ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1759/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(31 May 2000)

Subject: European cooperation project on adult education

The trade union Sinorquifa Sindicato dos Trabalhadores da Química, Farmacêutica, Petróleo e Gás do Norte (CGTP-IN), representing workers in the chemical, pharmaceutical, oil and gas industries, has concluded a partnership protocol with the Syndicat CGT Energie et Mines, Midi, Pyrénées, Toulouse and the Federación de Química CCIG/Galicia within the framework of the PACE project (European Programme of Advanced Continuing Education), established as part of the Grundtvig/Socrates/Leonardo da Vinci programmes.

They submitted their applications accordingly.

Can the Commission provide a progress report on the above applications?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(14 July 2000)

The Commission drew up the selection proposals on the basis of the assessment of applications submitted for the Grundtvig programme for 2000. The PACE project (Project No: 88131-CP-1-2000-0-ES-Grundtvig-ADU) is included in these proposals.

Proposals concerning the projects selected were submitted for the opinion of the Socrates Committee on 26/27 June 2000, and the final results will be communicated to the project coordinators in August 2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2758/00

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Methods of producing foie gras

I am informed that the production of the meat product foie gras involves the following elements:

1. Ducks and geese are force-fed up to two or three times a day with up to 1 lb 4 oz of grain and fat.

2. After two or three weeks, when the birds are ready for slaughter, their livers will have swollen to between six and 10 times their natural size.

3. A pneumatic pump forces one pound of feed down a duck's or goose's throat in two or three seconds.

4. Only the birds' necks protrude from the cages.

5. A single operator can force-feed more than 1 000 birds with the pneumatic pump in less than one hour; studies have shown that this treatment can cause terrible injuries to ducks and geese, including tearing of the neck.

6. Birds often die from asphyxiation if the feeder accidentally pushes food into the windpipe.

7. In the cages, the ducks and geese cannot walk, turn around, or clean their feathers.

8. Many ducks develop acute enteritis and diarrhoea.

9. Mortality rates on intensive foie gras farms are 20 times higher than on conventional farms.

10. The European Union Scientific Committee on Animal Health recently condemned foie gras production as being detrimental to animal welfare.

These feeding methods are an outrage to many people in the United Kingdom, where animal welfare is taken very seriously. There is such widespread concern that many people in the UK are calling for a Europe-wide ban on the force-feeding of ducks and geese.

I am advised that pressure from vested interests has meant that the European Commission has done nothing whatsoever in response to the appalling examples of animal cruelty I have referred to.

Would you please inform me, in full, what the European Commission has done, is doing, and will do, to put an end to this barbaric practice?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2739/00 and E-2758/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Members to its answer to Written Questions E-2183/00 and E-2618/00 by Mrs Lucas and Mr Davies(1).

(1) See p. 168.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1858/00

by Gorka Knörr Borràs (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(13 June 2000)

Subject: Catalan

Article 3 of the Statute on the Autonomy of Catalunya states that the language of Catalunya is Catalan and that the Catalan language is official in Catalunya.

A series of charges brought by the Asociación de Profesores para la Democracia (Teachers for Democracy Association) and Convivencia Cívica Catalana (Catalan Civil Good-fellowship, a body chaired by Mr Alejo Vidal-Quadras) have led to the temporary suspension of the Rovira y Virgili University's rules on linguistic usage by the courts on the grounds that they may be unconstitutional.

What is the Council's view of the constant efforts made by the Spanish Government, certain political parties and various bodies to prevent progress on the use of Catalan in public spheres relating to administration in Catalunya, as shown by what has happened to the Rovira y Virgili University?

Reply

(10 October 2000)

The matter raised in the Honourable Member's question does not fall within the sphere of competence of the Council, which, moreover, never comments on the rulings of Member States' courts.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1932/00

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: Budget Item A-3038

300 000 is allocated under Item A-3038 to other general grants. Could the Commission indicate what these general grants are and how these funds are used?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2000)

Item A-3038 is intended to cover various specific grants not related to the other items in Chapter A-30 (Community subsidies) which provide financing for institutions of European interest or contribute to the financing of organisations advancing the idea of the European civil society.

In its preliminary draft budget for 2000, the Commission asked for 171 000 to cover the following grants:

(a) International Press Club (IPC): 100 000

Founded in 1973 in Brussels, the IPC is a centre where the international press reporting on Community affairs from Brussels can meet and work. It receives an annual subsidy from the Commission in the form of a financial contribution to its operating costs. This is in addition to grants from the Belgian Government, the Council and Parliament.

(b) European Institute Washington: 50 000

The European Institute in Washington, set up in 1989 in close cooperation with the Commission, conducts information campaigns and studies to explain the position of the European Union on topics which are important to relations with the United States (economic and monetary union, General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), security and defence, competition, etc.). The Institute holds information meetings at government level, organises conferences addressed by top European political leaders and maintains a communications network with American decision-makers.

(c) International Association of Former Officials of the European Communities: 21 000

About half the European Communities' former staff are members of the International Association of Former Officials of the European Communities, whose main objectives are to represent the interests of former employees in dealings with Community bodies and the national authorities and, if necessary, to defend those interests in administrative and social matters, to maintain contacts and forge links with organisations with similar aims at international, Community or national level, and to place its experience at the disposal of the Community institutions for the preparation of officials and other staff for retirement.

In amendment 451 to the draft budget for 2000, adopted on 28 October 1999, Parliament entered a sum of 300 000 under item A-3038, corresponding to the amount entered in the 1999 budget, but without specifying where the extra 129 000 should go. At this stage, in the absence of factors over and above the estimates, the Commission proposes to execute the appropriations under this item in accordance with the preliminary draft budget for 2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0711/00

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Council

(14 March 2000)

Subject: Statements by the British Foreign Secretary on Cyprus

The British Foreign Secretary, Mr Robin Cook, told the House of Commons a few days ago that freedom of movement between the Republic of Cyprus and the occupied northern sector of the island would be restored only if Turkey acceded to the European Union. This statement by Mr Cook met with the justifiable riposte from the Conservative MP Sir David Madel who recalled that the British Government had so far adopted a different position on this matter. He also asked to be informed whether the peaceful reunification of Cyprus now depended on the entry of Turkey into the European Union and whether the British Government was now saying that the northern part of Cyprus was part of Turkey.

Will the Council say whether it shares the position of the British Foreign Secretary on this matter, bearing in mind that this would represent a departure from what had been agreed at Helsinki and from the consistent position of the EU that no third country is entitled to veto the accession of Cyprus? Will it also state clearly whether Mr Cook and the Council take the view that the acceptance of Turkey as a candidate country gives it this right? Will it also say whether it has asked Mr Cook to explain what he meant by this statement and suggested that he might retract it? If so, what was his response?

Reply

(26 September 2000)

The Council is in no position to predict, let alone to determine when freedom of movement within the Republic of Cyprus will be restored. In the Council's view this issue should be resolved in the context of a settlement negotiated on the basis of Resolutions adopted by the United Nations Security Council, notably through the proximity talks launched in December 1999 in accordance with UN Security Council resolution 1250, which the EU continues to support strongly. As the European Council underlined at Helsinki,

the EU takes the view that a political settlement will facilitate the accession of Cyprus. If, however, no settlement has been reached by the completion of accession negotiations, the Council's decision on accession will be made without the above being a pre-condition. In this the Council will take account of all relevant factors. In the accession process, each candidate country is judged on its own merits on the basis of the same objective criteria, and the accession of one candidate is not dependent on that of any other.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1465/00

by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission

(10 May 2000)

Subject: International trade in dog and cat fur

Given the increasing body of evidence indicating that an international trade in domestic cat and dog fur now exists in the EU and that this trade supposedly emanates from outside the EU reportedly Asia can the Commission inform Parliament which steps it can take to prohibit and eliminate this trade inside the EU? Furthermore, what pressure can be brought to bear to end the slaughter of domestic animals in the countries of origin where they are turned into coats or life-like statuettes?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1465/00 and P-1558/00 given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 June 2000)

The Commission shares the concern of the Honourable Member over the international trade in dog and cat fur, particularly concerning the possible implications for animal welfare.

The Commission has adopted a comprehensive set of legislation that covers a wide range of issues relating to animal welfare. Nothing in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules prevents the Community from taking measures which are considered essential for animal welfare, i.e. adopting high standards, within its borders. However, it is the Commission's view that the Community cannot unilaterally impose its welfare-based production standards on third countries. WTO rules do not permit the Community to prohibit products on the sole ground that they have been produced according to different welfare rules.

The adoption of international welfare-based standards in the framework of multilateral agreements may help in solving potential conflicts with trading partners. The Commission sought to ensure that the issue of animal welfare was raised in the WTO Millennium Round. However, at Seattle, the Commission had essentially no support for its animal welfare objectives. The Commission's efforts to promote them in the WTO context will continue.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2489/00

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 July 2000)

Subject: Work in prisons

There are approximately 54 000 inmates in Italian prisons, many of whom would like to work (even for low wages) but cannot do so for bureaucratic reasons.

What is the Commission's opinion on this matter?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2000)

The Commission takes the view that it has no jurisdiction in this matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2545/00

by José Pomés Ruiz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 July 2000)

Subject: Decentralised cooperation with Latin America

The Commission apparently intends to suspend or phase out the Community programmes for decentralised cooperation with Latin America.

These programmes are currently cornerstones of EU cooperation with Latin America and their ability to involve members of civil society and the results they have achieved have been recognised.

What are the Commission's real reasons for suspending these programmes?

Does it perhaps want to include measures of this kind among its negative priorities?

Could it be that Latin America will in future be one of the Commission's negative priorities?

What political effects does the Commission think that a decision of this kind will have, particularly as regards the European Union's credibility in Latin America?

Does the Commission not consider that its position is inconsistent with the statements made by the Heads of State and Government meeting in Rio de Janeiro in June 1999?

Lastly, is the Commission not breaking the commitment to openness it gave to Parliament and which Mr Prodi endorsed on his appointment?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 September 2000)

The Commission has not taken any decision aimed at suspending or terminating the Latin America decentralised cooperation programmes (AL INVEST, ALURE, ALFA, URB-AL). Rumours to that effect are purely speculative.

It is of course the Commission's duty to evaluate the external aid instruments for which it is responsible in the light of the objectives it is pursuing, the practical results achieved using those instruments and the means at its disposal.

Against that background, it is true that the Commission is now taking stock of the programmes and their prospects. But no conclusions can be drawn at this stage.

Whatever conclusions may be drawn, the Commission is aware of the key role the decentralised programmes play in Latin America as a channel for dialogue with civil society on both sides of the Atlantic.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2715/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Price alignment in the euro zone

Will the Commission please examine the evidence that there has been an alignment of prices for similar goods and service within the euro zone in anticipation of the transparency which will reach full effect in the first six months of 2002?

How significant has this alignment been?

How much further is it likely to go, and is it likely to alter significantly the relationship between price developments and growth?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(21 September 2000)

The Commission is examining the alignment of prices for similar goods and services within the Community in general and the euro zone in particular on a continuous basis. The results of these investigations are presented in various reports and studies(1).

These examinations show a gradual process of price convergence in the 1990s. However, this process has been rather uneven, not covering all goods and services and still influenced by exchange rate developments. Further, the level of price dispersion within the Community remains above that in the United States.

It is difficult to say how much further the alignment of prices within the euro area will go, because the European monetary union price transparency effect is just one of many factors having an impact on price convergence. Nevertheless, the degree of price dispersion in the relatively well integrated American economy may be considered as a lower bound.

A priori, increased price transparency should lead to fiercer competition and put a strong downward pressure on price levels, which should have a positive effect on the competitiveness of the euro area. On the other hand, the possibility that the price transparency facilitates collusive behaviour should not be excluded. This is one of the reasons why a strong Community antitrust policy is required.

(1) Market integration and differences in price levels between EU Member States, study 4 in The EU Economy: 1999 Review, European Economy, No 69, 1999. Section B2 in Economic Reform: Report on the functioning of Community product and capital markets, COM(2000) 26 final. Box 5 in the Report from the Commission on the implementation of the 1999 Broad Economic Policy Guidelines, COM(2000) 143 final. Car price differentials within the European Union on 1 May 2000, Competition Directorate-General. Part E of the Single Market Scoreboard, No 6, May 2000. EMU and the integration of European product markets, study carried out for the Commission by Gasiorek et al., forthcoming.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1610/00

by Gorka Knörr Borràs (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Committee on Structures for Fisheries and Aquaculture

Article 51 of Council Regulation No 1260/1999(1) laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds has set up a Committee on Structures for Fisheries and Aquaculture, with the sole specification that it shall be made up of representatives of the Member States.

What is the current membership of this Committee? What has it done in the period of its existence, which is now almost one year?

