ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2878/00

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

(13 September 2000)

Subject: Immigration to Europe and deaths of African migrants on the coasts of southern Spain

In circumstances which even recently could only be compared to the attempts of Latin American migrants to cross the Rio Grande into the US, the coasts of southern Spain, notably Andalusia, and the Canary Islands are now frequently witnessing the arrival of small vessels crammed with migrants young men and women, the latter often pregnant most of whom are arrested by the Spanish police (in the last five days, 600 people suffered such a fate). Corpses are frequently washed up on the beaches and rocks in the wake of desperate attempts to reach Europe. Spanish society is watching in perplexity as such deaths threaten to turn into a routine show of cruelty. Meanwhile, the Spanish government, on the pretext of adaptation to the European norm, has chosen not to regulate and facilitate the necessary inflow of immigrants (whose presence is particularly called for in the Spanish state, where the population is fast ageing thanks to the low birth rate), but, instead, to handle immigration in a repressive fashion: it has recently brought a bill before the national parliament which will toughen the law on foreigners which was quite recently adopted with the favourable votes of the vast majority of MPs.

Given that the French Presidency of the Council has just announced its intention to harmonise immigration and asylum law in the EU, and in the face of an overall problem of a harsh and cruel nature (as further evidenced by the deaths this year of 39 people of Chinese nationality in Dover), what action does the Council intend to take, in relation to the political attitudes of the Spanish government and to Community law, with a view to preventing these absurd and unacceptable deaths of defenceless persons on the coasts of Spain?

Reply

(20 November 2000)

1. The Council entirely agrees with the Honourable Member that illegal immigration into Europe is turning into a kind of slave trade which degrades human dignity, often at the cost of human lives. It would refer the Honourable Member to the Council's reply to Written Question P-1391/00 put by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou.

2. It is not for the Council to express any views on the alignment of the Spanish Ley de Extranjería on the EU acquis. Following entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty, questions to do with immigration, visas and asylum come within the Community's sphere of competence (Title IV TEC). It is therefore for the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to ensure that Member States fulfil their obligations in those matters.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2259/00

by José Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 July 2000)

Subject: Christian minorities in Egypt

In recent weeks there have been reports in the media concerning the persecution of minorities in Egypt, in particular the Copt Christian minority.

Is the Commission aware of this?

Can it provide information on the situation of the Copt minority in Egypt?

If these reports are true, will the Commission say what instruments it can use in order as far as possible to help ensure that the Egyptian authorities respect the rights of the Copt minority in Egypt?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2000)

The Commission is aware of press reporting of developments regarding the situation of the Coptic community in Egypt. Most of these cover the recent conviction of William Arsal for the murder of two people in the Christian village of el Khosheh in 1998. The trial of the 196 accused of involvement in the riots and murders in el Khosheh and nearby villages in the New Year has begun. During these events 22 people died (all were Copt but one).

The Egyptian government is aware of the dangers of sectarian violence to Egyptian society and immediately took measures to restore the rule of law to the region. The Commission believes that shortcomings in policing and the socio-economic deprivation of much of upper Egypt have been major factors in explaining the violence of the events in el Khosheh.

The reaction of the Egyptian authorities to the events of the New Year and the trials of those suspected of precipitating the events are encouraging signs. The delegation of the Commission and the Member States embassies in Cairo continue to monitor the situation.

The long term challenge of addressing the root causes of economic deprivation and intolerance is considerable. The Commission, in its MEDA financed cooperation programmes in Egypt (and notably those which target basic education and basic health) is working concretely with its Egyptian partners on these issues and poverty alleviation remains a priority in the Commission's programming for 2000-2006.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2753/00

by Konstantinos Alyssandrakis (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Advance of Turkish occupying forces in Cyprus

On the eve of the opening of direct talks on Cyprus between the two communities in Geneva, the Turkish occupying army has advanced its positions, taking an area of between 200 and 300 metres in the Strovilia area of Cyprus, near the British Army base and inside the neutral zone controlled by UN forces. This new provocation on the part of Turkey and Denktash is likely to undermine the Geneva talks between the two communities and reveals Turkey's contempt for UN resolutions.

Will the Council condemn this fresh provocation, and what action will it take with a view to ensuring that the neutral zone is cleared of Turkish troops and fostering the achievement of a just and viable solution to the Cyprus question on the basis of UN resolutions?

Reply

(20 November 2000)

1. The first and foremost interest of the Council is that a global, fair and viable solution be found to the Cyprus question, consistent with the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council. The Council considers that the proximity talks under the aegis of the United Nations currently under way are the best means to reach such a solution.

2. The Council fully supports the efforts of the United Nations in this regard, and urges all parties concerned to refrain from any acts which could undermine the talks. The EU is cooperating closely with the UN and other international players in order to foster the achievement of a just and viable solution.

3. The issue of the military advance around Strovilia, which negatively affected the atmosphere and increased tensions in the proximity talks and obstructed the work of Unficyp, which is mainly responsible for monitoring and maintaining the ceasefire established on 16 April 1974 in order to prevent a resumption of fighting, should be resolved in the UN framework and not be allowed to disturb the proximity talks. Restoration of the status quo ante would enable the proximity talks to continue unimpeded.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2974/00

by Carmen Fraga Estévez (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 September 2000)

Subject: The Commission's criteria for allocating fishing opportunities in the waters of the Svalbard archipelago

In its reply of 20 July 2000 to my question E-2196/00(1), the Commission stated that with regard to allocating opportunities for the Community fleet to fish for shrimps in Svalbard waters, at a meeting held on 30 June the Member States involved agreed to a fishing plan for this year. This development, which I already knew about, can only be welcomed, but in view of the Commission's initial proposal to the Member States even though it did not reach the stage of a formal proposal to the Council, which was subsequently amended by the Member States, doubts remain as to the Commission's criteria when allocating these fishing opportunities. This being so, and given that the aforesaid agreement applies only to this year:

What are the Commission's criteria for proposing reference periods, and particularly, in the case under consideration?

Does the Commission continue to hold the view, upheld in various international fora, that a single year's fishing activity cannot be used as a historical maximum?

Can the Commission tell me what its intentions are with regard to its proposal for the year 2001, the reference period it intends to use for this proposal, and the arguments on which it will be based?

(1) OJ C 89 E, 20.3.2001.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 2000)

It is the responsibility of the Commission to propose reference periods on an ad hoc basis in conformity with the detailed circumstances applicable to fisheries of various characteristics. This applies equally to fisheries by Community vessels for shrimps in the Svalbard area.

In that context, the possibility to refer to some maximum value within a range of years proposed by the Commission for each Member State is not precluded. Indeed, this approach was used when establishing allocation keys in 1998 for various fish stocks in the North Sea.

At present, the Commission has not decided whether a proposal dealing with 2001 will be required. Discussion has been initiated with the concerned Member States. It is possible that a further non-legislative solution may be found.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2944/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(19 September 2000)

Subject: Government subsidies for manure processing

Manure processing is one way of tackling the problem of nitrate and phosphate pollution caused by intensive pig-farming (as an alternative to reducing pig stocks).

In France and Denmark, government subsidies are paid to pig producers to enable them to process manure. This distorts competition with countries where pig-farmers do not receive subsidies for manure processing.

1. Is the Commission aware of the government subsidies paid to pig-farmers in Denmark and France for manure processing? If so, does the Commission consider them to be in accordance with European competition rules? If not, will the Commission provide information about the Danish and French government subsidies as soon as possible to make it possible to assess whether or not they are causing distortion of competition in relation to pig-farmers in countries where no subsidies are paid for manure processing?

2. What measures will the Commission adopt in the light of the answer to Question 1?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 October 2000)

The Commission has no knowledge of any aid granted to pig farmers to process manure in France or Denmark.

State aids to cover operating costs would normally not be compatible with Articles 87 and 88 (ex Articles 92 and 93) of the EC Treaty. The Commission attaches great importance to investigating allegations that (illegal) state aids are being paid. However, in order to do so the Commission would need to have more information about the nature of the aids which are being granted (is the aid granted to farmers or to the undertaking processing the manure) and about the level at which the aid is administered (national, regional or local).

