E/158 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
TheCommissionhasthereforealreadyfollowedupontheCouncil’srequest,mentionedinDeclaration34
annexed to Austria’s Adhesion Act, and presented legislation in the relevant areas. Moreover theCommissionhaspresentedinDecember2001aproposalforaprolongationoftheecopointssystem(
4)
which is nowthe subject ofthe conciliation procedure. Finally the Commissionhasthe intention topresentshortlyanewsectoralproposalforaDirectiveonchargingfortheuseofroadinfrastructuremodifyingtheEurovignette-Directive.
(1) COM(98)444final.
(2) OJC59,26.2.1997.
(3) Directive1999/62ECoftheParliamentandtheCouncilof17June1999onthechargingofheavygoodvehicles
fortheuseofcertaininfrastructures,OJL187,20.7.1999replacingCouncilDirective93/89/EECof25October1993,OJL279,12.11.1993.
(
4) OJC103E,30.4.2002.
(2004/C58E/142) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2046/03
byAnneJensen(ELDR)totheCommission
(19June2003)
Subject:Germanroadtax
TheGermanGovernmenthastakenadecisiontointroducearoadtax(HGVtoll).Theintroductionofa
unilateralGermanroadtaxwillplacehauliersfromanumberofEuropeancountriesinaconsiderablyworsepositionthantheirEuropeancolleagues.TransitthroughGermany,forexample,isessentialforhaulagefromDenmarkandSwedentotherestofEurope.WiththeintroductionofaunilateralGermanroadtax,therefore,DanishandSwedishhaulierswillbecompetitivelyworseoff.
DoestheCommissionconsiderthatthisunilateralGermanroadtaxisconsistentwithEUcompetition
rules? Will the Commissionseek a commonEuropean solutionrather than accept unilateral nationaltaxation?
AnswergivenbyMrsdePalacioonbehalfoftheCommission
(18July2003)
GermanyhasnotifiedtotheCommissionitsintentiontointroduceanewroadtollsystemforheavygoods
vehiclesonGermanmotorways.TheCommissionhaswrittentotheGermanauthoritiesinordertoassessthecompatibilityofthesystemwithCommunitylaw,andinparticularwithDirective1999/62/EC(
1)as
regardsboththeleveloftollsandtheotherrelevantaspectsofthesystem.Theissueiscurrentlyunderexamination.
InanycasetheCommissionwillmakesurethatCommunitylawisdulyrespectedintheapplicationofall
issuesrelatedtothenewroadtollsysteminGermany.
(1) Directive 1999/62/ECoftheParliamentandoftheCouncilof17June1999onthechargingofheavygoods
vehiclesfortheuseofcertaininfrastructures,OJL187,20.7.1999.
(2004/C58E/143) WRITTENQUESTIONE-2057/03
byBarthoPronk(PPE-DE)totheCommission
(20June2003)
Subject:Oneandtwoeurocentcoins
A scientific article which was recently published in the Netherlands(1) used Cramer’s algorithm to
demonstratethatasetofeurocoinswhichdidnotincludeoneandtwocentcoinswasmuchmoreefficientforcashpaymenttransactionsthanthecurrentsetofeurocoins.Accordingtothearticle,anefficientsystemforcashpaymenttransactionsisintheinterestsofconsumers,shops,banks,industryandtheCentralBanks.C58E/126 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
(2004/C58E/127) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1912/03
byMaríaSornosaMartínez(PSE)totheCommission
(12June2003)
Subject:AwardofservicecontractsinSpaintonon-Communityhelicoptercompanies
The Spanish Government is still failing to comply with Regulation (EEC) No 3922/91(1) on the
harmonisationoftechnicalrequirementsinthefieldofcivilaviation,giventhatitcontinuestoauthorise
thetransportofforestfirebrigadesinhelicopterssubjecttoairworthinessrestrictions,suchasabanon
carrying persons and flying over urban areas or groups of people. These helicopters, which werewithdrawnfrommilitaryuseongroundsofage(after30yearsintheSpanish,NorthAmericanorIsraeliArmy),haveenteredthefieldofcommercialaviationthankstoauthorisationsgrantedbytheSpanishauthorities.However,theCommissionalreadyhasfiguresshowingthatthesehelicopterscausedseriousaccidentsinSpainlastyear(aparticularlytragicaccidentoccurredon14June2002inLérida,wheneightpeoplediedonboardanEC-GJLpurchasedfromtheSpanisharmyforonlyEUR3000whichhadbeeninuse for more than 30 years). This type of helicopter is not certified and authorised for commercialoperationinanyotherEUcountry.