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 June 2000)

The full members of the Committee in question are in general the heads of the Member States' fishery administrations.

Under the Code of Conduct on the implementation of structural policies by the Commission signed on 6 May 1999 by Mr Santer and Mr Gil Robles (document PE 230 741) Parliament is officially provided with regular information on the Committee's activities. The Honourable Member can obtain agendas, minutes and documents from Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1457/00

by Reinhold Messner (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 May 2000)

Subject: Renewal of the licence granted to the Italian company Autostrade SpA

Following a previous question (E-2293/99)(1) on the renewal of the licence granted to the Italian company Autostrade SpA, which dealt with the issue of the operational risk taken on by the licence holder, the Commission stated that the activities of the independent committee responsible for the procedures for the award of the public works contracts in connection with the licence was not likely to alter the element of risk involved in the management of the construction, since it does not affect the financial plan of the licence and is merely an additional guarantee for opening up markets to competition. The committee, which was set up at the Commission's request in order to make it possible to renew the licence without issuing a public invitation to tender, is not in reality independent, since two of its members were chosen by ANAS (national state-owned road company) and one by the company Autostrade SpA.

How can the Commission go along with the separation between the construction and the operation of infrastructure, a principle which is not permitted under Italian law (see Law No 463 of 21 May 1955 and Decree No 537 of 17 April 1948) but which lies behind the setting up of the independent committee responsible for awarding the Autostrade SpA contracts?

Does the Commission not consider that the fact that the licence holder is represented on the committee of experts may undermine the committee's independence?

Does the Commission not consider that the link between the licence holder's business activities and its political responsibilities, which is a basic feature of the committee of experts (appointed by the Public Works Ministry), will have the effect of restricting the ability of the public authorities to exercise control over transport policy?

(1) OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000, p. 89.

Answer by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2000)

In spite of the formation of the independent committee to which the honourable Member refers, Autostrade S.p.A. continues to be in charge of the construction and the operation of the infrastructure, since the committee in question acts solely at the award phase of public works contracts and solely in order to launch and administer award procedures. This instance does not therefore affect the concept of works concession laid down in Council Directive 93/37/EEC of 14 June 1993 concerning the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts(1).

This committee was formed solely as a result of the Commission's insistence that competition should be as open as possible, with the exclusion from such procedures of the licence-holding company and associate companies.

As for the composition of the committee, however, the Commission immediately asked the Italian authorities for information, with a view to checking whether the commitments regarding the impartiality and independence of the committee had in fact been respected.

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1214/00

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 April 2000)

Subject: Van Buitenen parliamentary questions

How many written questions regarding Van Buitenen's allegations remain to be answered?

How long have the delays been in each instance?

What accounts for each delay?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2000)

The Commission answers all written questions as quickly and as fully as it can, and devotes considerable resources to doing so.

It has given 2064 answers to written questions this year, in an average reply time of 6 weeks and 1 day. The Commission aims to answer within the deadlines identified by the Parliament (priority questions 3 weeks, other questions 6 weeks) and succeeds in many cases. In 1999 and this year the Commission answered 20 questions from the Honourable Member, of which 12 inside the time allowed by the Parliament. The longest reply time to the Honourable Member was 8 weeks and 2 days.

The Commission is not sure exactly to which questions the Honourable Member is referring, and is not aware that any written questions regarding Mr Van Buitenen's allegations remained unanswered at the time the Honourable Member asked his question, or remain unanswered now. The Commission has identified six written questions asked on this subject this year preceding the Honourable Member's question and forwards to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat general copies of these questions and answers, from which it can be seen that half of them were answered inside the deadlines identified by the Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3149/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 October 2000)

Subject: Application of Community funds

The Portuguese industrial company Preceram S.A., which is based in Pombal (Portugal) and is active in the ceramics sector, still uses highly polluting

manufacturing processes which, as illustrated in reports drawn up by specialists at the Beira Litoral Regional Directorate for Agriculture, do enormous damage to local farmers, although the latter have never been offered any kind of compensation. The crops which they grow (pine trees, vines, maize and fruit) regularly display serious deformities and clear signs of charring.

The company has allegedly received Community funding for the purpose of introducing anti-pollution technologies but, according to the local farmers, nothing has changed.

Would the Commission therefore provide information concerning any Community funding which the company may have received and the action which is due to be taken in order to prevent the farmland in the area around the factory from being further polluted?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.