ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1419/01

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 May 2001)

Subject: Fighting dogs

Measures have been taken in a number of European countries to combat the spread of breeds of fighting dogs, both because they are dangerous - as demonstrated by numerous attacks by dogs - and the unlawful use of such breeds by criminals to guard property or hold cruel dog fights for the purposes of betting.

Does the Commission consider it useful to draw up a European legal framework aimed at the strict regulation or, in certain cases, the elimination, of such dog breeds?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2001)

In the absence of a harmonised definition of fighting dogs, the Commission takes the view that the issue raised by the Honourable Member falls, in principle, within the remit of the Member States.

At the moment, the Member States have very different positions with regard to fighting dogs.

The Commission does not have a sufficiently sound scientific basis to draw up European legislation in this area. In the light of this, it does not feel able to table any proposals on this issue.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1402/01

by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 May 2001)

Subject: EU funding for the completion of the A6 Amberg-Waidhaus motorway

The A6 motorway is part of the European Paris-Nürnberg-Prague east-west link and hence part of the trans-European Transport Network. In view particularly of the expected increase in traffic volume in the wake of membership of the Czech Republic, rapid completion of the remaining gap between Amberg and Waidhaus is urgently needed.

Can the Commission say in this context:

- which EU funds can be allocated to such projects in principle, and up to what level,

- what requests for funding have been made to the EU by the German Federal Government for the completion of the A6 stretch of motorway,

- what funding has so far been granted,

- what future financing can be anticipated for the three remaining part-sections?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2001)

The A 6 motorway in Germany has been included in the trans-European transport network(1), and projects along this axis are therefore in principle eligible for Community financial aid under the trans-European transport network budget line. The relevant procedures are laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95(2), amended by Regulation (EC) No 1655/1999 of the Parliament and of the Council(3). The total amount of aid granted under this Regulation cannot exceed 10 % of the total investment cost of the project concerned.

As far as the Amberg-Waidhaus section of the A6 motorway, constituting the immediate border section with the Czech Republic, is concerned, the German Federal Government submitted to the Commission requests for Community financial aid in 1997 and 2001. On this basis, a grant of 6,51 million was allocated in 1997 to support the construction of the Lohma-Waidhaus and the Pfreimd-Woppenhof sub-sections. A Commission Decision regarding a possible support for the Kaltenbaum-Lohma section, subject to request under the budget 2001, is still pending. No request was so far submitted to the Commission for the Woppenhof-Kaltenbaum sub-section of the project.

Community co-financing of this sub-section will mainly depend on its technical and financial maturity (i.e. the provision of the necessary national funding), and be subject to the availability of funds under the trans-European transport network budget line in the coming years.

(1) Decision No 1692/96/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community Guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (OJ L 228, 9.9.1996, p.1.

(2) Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 of 18 September 1995 laying down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks (OJ L 228, 23.9.1995, p. 1).

(3) Regulation (EC) No 1655/1999 of the Parliament and of the Council of 19 July 1999 (OJ L 197, 29.7.1999, p. 1).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1050/01

by Carlos Lage (PSE) to the Commission

(5 April 2001)

Subject: Consolidated texts of directives

There are still no freely available consolidated texts of directives that have been amended or expanded to incorporate technical adjustments. Even where all that is involved is unofficial, purely practical simplifications to legislative acts, the consolidated text of a directive is still ultimately the one that is used in legal proceedings and which alone makes it possible to keep the work transparent and simple.

It is intolerable that consolidated versions have to be obtained from private firms that make money in the process. This is a case of insufficient transparency, which should be eliminated in accordance with Article 255 of the Amsterdam Treaty. Sufficient transparency can at all events only be said to apply when access to documents is possible without disproportionate expense, and that is not the case when trying to track down consolidated texts.

1. Why can the Commission not issue consolidated versions of amended directives at regular intervals?

2. Why are the current consolidated versions of directives not at least posted on the Internet and freely accessible?

3. When will the Commission finally be in a position to change this untenable situation?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(1 June 2001)

1. and 3. Since 1999 the Commission has considerably boosted efforts to provide consolidated versions of the legislation that is in force, the aim being to consolidate all current acts within three years (by mid-2003) and to ensure that existing consolidated versions are constantly updated.