WhatstepswilltheCommissiontakevis-à-vistheSpanishauthoritiestoensurecompliancewiththerules
setoutinRegulation(EEC)No3922/91onrequirementsinthefieldofcivilaviation?
WhatactionwilltheCommissiontaketocurbtheseriousriseinhelicopteraccidentsinSpain,which
people working in the Spanish sector attribute to the absence of national legislation in line withCommunitylegislationorsimilartothatinotherEUcountries?
Does the Commission not believe that granting licences for the type of helicopter described above
constitutesnegligenceonthepartoftheSpanishaviationauthorities?
What is the Commission’sview ofthe practice followedby the Spanish authorities ofcertifying and
authorisingthetransportofforestfire-fightersinhelicopterswhichshouldbesubjecttotheairworthinessrestrictionsdescribedabove,takingaccountoftheprovisionslaiddowninCommunitylegislationonhealthandsafetyatwork?
SeeWrittenQuestionsE-3487/00,E-3488/00andE-3489/00(
2).
(1) OJL373,31.12.1991,p.4.
(2) OJC187E,3.7.2001,p.9.
(2004/C58E/128) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1913/03
byMaríaSornosaMartínez(PSE)totheCommission
(12June2003)
Subject:Contractingofnon-Communityhelicopterstofightfires:thecasesofItalyandSpain
TheCommissionissuedawarningtotheItalianGovernmentinrelationtothepurchaseof49helicopters
tofightforestfires,callingonittocomplywithCommunitylegislationandarguingthatthefireproblemwasneitherexceptionalnortemporaryanendemicproblem.
How, then, Commissionexplain its failure to act in the case ofSpain, thereby allowing the Spanish
Government to use those same criteria of exceptional and temporary circumstances to circumventCommunitylegislation,andpermittingthesubcontractingproceduretobeabusedinrelationtowet-leaseagreementsinvolvingnon-Communityhelicoptercompanies?
SeeWrittenQuestionsE-3487/00,E-3488/00andE-3489/00(
1).
(1) OJC187E,3.7.2001,p.9.6.3.2004EN C58E/113 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion
Bearinginmindthatsomelocalauthorities,suchasthemunicipalityofCarrara,urgentlyneedtouse
EuropeanfundstopromotethesafeuseoftheInternetandencourage,atEuropeanlevel,afavourableenvironmentforthedevelopmentoftherelevantsector,
cantheCommissionstate:
1. whetherthemunicipalityofCarrarahassubmittedprojectsfortheActionPlanonpromotingsaferuse
oftheInternet?
2. whetherthemunicipalityofCarrarahassecuredfundingfortheseprojects?
3. whetherthisfundinghasbeenused?
(2004/C58E/039) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1080/03
byRobertaAngelilli(UEN)totheCommission
(31March2003)
Subject:UseoffundsundertheActionPlanonpromotingsaferuseoftheInternetbythemunicipalityof
Florence
InSeptember2002,themonitoringcommitteeoftheItalianMinistryforEconomicAffairsissuedareport
onthespendingofEUfunds.
ThereportrevealsthealarmingslownessandinefficiencywithwhichEUfundsareallocatedtoprojectsby
someregionalauthorities.
ThegraveconcernsabouttheinadequateuseofEuropeanfundsbylocalauthoritieshavefrequentlybeen
echoedbytheCommission.
Bearinginmindthatsomelocalauthorities,suchasthemunicipalityofFlorence,urgentlyneedtouse
EuropeanfundstopromotethesafeuseoftheInternetandencourage,atEuropeanlevel,afavourableenvironmentforthedevelopmentoftherelevantsector,
cantheCommissionstate:
1. whetherthemunicipalityofFlorencehassubmittedprojectsfortheActionPlanonpromotingsafer
useoftheInternet?
2. whetherthemunicipalityofFlorencehassecuredfundingfortheseprojects?
3. whetherthisfundinghasbeenused?
(2004/C58E/040) WRITTENQUESTIONE-1081/03
byRobertaAngelilli(UEN)totheCommission
(31March2003)
Subject:UseoffundsundertheActionPlanonpromotingsaferuseoftheInternetbythemunicipalityof
Livorno
InSeptember2002,themonitoringcommitteeoftheItalianMinistryforEconomicAffairsissuedareport
onthespendingofEUfunds.
ThereportrevealsthealarmingslownessandinefficiencywithwhichEUfundsareallocatedtoprojectsby
someregionalauthorities.
ThegraveconcernsabouttheinadequateuseofEuropeanfundsbylocalauthoritieshavefrequentlybeen
echoedbytheCommission.C58E/34 EN6.3.2004 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion