ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1784/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(28 May 2003)

Subject: Access to Medicines Round Table

What conclusions has the Commission drawn from the EU/WTO Access to Medicines Round Table event held in Brussels on 28 April, attended by Romano Prodi, Commissioner Lamy and Commissioner Busquin?

Joint answerto Written questions E-1779/03, E-1784/03 and E-1791/03given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2003)

The Commission is disappointed that thus far no agreement has been reached to address the problems faced by developing countries with no or insufficient manufacturing capacities (Article 6 of the Doha Declaration on Public Health and TRIPs). It is working together with its World Trade Organisation (WTO) partners in order to secure a solution prior to the Cancun Ministerial in September 2003. Such a solution should under no circumstances undermine the content of the Doha Declaration on Public Health and TRIPs as agreed in November 2001.

Taking forward the access to medicines agenda is part of a broader and ambitious Commission strategy spelt out in our Community Programme for Action on Communicable Diseases. The Commission works jointly on the implementation of a series of actions eventually leading to the same objective: accelerated action and improved health outcomes, in particular in the area of Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS), malaria and tuberculosis (TB). In light of this, the Commission is fully committed to incorporating the Doha Declaration on Public Health and TRIPs into its trade policies, and with particular regard to technical assistance for the implementation of the TRIPs Agreement. It is the view of the Commission that proper implementation will improve access to medicines including antiretrovirals (ARVS) to treat HIV/AIDS. The Community recently adopted a Communication to the TRIPs Council: on the implementation of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPs Agreement and Public Health calling upon all technical assistance providers, and in particular multilateral organisations to join them in taking up this commitment, and thus fully integrate the Doha Declaration in their policies and practices. This communication was welcomed by developing country members of the WTO.

As to the Round Table on Access to Medicines hosted by the Member of the Commission responsible for Trade and the Member of the Commission responsible for Research and Technological Development on the 28 April 2003, the discussions were meant to inform the Commission's input

into the G8 Summit in Evian. The main conclusions of the Round Table noted that political will on all sides is essential in improving access to medicines. Tiered pricing of medicines was reconfirmed as being crucial and be pursued in conjunction with other policies, as developed in the Community Programme for Action. The need for genuine partnerships between developed and developing countries was emphasised in improving research and development in access to medicines.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1852/03

by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 May 2003)

Subject: Requirement under EU law of tendering for ferry services

The Danish Transport Minister, Flemming Hansen, recently had the opportunity to discuss the requirement under EU law that ferry routes be put out to tender with Commissioner Loyola de Palacio, who agreed with the Danish Government that in several respects EU law on this matter produced absurd results.

The Commissioner explained that the Commission was working on certain amendments to EU legislation on tendering for ferry services and that those amendments could enter into force very soon depending on the circumstances.

Will the Commission say whether these amendments to EU law concerning tendering for ferry services have been finalised? What is the substance of the amendments and when might they enter into force?

Answer given by Ms de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 2003)

The Honourable Member is very probably referring to the possibility that the Commission adopt a de minimis rule for islands with a low volume of traffic, as part of its revision of the Community guidelines on State aid for maritime transport, which should result in the adoption of a communication in the coming weeks.

When the abovementioned communication was discussed this June, serious consideration was given to the possibility of adopting a de minimis rule for small islands, as already announced in the Commission's White Paper of 12 September 2001 (European transport policy for 2010: time to decide)(1).

(1) COM(2001) 370 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1581/03

by Jean-Claude Fruteau (PSE) to the Commission

(8 May 2003)

Subject: Review of the CAP impact assessment on agriculture in the outermost regions

The discussions on the mid-term review of the Common agricultural policy are of vital importance for agriculture in the outermost regions.

However, this review has been launched without any prior impact assessment on agriculture in these regions having been conducted.

This runs contrary to the undertakings given by the Commission which, in its report of 14 March 2000 on the implementation of Article 299(2) of the Treaty of Amsterdam(1), stated that when considering any new Community legislation, it would first look at whether there are any issues affecting the outermost regions which require attention. In fact, in connection with each and every policy, consideration should be given to the possible implications, whether direct or indirect, positive or negative, for these regions.