2. Currently, more than 40 % of legislative acts are available in consolidated form, free of charge, under the heading Legislation in force on the website http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1458/01

by Philip Bushill-Matthews (PPE-DE) and Caroline Jackson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 May 2001)

Subject: Biological teatment of biodegradable waste

The practice of shredding solid biodegradable waste via food disposal units, with a view to evacuating it via the sewer, is widely used in the UK as well as for example in the USA.

Does the Commission accept that its proposals on this subject must pursue an integrated policy for waste management, permitting various processes rather than specifying composting as the sole way to manage food waste?

Does the Commission agree that banning one particular method of dealing with food waste, in defiance of national experience and in the absence of compelling and accepted scientific evidence in support of such a ban, would be inconsistent with the principle of subsidiarity?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2001)

The prudent use of resources is an obligation arising out of the EC Treaty (Article 174, ex-Article 130a). Drinkable water is a very precious and limited resource that should be used with moderation and without wastage. Food waste disposal units are electrical devices normally installed under a kitchen sink and used to grind food waste with a view to evacuating it via the sewer. Drinkable water is normally used to carry the ground waste through the sewer to the wastewater treatment station.

The working document on the biological treatment of biodegradable waste (second draft of February 2001) elaborated by the Directorate general Environment for discussion with all relevant stakeholders suggests that the use of food waste disposal units should be limited. The Commission has so far taken no decision on restricting the use of food disposal units in the Community. Furthermore, the Commission has not specified composting as the sole way to manage food waste.

However, with regard to food waste disposal units, the following aspects deserve attention, especially with regard to an integrated waste management policy:

- Sewers are generally not engineered to carry solid waste and high density waste may slow down wastewater and cause pipe clogging;

- Solid waste in wastewater increases the energy demand at the wastewater treatment station in order to reduce the additional pollution provoked by solid waste;

- Sewage sludge production would be increased by 10 to 40 % because of solid waste in waste waters. Only 30 to 40 % of sewage sludge is used on land as fertiliser in the Community. The rest is either landfilled or incinerated. Moreover, sewage sludge is normally much more contaminated by heavy metals than compost from source separation of food waste;

- Urban waste water treatment plants are not built in order to deal with solid waste but with wastewater. Concerning the implementation of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991(1), Member States and local authorities have already made their investments, which are based on wastewater volumes that do not include food waste.

(1) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1445/01

by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission

(11 May 2001)

Subject: Quebec agreement and relations between the EU and Latin America

A few days ago an agreement was signed in Quebec for the purpose of setting up a huge free-trade area encompassing all the countries of the American continent.

Could the Commission say what effect the agreement may have on the political and trade relations between the European Union and America?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2001)

The Quebec Summit of the Americas of April 2001 did not lead to an acceleration of the integration process of the Americas, but rather confirmed the Declaration made by the Trade Ministers of 34 countries participating in the negotiations of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) at their meeting in Buenos Aires in April 2001 to ensure that negotiations of the FTAA Agreement are concluded no later than January 2005 and that the Agreement enters into force no later than December 2005.

The FTAA negotiations aim to further liberalise trade within the Western hemisphere by reducing barriers to trade and investment in order to generate economic growth and prosperity in the region. The Buenos Aires Ministerial Declaration emphasises the commitment of the participating countries to an open and balanced trading system and prevention of further barriers to trade and investment to countries outside the Western Hemisphere.

The Commission generally is not opposed to regional initiatives which aim to achieve further trade liberalisation as long as they comply with the internationally agreed rules of the World Trade Organisation, are mutually supportive to the global trading system and do not lead to the imposition of any new barriers to trade with other countries.

Given the current state of play of the FTAA negotiations, no in-depth analysis of the various elements is currently possible making it difficult to estimate the likely effects on trade between the Community and the countries of the future FTAA.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2050/01

by María Sornosa Martínez (PSE) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: White Paper on EU youth policies

In the wake of a wide-ranging consultation process involving civil society, young people's organisations and experts, the Commission would seem to have, for the time being, suspended work on its White Paper

on youth policies. At the last Council of Ministers for Youth, held in Brussels on 28 May 2001, the Member States advocated an ambitious White Paper which would aim high. Nonetheless, Commissioner Reding, while stopping short of announcing that there would be no White Paper, has warned that the final text could prove to be a document devoid of content.

