ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0212/01

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 2001)

Subject: CFP and MEAs

The EC is bound by a number of international and EC environmental commitments, including the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Amsterdam Treaty, the Habitats Directive and UN Fish Stocks Agreement. How does the Commission intend to ensure that these commitments are incorporated into the CFP after 2002?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0172/01 and E-0212/01 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2001)

The commitments cited by the Honourable Member are already being progressively incorporated in the current Common Fisheries Policy.

In first place, as far as the first two items mentioned in the question are concerned, the Commission wishes to draw the attention of the Honourable member to some recent or imminent policy documents describing the operational modalities of the implementation of such commitments, such as:

- the Communication on a Biodiversity Strategy(1), to be followed by sectoral Biodiversity Action Plans, including fisheries (expected in March 2001),

- the Communication on nature conservation and fisheries management in the marine environment(2), to be followed by the Communication on the elements of a strategy for the integration of environmental protection requirements into the Common Fisheries Policy (expected by March 2001).

Secondly, as far as the Habitats Directive(3) is concerned, the Commission is using all its means, including those of a financial nature, to ensure its complete implementation in the marine environment.

Furthermore, the Commission's proposal for a 6th Environment Action Programme(4), in Article 5, point 5, proposes, promoting greater integration of environmental considerations in the Common Fisheries Policy, taking the opportunity of its review in 2002 and in point 7, A thematic strategy for the protection of the marine environment. The implementation of relevant international and Community environmental commitments will be important topics to be addressed in this context.

Finally, although ratification by the Community of the United Nations (UN) Agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks is still pending, the Commission in proposing Community legislation is already taking account of the principles originating from the UN Agreement. Moreover, the Commission is also proposing implementation of management measures adopted by regional fisheries organisations operating within the framework of this Agreement.

The Commission intends to continue this process in a more efficient manner on the basis of a reinforced Common Fisheries Policy. It is the intention of the Commission that the forthcoming reform of the CFP will fully take into account the need to deal more effectively with fisheries and environment conservation issues.

(1) COM(98) 42.

(2) COM(1999) 363.

(3) Directive 92/43/EEC (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992).

(4) COM(2001) 31 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0274/01

by Jillian Evans (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 February 2001)

Subject: The United Kingdom Census in Wales

In its 2001 census forms, the United Kingdom Government's Office of National Statistics recognises the existence of a Scottish national identity in its form for Scotland and the existence of an Irish nationality on the census form throughout the United Kingdom. The same opportunity does not exist for the people of Wales to register their nationality as Welsh in Wales nor in the other countries of the United Kingdom.

Does the Commission agree that the people of Wales are being denied the freedom to express their national identity (or ethnicity) and that this is a case of discrimination against almost 3 million people resident in Wales and against Welsh people resident in other parts of the United Kingdom. If so, what action does the Commission intend to take?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(20 February 2001)

The Commission has no jurisdiction to deal with the question asked, which is a matter solely for the national authorities concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0305/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 February 2001)

Subject: Inclement weather in Portugal

Portugal has recently been afflicted by severe storms which have had effects including deaths, the displacement of numerous households, and substantial repercussions for economic activity in general.

Numerous infrastructures have been affected: homes have been destroyed, localities have been cut off, transport routes including roads and rail lines have been interrupted, electricity and communications networks have suffered cuts, and harbours and ports have had to close.

Industry, commercial activity, agriculture and fisheries have been heavily affected, with estimated losses already running into billions of escudos.

In view of the above, can the Commission state what emergency measures it intends to take, in cooperation with the Portuguese government and local authorities, to combat the effects of these dramatic circumstances in Portugal?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-0099/01 by Mr Casaca during question time at Parliament's February I 2001 part-session(1).

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (February 2001).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0206/01

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 2001)

Subject: Fisheries agreements and environmental impact

The recent Communication on Fisheries and Poverty Reduction(1) supports the pursuit of environmental and social studies prior to intervention with a potential social or environmental impact. How does the Commission intend to carry this out with regard to fisheries arrangements between the EU and third countries?

(1) COM(2000) 724.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0179/01 and E-0206/01 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2001)

The Commission's bilateral relations in the fisheries sector increasingly take account of the environmental and social aspects of fishing in waters under the sovereignty and/or jurisdiction of our partners.

Before any negotiations are opened, an assessment involving several Commission departments is made of their potential environmental and social impact, in the light of available information. The results of this assessment are sent to the Council and to Parliament.

The Commission is aware that there is room for improvement, and we are doing our best to use our bilateral relations in the fisheries sector to persuade our partners to develop responsible fishing, and subscribe to targeted measures that will improve knowledge of fisheries resources, fishing practices and the needs of the local people.

The Commission also encourages its partners to use the facilities available under the policy of development co-operation to this end.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/01

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(21 February 2001)

Subject: Use of cattle hides

The measures adopted with a view to combating bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) provide for the mandatory incineration of animals that are infected or may be at risk from infection. This means of disposal, whereby hides are not removed from the animals beforehand, may lead to supply-related problems for certain industries, such as the shoe industry, which use these hides as a raw material.

In the Commission's view, could hides be removed from cattle prior to incineration for subsequent use by industry?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2001)

Current Community measures on bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) do not prohibit the removal of cattle hides before disposal of the rest of the body, if the hides are destined for leather production, unless they are derived from animals which are suspected of being infected or are infected by a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE).

In particular, Article 5(4) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2777/2000 of 18 December 2000 adopting exceptional support measures for the beef market(1) exempts hides from bovine animals aged more than 30 months and not subject to one of the approved BSE rapid tests, from being stained or destroyed, provided that the hides are stored and treated separately from other hides in such a way that they can only be used for leather production.

According to Commission Decision 98/272/EC of 23 April 1998 on epidemio-surveillance for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies and amending Decision 94/474/EC(2) and to Decision 2000/764/EC of 29 November 2000 on the testing of bovine animals for the presence of bovine spongiform encephalopathy and amending Decision 98/272/EC on epidemio-surveillance for transmissible spongiform encephalopathies(3), all parts of the body, including the hide, of an animal which shows clinical signs giving rise to a suspicion of a TSE, or of an animal examined by one of the approved BSE rapid tests, must be destroyed if the diagnosis indicates the presence of TSEs or if the result of the test is positive.

(1) OJ L 321, 19.12.2000.

(2) OJ L 122, 24.4.1998, as last amended by Decision 2001/8/EC (OJ L 2, 5.1.2001).

(3) OJ L 305, 6.12.2000, as last amended by Decision 2001/8/EC (OJ L 2, 5.1.2001).
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0449/01

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: EU-Turkey partnership

The French National Assembly recently adopted a resolution recognising the genocide of the Armenians. Turkey responded with retaliatory measures of a mainly economic nature, cancelling a number of contracts with French companies. On 13 December 1999, the European Council meeting in Helsinki decided to recognise Turkey as a candidate country for accession to the EU, and to draw up an accession partnership and a single financial framework to assist Turkey towards accession.

Does the Commission consider that Turkey's economic retaliation against France, and its unilateral termination of contracts are politically and legally compatible with the EU-Turkey customs union or that such conduct is consistent with the criteria laid down by the European Council in Copenhagen?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2001)

The Commission is monitoring closely the Turkish reaction to the law recognising the Armenian genocide by the Turkish army between 1915 and 1917 adopted by the French Parliament. In the light of this reaction, it will consider whether and, if so, what measures are called for.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0027/01

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(17 January 2001)

Subject: Supply of buttermilk

Paragraph 36 of the Court of Auditors Special Report No 1/99 concerning aid for the use of skimmed milk and skimmed-milk powder as animal feed(1) states It was found in the Netherlands that the main aid beneficiary (98 % in 1996) supplied buttermilk produced, without denaturing, to a farm in Germany. The Dutch authorities, however, had never checked whether the buttermilk in question was actually used for animal feed and, moreover, they had not asked the German authorities to carry out such checks.

The Commission's reply (contained in the same report) was as follows: For the case mentioned by the Court concerning the Netherlands (paragraph 36) the Commission's services have initiated the procedure for the necessary follow-up checks on-the-spot.

In the light of the above, would the Commission answer the following questions:

(a) What company (or companies) was (or were) involved;

(b) What action was taken by the Commission and the local authorities;

(c) What on-the-spot follow-up checks have been and are to be carried out;

(d) What is the current situation?

(1) OJ C 147, 27.5.1999.

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 2001)

The Commission can confirm that, in light of the Court of Auditors Special Report No 1/99, the European anti-fraud office (OLAF) did carry out the follow-up checks mentioned by the Honourable Member.

In this regard, the Commission would answer the specific questions raised by the Honourable Member as follows:

(a) For reasons of confidentiality the names of the companies concerned may not be given.

(b) and (c) Two controls were conducted by OLAF. The first in the Netherlands, in June 1999 at the premises of the buttermilk producer who received the aid and the second in Germany in July 1999 at the premises of the buttermilk recipient. In both cases, these checks were conducted in partnership with the national authorities under Council Regulation (EEC) No 595/91 of 4 March 1991 concerning irregularities and the recovery of sums wrongly paid in connection with the financing of the common agricultural policy and the organization of an information system in this field and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 283/72(1).

(d) Having conducted its on-the-spot checks, and clarified certain legal aspects on the general operation of this measure, OLAF concluded that there were no grounds for suspecting that anything irregular had occurred. The two Member States concerned were informed of the outcome in May 2000 and the matter closed.

The Honourable Member may also wish to note that the scheme concerned, Council Regulation (EEC) No 1105/68 of the Commission of 27 July 1968 on detailed rules for granting aid for skimmed milk for use as feed(2), which provided for a subsidy on such buttermilk being used directly as animal feeding stuff, was abolished on 31 December 1999 as part of the review of and legal changes made to the Common Agricultural Policy support measures at that time.

(1) OJ L 67, 14.3.1991.

(2) OJ L 184, 29.7.1968.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0172/01

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(1 February 2001)

Subject: CFP

The EC is bound by a number of international and EC environmental commitments, including the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Amsterdam Treaty, the Habitats Directive and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement. How does the Commission intend to ensure that these commitments are incorporated in the CFP after 2002?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0172/01 and E-0212/01 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2001)

The commitments cited by the Honourable Member are already being progressively incorporated in the current Common Fisheries Policy.

In first place, as far as the first two items mentioned in the question are concerned, the Commission wishes to draw the attention of the Honourable member to some recent or imminent policy documents describing the operational modalities of the implementation of such commitments, such as:

- the Communication on a Biodiversity Strategy(1), to be followed by sectoral Biodiversity Action Plans, including fisheries (expected in March 2001),

- the Communication on nature conservation and fisheries management in the marine environment(2), to be followed by the Communication on the elements of a strategy for the integration of environmental protection requirements into the Common Fisheries Policy (expected by March 2001).

Secondly, as far as the Habitats Directive(3) is concerned, the Commission is using all its means, including those of a financial nature, to ensure its complete implementation in the marine environment.

Furthermore, the Commission's proposal for a 6th Environment Action Programme(4), in Article 5, point 5, proposes, promoting greater integration of environmental considerations in the Common Fisheries Policy, taking the opportunity of its review in 2002 and in point 7, A thematic strategy for the protection of the marine environment. The implementation of relevant international and Community environmental commitments will be important topics to be addressed in this context.

Finally, although ratification by the Community of the United Nations (UN) Agreement on straddling and highly migratory fish stocks is still pending, the Commission in proposing Community legislation is already taking account of the principles originating from the UN Agreement. Moreover, the Commission is also proposing implementation of management measures adopted by regional fisheries organisations operating within the framework of this Agreement.

The Commission intends to continue this process in a more efficient manner on the basis of a reinforced Common Fisheries Policy. It is the intention of the Commission that the forthcoming reform of the CFP will fully take into account the need to deal more effectively with fisheries and environment conservation issues.

(1) COM(98) 42.

(2) COM(1999) 363.

(3) Directive 92/43/EEC (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992).

(4) COM(2001) 31 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0065/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(22 January 2001)

Subject: Celebration of the first centenary of the death of Giuseppe Verdi and the international recognition of the town of Busseto as the Verdian capital

2001 is the first centenary of the death of Giuseppe Verdi, who was born in Busseto at a time when Italy was not yet united politically and was therefore not yet divided up into provinces as it is now. Busseto, ruled first by the Farnese family and then the Bourbons, had a tradition of self-government, being the capital of a small sovereign state, the Pallavicino marquisate. This feeling of a small capital city still prevailed when Verdi was born, and promoted his development as a man and a creative artist (under the influence of his patron Antonio Barezzi and his teacher Ferdinando Provesi). Verdi continued his studies in Milan (thanks to scholarships from the Monte di Pietà in Busseto), where he became famous and where he died and was buried. At the height of his success the composer returned to Busseto, where he spent most of his long life. Despite this, the National Committee for the Verdi Celebrations has not envisaged a representative of the commune of Busseto taking part and the multi-media and interactive opera documentation centre, a kind of museum of music, which was originally to be located in Busseto in the palace of the Pallavicino Marquises, has been set up in Parma in the Palazzo Cusani, which has no connection with Verdi's life and history. Does the Commission not consider it fair to safeguard Busseto's natural and historical right to be considered as the Verdian capital, and raise the awareness of the Italian Government, the Region of Emilia Romagna and the province of Parma, and does it not consider it appropriate to condemn the fact that the National Institute for Verdi Studies is based in Parma, rather than Busseto, and request that it be given its natural place in Busseto? Can it also say whether it is carrying out any Community programmes that envisage restoring historic sites linked with all aspects of music?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2001)