The Commission would be grateful if the Honourable Member could provide the information in his possession.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2913/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(20 September 2000)

Subject: Doubts over the effectiveness of sanctions policy

On 10 July, at their first meeting under French Presidency, the EU Foreign Ministers discussed the aims and methods of their Balkan policy. The French Foreign Minister and President-in-Office of the Council, Hubert Vedrine, stated that an increasing number of countries were doubtful of the efficacy of sanctions against Yugoslavia in relation to their goal of democratisation. The sanctions were discouraging the population rather than damaging Milosevic. He admitted that that it was obvious that our political goals were not being achieved. Our leaders are clearly embarking on a radical reappraisal of their sanctions policy, despite Milosevic's recent attempts to retain power.

Against this background, is the Council having similar thoughts about the sanctions against Austria (unjustified by comparison with those against the undemocratic Milosevic regime) and considering removing bilateral sanctions and resuming Community dialogue with this fellow EU member and partner?

Reply

(22 December 2000)

The Council has no position on the issue raised by the Honourable Member and is therefore unable to respond.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2536/00

by John McCartin (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 July 2000)

Subject: International Marine Pollution Commission report

Is the Commission aware of a report published recently by the International Marine Pollution Commission, on behalf of OSPAR, warning of irreparable damage to marine life in the seas around the west and north of Europe? The report refers to sewerage discharge and industrial pollution, toxic and radioactive pollution, chemical pollution and overfishing and calls for a response from the Commission. Does the Commission propose to make a statement on the matter or respond to the report?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 2000)

The Commission is unaware of the existence of an international marine pollution commission but assumes that the Honourable Member refers to a report recently issued by the Oslo-Paris commission (OSPAR).

During its annual meeting of 26-30 June 2000, the OSPAR commission adopted the quality status report 2000 on the whole North-East Atlantic, commonly known as QSR 2000. This report, together with reports covering the five regions of the OSPAR maritime area, is the first detailed assessment of the status of the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic from the Arctic to the Straits of Gibraltar and from Greenland to the Kattegat.

According to QSR 2000, the worsening trends on marine pollution and fisheries have been reversed or at least halted. Nevertheless, there are still threats to the marine environment and action is needed on sustainable management of fish stocks, reduction of fisheries impact on fragile ecosystems, and elimination of inputs of hazardous substances, which have been clearly identified.

The Community, represented by the Commission, is a contracting party to OSPAR and has collaborated actively in the four-year preparation of QSR 2000. The Commission welcomes the completion of QSR 2000 and recognizes the extensive efforts of contracting parties that went into its preparation. The Commission hopes to see OSPAR build upon this QSR in the future and emphasizes the need for future assessments to have greater coherence between regions and to coordinate assessments with those of other regional seas fora through collaboration under

the European environment agency's inter-regional forum. Consequently, the Commission endorses the report and will respond to the main challenges it raises in the fields falling within Community competence. On that last point, it has to be recalled that many pieces of Community legislation as well as coordinated Community activity in various international fora contribute either directly or indirectly to the improvement of the marine environment protection.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2605/00

by Carlos Ripoll y Martínez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: Measures to support the dried fruit sector

The general reform of the fruit and vegetable sector which includes almonds, locust beans, hazelnuts, walnuts and chestnuts in the new common organisation of the market will mean the end of specific support measures for the sector (improvement plans).

Commissioner Fischler has mentioned the possibility of specific EU intervention in favour of such crops under the rural development programmes.

Does the Commission approve of EU intervention in favour of dried fruits through the rural development programmes?

If so, what specific support measures for the dried fruit sector have been laid down in the rural development programme for Spain in general, and for the Balearics region in particular?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 2000)

Financial support for Community nut production under Title IIa of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1035/72 of 18 May 1972 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables(1) was discussed at the Council meeting (agriculture) of 17 July 2000. The Ministers concluded that the Council should ask the Commission to propose that payments to nut growers be continued under the budget for 2001 for those programmes that would otherwise expire in 2000.

Furthermore, the Commission will be considering the situation in the nuts sector in connection with the report it is to present by the end of 2000 on the arrangements for fruit and vegetables.

In principle the Commission has always been in favour of providing Community support for the nuts sector through rural development programmes, which are drawn up and proposed by the Member States or, where applicable, by the regions. However, the initial versions of the rural plans for 2000-2006 proposed by Spain and the Balearic Islands make no provision for any specific measures regarding economic support for nuts.