Could the Commission inform Parliament why it has not yet done this?

(1) COM(200) 147 final.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 July 2003)

Although regional impact analyses can be carried out using the econometric impact-simulation models available within both the Commission and academic centres, none of those models, to our knowledge, can provide the type of analysis for the most remote regions requested by the Honourable Member. That analysis cannot therefore be carried out.

Neither can the mathematical models using data from the Farm Accountancy Data Network provide an exhaustive analysis of the impact of the proposed reform on those regions because the data required to provide a representative sample is either not available or incomplete.

The impact analyses carried out by the Commission or, at its request, by research centres, show a globally positive impact on the Union's agriculture and farmers from the measures proposed by the Commission.

At all events, the reform adopted on 26 June 2003 by the Council of Ministers for Agriculture, on a proposal from the Commission, gives a special place to the outermost regions, which will be affected neither by the decoupling of aid from production nor by the modulation of direct aid.

The Commission will continue to ensure that the special measures for the outermost regions are maintained and take full account of the specific nature of those regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2203/03

by Véronique Mathieu (EDD) to the Commission

(27 June 2003)

Subject: Drought

For several months now, a large number of regions in Europe, and especially in France, have been suffering from an exceptional rainfall shortage. In Lorraine, the shortage began as long ago as February. In some areas, no more than 50 mm of rain has fallen since February, although, in a normal year, the average rainfall is 50 mm per month. Farmers have been forced to start using the fodder stocks which they had set aside for next winter.

The scorching temperatures of the last few days have further exacerbated the situation. Every crop has now been affected.

Current legislation does not permit set-aside land to be used for fodder. However, given the exceptional circumstances which are threatening livestock, that resource must not be neglected.

What measures will the European Commission propose so that all fodder and straw resources may be fully utilised and every possibility of mutual assistance be exploited?

What provisions will the European Commission propose to cope with what might become an economic disaster?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 2003)

The Commission is aware of the fact that the drought became worse in several regions of the Community in June 2003 and, following a favourable opinion of the Management Committee for Cereals delivered on 3 July 2003, has decided to authorise the use of set-aside land for fodder in the regions concerned in the 2003/04 marketing year.

The French authorities have requested that the measure be applied in 54 departments. In addition to France, several regions of Germany, Italy and Austria are also taking advantage of the scheme.

This exceptional measure applies from 4 July 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0573/03

by Luigi Vinci (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(28 February 2003)

Subject: Turkey and the Ocalan case

For some weeks now the leader of the former PKK, Abdullah Ocalan, has been unable to receive visits from his defence lawyers or anyone else. This arbitrary decision on the part of the Turkish Government constitutes a flagrant violation of the European Convention on Human Rights and the political criteria for enlargement identified by the Copenhagen European Council.

What steps does the Greek presidency of the Council intend to take to ensure that Ocalan is guaranteed the basic right of defence? Does the Council not consider that, since Ocalan's sentence of death has been commuted, Brussels should now exert pressure on the government in Ankara to ensure that Ocalan is granted freedom and that negotiations are launched with a view to a political solution to the Kurdish question?

Reply

(29 September 2003)

1. The Council is closely watching the situation. After a period during which Mr Abdullah Ocalan had indeed been unable to receive visits, he has recently received visits from his lawyers and his brother.

2. In a judgment of 12 March 2003 (Ocalan v. Turkey application no 46221/99) concerning Mr Abdullah Ocalan's complaints relating to his detention, the trial and the sentence (death penalty) pronounced against him, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found, with regard to the right to a fair trial that Mr Abdullah Ocalan's right had been violated and that the imposition of the death sentence following an unfair trial had amounted to inhuman treatment. It did not, however, uphold the complaints regarding the legality of his arrest and of the conditions of his detention on the island of Irmali in the light of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The Council will closely monitor the follow-up to the Court's judgment, which may be subject to appeal by either party.