Can the Commission explain the nature of the problems encountered or the reasons which have led it to consider that the final text could be a document devoid of content?

What action does the Commission intend to take to meet its original goal of submitting the White Paper by November 2001?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1694/01, E-1733/01, E-1903/01, E-1904/01 and E-2050/01 given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(2 August 2001)

The Commission believes that the policy of European co-operation in the youth field should be strengthened. This is why, at the end of 1999, the Commission began to draw up a White Paper on this subject at the instigation of the Member of the Commission with responsibility for Education and Culture.

The Commission wanted a hitherto unprecedented consultation process to take place beforehand: consultations with young people in each Member State in 2000, in connection with which a European-level meeting was held in Paris in October 2000; consultations with civil society organisations and academics; discussions with the Member States. This process was completed in March 2001 in Umeå, Sweden.

The Commission, now sure of the support of young people and the Member States, has since then been in the process of drawing up the White Paper, which should be published before the end of the year.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1188/01

by Juan Naranjo Escobar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 April 2001)

Subject: Techniques for detecting meat from animals fed on illegal feedingstuffs

A technique devised by Spanish researchers at the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas [= Senior Scientific Research Council] is capable of determining whether nor not any bovine product (meat, skin, horns, hooves) comes from a beast fed on meal containing any kind of meat, which in the case of ruminant animals has been banned since 1994.

Initial trials of the technique carried out on 350 samples of animals and of meat purchased in Spanish shops proved highly successful and information regarding the technique has already been conveyed to the Spanish Government.

Does the Commission not think that it should provide support to help consolidate the initial (and highly encouraging) results of the technique by approving the latter and by providing a major share of the funding required to finance relevant research work?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2001)

The Commission is aware of the new testing method being developed in Spain to detect meat and bone meal in feed and whether cattle have been fed such meal, and is carefully considering the scientific validity of the method and will consider authorising its use, should trials prove to be satisfactory.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1741/01

by Anne Jensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(12 June 2001)

Subject: Implementation of Directive 97/81/EC on part-time work

In what case has implementation of Council Directive 97/81/EC(1) of 15 December 1997 on part-time work led to a lowering of the limits for the number of hours worked subject to which part-time workers are covered by particular conditions of employment?

(1) OJ L 14, 20.1.1998, p. 9.

Answer given by Ms Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 July 2001)

The goal of Council Directive 97/81/EC of 15 December 1997 concerning the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC(1) is to eliminate discrimination against part-time workers, improve the quality of part-time work, facilitate the development of the potential for part-time work on a voluntary basis and contribute to the flexible organisation of working time in a manner which takes into account the needs of employers and workers.

However, the Directive does not lay down the number of hours that must be worked to fall within the definition of part-time. It leaves the definition of this term to the national legislation of the Member States, stating merely that The term part-time worker refers to an employee whose normal hours of work, calculated on a weekly basis or on average over a period of employment of up to one year, are less than the normal hours of work of a comparable full-time worker.

(1) OJ L 14, 20.1.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0345/01

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 February 2001)

Subject: Interference by food distribution companies in political processes

The extraordinary interference by the Swiss food chain Migros in the social developments taking place in the fruit and vegetable-producing region of Almeria, Spain, has provoked a strong negative reaction on the part of local businesses, which have received letters from the well-known Swiss firm threatening to break off business relations unless conditions for immigrants are improved.

Such an unexpected response from a commercial firm to a debate which has already been resolved in the farming region of Almeria, after a number of incidents linked to the assimilation of a particular group of immigrants, risks setting a highly dangerous precedent for interference by commercial companies in certain social and political conflicts which may arise in any of the Community's farming regions.

Does the Commission believe that it should take up a position with a view to preventing interference such as that seen in the case of Migros, which has been acting under the influence of the European Civic Forum, an organisation which seeks to favour the farming interests of the countries of eastern Europe?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2001)

It is clearly not for the Commission to interfere in the commercial decisions of private firms.