(1) OJ L 286, 23.12.1972.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3381/00

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 November 2000)

Subject: European Social Fund in Catalonia

Reports in the Spanish media indicate that, as a precautionary measure, the Commission has held back 14 million from the European Social Fund earmarked for Catalonia. Since these reports appear to have originated from Community sources, will the Commission specify the exact figure involved?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 2001)

In the framework of the partnership principle, and on the basis of documentation provided on one of the promoters subject to judicial proceedings, in September 1999, the Commission made an initial estimate of the amounts to be retained from the 1999 advances. For the moment, the judicial investigation concerns operations undertaken in 1996, but a possible extension to the whole 1994-1999 programming period might be envisaged. This provisional retention would have allowed payment of the advances pending. However, the Member State rejected the Commission's proposal by letter of 27 October 1999. At that stage, having deducted the amount blocked on the grounds of the state aid regulation, Council Regulation (EC) no 994/98 of 7 May 1998 on the application of Articles 92 and 93 of the Treaty establishing the Community to certain categories of horizontal state aid(1), the Catalan Region should have received 14 million from the Commission for the 1999 first advances request. This is the figure that has been reported by the press.

At present, the financial requests that have not been treated by the Commission amount to 63 million, of which 31 million are still blocked on the grounds of the state aids Regulation and 32 million are awaiting an examination as to the admissibility of the expenditure in question. These amounts correspond to the Objective 2 1998 final claim and the 1999 advances for all the objectives requested by the Member State.

(1) OJ L 142, 14.5.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3369/00

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: The European Social Fund in Catalonia

In its answer to Written Question P-2749/00(1) on this subject the Commission refers to the precautionary suspension of the payments referred to in Article 21 of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88(2), amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93(3).

Can the Commission say which source is authorised to disseminate such information?

If the information is merely the expression of a personal opinion although this would mean the Commission has seriously compromised itself does the Commission intend to take any steps to prevent this kind of thing happening again in the future?

(1) OJ C 103 E, 3.4.2001.

(2) OJ L 374, 31.12.1988, p. 1.

(3) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 20.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 2000)

The Commission answers parliamentary questions in line with its obligation under Article 197 of the EC Treaty. Each Commission answer to a written question is adopted by the Commission itself and then forwarded to the Parliament and to the Member of Parliament concerned. It is the Parliament which publishes the answers under Article 44 of its rules.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3589/00

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(22 November 2000)

Subject: Beatles Anthology

Is the Commission aware that it is impossible to buy the Beatles Anthology in the English (original version) in France? Is it aware that this situation is to protect the producer of the French language version from competition? Is the Commission aware that this is giving rise to a black market in France?

What is the Commission intending to do to enforce the rules of the single market, and to protect Beatles' fans from unscrupulous practice and to save this important part of Europe's cultural heritage from unfair commercial practice?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(15 December 2000)

The Commission has not been informed of the problem referred to by the Honourable Member. On the basis of the limited information at its disposal, it does not feel able to take any steps to deal with this matter.

It would therefore ask the Honourable Member, if he can provide further information, to draft a new and more detailed version of his question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2606/00

by Carlos Ripoll y Martínez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 August 2000)

Subject: State aid for fishing vessels and the fishing fleet

Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999(1) lays down that state aid for the modernisation of fishing vessels was to be defined for the period beginning on 1 January 2000.

The Member States may also adopt measures to promote investment in port facilities and the processing and marketing of fisheries products.

What measures and actions have been adopted by Spain for the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999?

What measures and actions have been proposed for the Balearics region in particular?

(1) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999, p. 10.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 2000)

Under Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December 1999 laying down detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector on 8 March 2000 Spain sent the Commission its proposed restructuring programmes for 2000-2006 in both Objective I and non-Objective I regions. In neither case is the programme broken down by Autonomous Community.

Under Article 87 (ex Article 92) of the EC Treaty Spain has submitted for approval to the Commission its national-level structural aid scheme for the sector and the aid schemes of certain regions. No scheme has yet been notified for the Balearic Islands Autonomous Community.

The programmes and structural aid schemes are being examined by the Commission.