3. In the context of political dialogue with Turkey and under the Accession Partnership, the Council constantly insists on compliance with the provisions of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and in particular the judgments of the ECHR. As regards the wider aspects of the Kurdish question raised by the Honourable Member, the Council expects Turkey to continue to work towards guaranteeing human rights including cultural rights and fundamental freedoms for all citizens irrespective of their origin, and promoting economic, social and cultural development in the South-East in particular.

4. On 26 March, the Commission adopted a revised Accession Partnership setting priorities for Turkey in meeting the pertinent political criteria, which the Council agreed on 14 April.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1875/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(6 June 2003)

Subject: On-site visits

Will the Commission estimate the number of occasions over the last year in which Member State regulators availed themselves of powers to conduct on site visits prior to the approval of a prospectus?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(1 July 2003)

The Commission has not sought to estimate the number of occasions of on-site visits prior to the approval of a prospectus because it does not believe this number will allow it to draw conclusions on the usefulness of on site inspections.

The Commission believes this number is very small and perhaps close to zero. However, it should be mentioned that the Commission has checked how many competent authorities have the powers to carry on-site inspections in the context of the approval of a prospectus. At the request of the Commission, the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) has sent a questionnaire to its members, covering this issue. Six competent authorities from five Member States have this power (Spain, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Finland). The Danish Financial Services Authority (FSA) has the power to carry on site inspections limited to financial institutions. However, it must be noted that some other competent authorities, notably in France and in the United Kingdom, do have this kind of power, directly or indirectly, in a more general context related to enforcement either of market abuse or of other disclosure obligations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0779/03

by Carlos Bautista Ojeda (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 March 2003)

Subject: Comitology

Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1049/2002(1) of 30 May, regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, lays down those exceptions where access shall be refused. Given that

the ruling handed down by the Court of First Instance on 19 July 1999, Rothmans International v. Commission (Case T-188/97) laid down that thecomitologycommittees [], for the purposes of the Community rules on access to documents, came under the Commission itself, on what grounds and how often has the Commission refused public access to comitology committee documents, on the basis of the exceptions laid down by Article 4 of Regulation (EC) 1049/2002 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents?

(1) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001, p. 43.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2003)

The Commission does not have sufficiently detailed statistics to identify specific cases where access to committee documents under the commitology decision was refused on the basis of the exceptions in Article 4 of Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents. Requests for access to documents produced by committees acting under committee procedures are processed on the same basis as documents from the Directorates-General which provide secretarial services for those committees, and they are treated by those Directorates-General.

However, the Commission would inform the Honourable Member that it will shortly be publishing the first annual report (2002) under Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001. The report, which will be transmitted to the other institutions, will contain statistics, in particular the breakdown by percentage of refusals to grant access by way of exception.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1885/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(6 June 2003)

Subject: Transparency requirements

In the Commission's proposal for a transparency directive, it states that it received 184 responses in the two consultation rounds. Will the Commission list all those investors and investor organisations that were consulted by it, and will it also attach to each organisation the amount of funds under management that it claims to speak for? Will it further arrange the list into those organisations that it believes were broadly favourable to compulsory quarterly reporting and those that were broadly against?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2003)

The Commission Proposal for a Directive on the harmonisation of transparency requirements with regard to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market was published on 26 March 2003(1).

The proposal was based on two consultation rounds which were carried out from July 2001 to October 2001 and again May 2002 until July 2002. In these written consultation rounds, the Commission invited the public (and not only a particular list of investors referred to in the written question) to make comments on the services' preliminary views for a future Commission proposal. The Commission published a summary of the replies received in the first consultation round in December 2002. As regards the arguments represented in the second consultation round, the Commission outlined them in great detail in its explanatory memorandum preceding its Proposal for the Directive.

These consultation rounds represented an additional tool for the Commission's internal reflections on a final proposal. In this context, the Commission considered not only the views of organisations to which the Honourable Member referred to in his question, but also those of individual market participants, citizens, companies and associations defending the various economic interests involved. Since the consultations were addressed to the public, potential respondents were not asked to provide information about their personal or economic background. Even if it wishes to do so, the Commission is not in a position to provide the requested factual background for all responses received.