Such firms are of course free to apply social, environmental or other ethical considerations to their commercial decisions, including purchasing policy. Indeed, best business practice in this domain is explicitly encouraged by the OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises, which were reviewed last year, and endorsed by all OECD Members at Ministerial level. The Commission fully supports the promotion of these Guidelines as a means of promoting corporate citizenship.

The Honourable Member will also recall that the institutions are committed to ensuring the fair treatment - economically, socially and culturally - of all third country nationals who reside legally on the territory of Member States, as stated in the Conclusions of the Tampere European Council (October 1999).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1191/01

by Robert Goebbels (PSE) to the Commission

(19 April 2001)

Subject: Use of an industrial site reclaimed through EU aid

The author of this question firstly wishes to stress that the Commission has taken more than four months to give an - incomplete - answer to his Question E-2807/00(1) regarding the use of an industrial site reclaimed by means of EU aid. The question concerned whether an international industrial park, the infrastructure of which has been developed with the help of significant Community funds, may be reassigned to be used for the building of a state school, important though the latter may be from Luxembourg's point of view.

In other words, can Community funds be used to redevelop land the ultimate intended use of which is no longer that which justified the Commission's contribution?

(1) OJ C 187 E, 3.7.2001, p. 3.

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 2001)

As the Commission informed the Honourable Member in September 2000, in order to answer his Written Question E-2807/00(1) the competent authorities needed to be contacted and this took some time.

The purpose of investments to which the Commission has contributed must continue to apply throughout the duration of the programme and, where possible, until the goals set out therein have been achieved.

In accordance with Article 24 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 of 19 December 1988 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different Structural Funds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing financial instruments, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2082/93(2), the Commission can only reduce or suspend assistance in respect of the operation or measure concerned if an examination reveals an irregularity or a significant change affecting the nature or conditions for the implementation of the operation or measure for which the Commission's approval has not been sought.

In the case in point, the goals set out in the programme have been attained. (By the end of 1997, some 1 561 jobs had been created on the Luxembourg side of the European Development Pole, the target set being only 1 000.) Under the circumstances, the aim of the Community financial assistance has been met and one cannot object where the use made of the facilities benefiting from the aid changes over time and in line with the Member State's needs and priorities.

(1) OJ C 187 E, 3.7.2001, p. 3.

(2) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 20.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0764/01

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 March 2001)

Subject: Silk production in the EU

The mulberry tree which is indispensable for breeding silkworms and developing silk production grows in an area in the Mediterranean countries of the Union. France, Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal have a notable production of cocoons, an activity which constitutes a substantial source of income for farmers and those employed in the silk industry. Total annual production in the Union is estimated at 60 tonnes of dried cocoons which yield some 20 tonnes of silk thread.

The EU's total silk product needs could be met by cultivating 100 000 hectares of mulberry trees, employing some 100 000 households: this would lead to a reduction in unemployment and boost the incomes of farmers in Europe whose numbers are steadily declining. It should be pointed out that production of silk thread in the EU lags far behind requirements and the EU is obliged to import raw materials from Asia (Vietnam, for instance) and Africa (Zambia, for instance), even though it could very easily produce the silk needed on its territory.

Will the Commission say whether its services have recently drawn up a study on the problems facing sericulture and the silk industry in the Union and, if so, what conclusions it reached? Will it also say whether there is any prospect of the production of European silkworm eggs so as to make the Union self-sufficient, solve the problem of dependence on third countries and offer a prospect of development to border regions, such as Thrace, where production is ailing, leading to further unemployment and a fall in producers' incomes?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2001)

The Commission has not recently studied the problems of European sericulture and the Community silk industry.

Silkworm rearing in Greece, Italy and in lesser degree Spain and France accounts for a minute proportion of the Community's agricultural activity and of world sericulture. But in some regions, notably Thrace, Veneto and Marche, it is of significance and the skills involved merit preservation.

Accordingly to enable the operators concerned to plan their activities in the longer term the Council has decided, on a Commission proposal as part of the 2000/2001 price package, to prolong the Community aid on boxes of silkworm eggs.