The questions raised by the Honourable Member on preserving the town of Busseto as Verdian capital and on the location of the National Institute for Verdi Studies, are not within Community jurisdiction but are solely a matter for the Member State in question.

With regard to Community programmes to restore historic monuments, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer given to Mrs Muscardini's Written Question E-0030/01(1).

In addition, as the year 2001 is the first centenary of the death of Giuseppe Verdi, the Commission would like to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the fact that the Culture 2000(2) programme's call for proposals for projects to be carried out in 2001 provides for funding to be awarded to three projects to commemorate this anniversary. Conditions for participation in the programme, together with the application form, are available on the Europa server at:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/culture/index_en.html.

(1) See p. 95.

(2) OJ C 21, 24.1.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0489/01

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: Sport funding

Does the European Ryder Cup team receive funding from the European Community?

If so,

- how much,

- from which item, and

- what conditions are attached with regard to publicising the European Communities?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(11 April 2001)

In the past, the European Ryder Cup team has received Community funding as part of communication measures. However, in 1998 the Commission decided to end specific funding for sport, and in particular for the Eurathlon programme, in application of principles established by the Court of Justice(1).

Since then, the European Ryder Cup team has received no more Community funding.

(1) Case C-106/96. Judgment of the CJEC of 12 May 1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0159/01

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

(31 January 2001)

Subject: Oncology unit at the Costa del Sol Hospital in Marbella

The fact that fifty per cent of cancer patients who undergo operations at the Costa del Sol Hospital in the Spanish city of Marbella are obliged to travel to Malaga for post-operative treatment clearly points to the need to establish an oncology unit at the Marbella hospital.

Residents' associations and political parties have issued repeated calls for an oncology department to be established at this important public hospital, whose many patients from Spain and the Community have to make the journey from Marbella to Malaga on a daily basis in order to receive medical care following cancer operations at the Costa del Sol Hospital.

Will the Commission say whether the EU programme to combat cancer includes Community initiatives for establishing oncology units to provide cancer patients undergoing treatment with the additional post-operative medical care they require?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 2001)

The Europe Against Cancer Programme does not deal with issues of treatment for reasons arising from the lack of a relevant legal basis in the EC Treaty. Under Article 152 (ex Article 129) of the EC Treaty, Community programmes of this sort are limited to preventive action.

Andalusia's integrated operational programme, which was approved by the Commission on 29 December 2000, and the local operational programme, to be approved soon, provide funds to improve health facilities and infrastructure.

According to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(1), it is up to the Member State alone to select the projects eligible for cofinancing from the Funds, in accordance with its own health policy criteria.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0656/01

by Maurizio Turco (TDI) to the Commission

(26 February 2001)

Subject: Judicial investigation into the use by the Puglia Regional Council of funds earmarked for professional training

Recent press reports state that the public prosecutor in Bari has begun an investigation into the use by the Puglia Regional Council of funds earmarked for professional training, that various irregularities have come to light and that the investigation was begun following reports by Mr Giuseppe Di Donna, a former councillor responsible for professional training, of irregularities.

In addition, an interview with the President of the Italian Chamber of Deputies, Mr Luciano Violante, was published in the newspaper La Repubblica on 18 January 2001 under the headline Provenzano gets his hands on 16,000 billion of EU money says Violante: Cosa Nostra's new ambitions'.

Does the Commission not consider it appropriate to find out from Mr Di Donna whether or not the financial interests of the Union have been harmed and to approach Mr Violante in order to ascertain how real the danger he refers to actually is?

Has the Commission taken any action in connection with the two matters described above or does it intend to take any action, and if so, what action?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2001)

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) has stated that it opened an investigation into the use by the Puglia region of funds earmarked for professional training on 28 July 2000.

The Commission is also providing any assistance that may be necessary. In particular it has given its authorisation for one of its officials, an expert in European Social Fund financial procedures, to be interviewed by the Bari Public Prosecutor's Office.