The individual replies are accessible in accordance with the Community acquis on public access to documents.

The Commission policy is also in line with the recommendations of the Committee of Wise Men, chaired by Alexandre Lamfalussy, in its Final Report on the Regulation of European Securities Markets of February 2001. These recommendations were also fully endorsed by the Council in March 2001 and the Parliament in February 2002.

(1) COM(2003) 138 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2137/03

by Marco Cappato (NI) to the Council

(19 June 2003)

Subject: Declaration by Umberto Bossi, the Italian Minister for Institutional Reform, on immigration policy

On 16 June 2003, Umberto Bossi, the Italian minister for Institutional Reform, publicly stated that Illegal immigrants should be thrown out, full stop. Only people with employment contracts should be allowed in. Out with the rest. There comes a time when one has to use force. The navy and Guardia di Finanza should line up to defend our shores and use the gun. On the same occasion, Mr Bossi specified that After the second or third warning, that should be it bang. No more mincing words. Just shoot whoever they are. Otherwise we will never see the end of it.

In view of the principles underlying the European common immigration and asylum policy, let alone the rights and fundamental freedoms laid down in Articles 6 and 7 of the Treaty on European Union, does the Council not feel, especially in consideration of Italy's Presidency of the EU, that the Italian Government should be asked to clarify whether the statements on immigration policy made by one of its members represent that government's position?

Reply

(13 October 2003)

It is not for the Council to express a view on public statements made by a member of the government of a Member State.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2025/03

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Subject: Clophen leakage

Following the recent leakage of clophen in an electricity plant in the basement of a building in Syntagma Square (Greece), will the Commission say what stage has been reached in the infringement proceedings it initiated against Greece in April 2000, because the latter omitted to submit inventories of equipment with PCB, a plan for the disposal of such equipment and outlines for the collection and subsequent disposal of equipment which is not subject to inventory, in accordance with Articles 4.1 and 11 of Directive 96/59/EC(1)? Is the Commission aware of the whereabouts and use made since 1994 of the millions of euros set aside in the operational programme on the environment for the management and disposal of toxic waste?

(1) OJ L 243, 24.9.1996, p. 31.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(7 August 2003)

Article 4(1) of Council Directive 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT) requires Member States to establish an inventory of equipment containing more than five cubic decimetres (5 dm3) of PCBs and to submit a summary of such inventory to the Commission. In addition, according to Article 11 of the Directive, Member States have to draw up and communicate to the Commission plans for the decontamination and/or disposal of inventoried equipment and the PCBs contained therein and outlines for the collection and subsequent disposal of equipment which is not subject to inventory in accordance with Article 4(1).

In its judgement delivered on 5 June 2003 (case C-83/02), the Court of Justice declared that by failing to draw up, within the prescribed period, summaries of inventories of equipment with PCB volumes of more than 5 dm3, plans for the decontamination and/or disposal of inventoried equipment and the PCBs contained therein, and outlines for the collection and subsequent disposal of equipment which is not subject to inventory, in accordance with Articles 4(1) and 11 of Council Directive 96/59/EC of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCB/PCT), the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that Directive.

According to Article 228 of the EC Treaty, Greece must take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice. If Greece fails to take the necessary measures to comply with the Court's judgment, the Commission could open an infringement procedure under Article 228.

The Operational Programme for Environment for the period 1994-1999 included indeed a measure (measure 2,5) with a Community aid of circa EUR 32 million for projects related to waste and toxic waste management.

Under this measure, the Greek authorities co-financed mainly projects and actions related to non hazardous waste. The Commission has received the list of projects co-financed and their respective budgets and would be pleased to supply a copy of it to the Honourable Member upon his request.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1011/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(27 March 2003)

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

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 Pesaro, urgently need to use European funds to combat the abuse of women and children,

can the Commission state:

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

2. whether the municipality of Pesaro 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).