ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3536/98

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Commission assessment of appropriate legal base for its proposals

Since the entry into force of the Single European Act, on how many occasions has the Commission's legal service disagreed with the legal base proposed by the directorate-general responsible for a proposal?

How are such differences of views solved within the Commission? On how many occasions has the College of Commissioners had to deliberate and adjudicate on a divergence of opinion as to the appropriate legal base? Has the pattern changed over time?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

The Commission is not in a position to supply the information requested by the Honourable Member.

To do so would be detrimental to the public interest and, more particularly, as the President of the Court of First Instance stressed in his Order of 3 March 1998(1), to the stability of the Community legal order and the proper functioning of the institutions, since the disclosure of the Legal Service's opinions, which form part of the institution's internal discussions, could give rise to uncertainty with regard to the legality of Community measures and have a negative effect on the functioning of the Community's institutions.

(1) CaseI-610/97 Carlsen et al v Council ECR II-485 (paragraph 46).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3500/98 by Bryan CASSIDY Late payment of invoices submitted under the TACIS programme



Official Journal C 320 , 06/11/1999 P. 0051



WRITTEN QUESTION E-3500/98 by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission (25 November 1998) Subject: Late payment of invoices submitted under the TACIS programme 1. What representations have been received from: (a) each national government? (b) other national organisations in each EU country? (c) individual companies in each EU country? about the late payment of invoices submitted under the TACIS scheme? 2. Could the Commission also provide a list, broken down by EU Member State, of the number of invoices that remain outstanding for payment to firms under TACIS for: (a) 2 months? (b) 4 months? (c) 5 months? (d) 6 months? (e) 9 months? (f) 1 year? (g) 18 months? (h) 2 years? (i) more than 2 years? 3. What is the total sum outstanding for each category (a-i), and what action is being taken to resolve the problem?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3814/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of research and development in Catalonia

Bearing in mind the policy of transparency pursued by the Commission in relation to its spending, can the Commission say what projects implemented in Catalonia benefitted from each type of aid available in the area of research and development for the period 1994-1999?

Can the Commission further specify what amounts were finally allocated to each of the above projects?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3734/98 by Aline PAILLER to the Council. International convention on the rights of migrant workers



Official Journal C 297 , 15/10/1999 P. 0096



WRITTEN QUESTION E-3734/98 by Aline Pailler (GUE/NGL) to the Council (11 December 1998) Subject: International convention on the rights of migrant workers In its reply to Written Question E-2283/96(1) by the same author as this question, the Commission stated that no Member State had ratified the international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families. Has the Council decided to take steps to encourage ratification of this convention, as called for by the European Parliament in its resolution on human rights in the European Union? Reply (22 April 1999) The Council recognizes the importance attached by the European Parliament to the implementation of the international convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families, which was adopted by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 45/158 of 18 December 1990. However, the Council has not so far been called upon to encourage the Member States to proceed with the ratification of this convention. (1) OJ C 365, 4.12.1996, p. 103.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2960/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 October 1998)

Subject: Conservation of sixth century Byzantine villages and churches in northern Syria

Along an area of 140 kilometres in northern Syria, villagers are responding to a severe housing shortage by building their own accommodation among the ruins of Byzantine churches and villages dating from 6 AD., despite the fact that the Syrian Government prohibits construction in ancient villages. The country's archaeologists are warning that these villages with their 2000 churches, which form part of the architectural heritage of particular historical value, will probably be destroyed.

How will the Commission intercede with the Syrian authorities and what assistance can it offer them to preserve areas of particular architectural and historical value?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(28 October 1998)

The Commission is aware of the immense value of Syria's historical and cultural heritage and is supporting a number of measures to conserve it. However, given the scale of the Syrian heritage and the limited funds available, it is not possible to cover all Syrian sites of historical and cultural interest.

The following projects to protect the Syrian heritage have recently been financed, or are at the preparation stage: modernisation of municipal administration (including historical centres); development of cultural tourism (involving eight historical sites); archaeological digs at Jerf el Ahmar; support for a Euro-Syrian archaeological mission to the Tell Beydar site; conservation of the murals of the Doura Europos and Qasr El Heir synagogues. There are also sixteen projects at the preparation stage to train Syrian restorers and researchers in the field in the conservation of their cultural heritage.

Many proposals were made, and those selected have been chosen primarily on the following bases: they will have a helpful impact on the Syrian economy (development of cultural tourism); they will improve Syrian institutional and administrative capacity (modernisation of municipal administration); their results will be sustainable and broadly disseminated through training and the teaching of appropriate technologies (training programme for the conservation of the cultural heritage).

The Commission can discuss the problem raised by the Honourable Member during one of its frequent contacts with the Syrian authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3802/98

by Sérgio Ribeiro (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Closure of the Nestlé factory in Matosinhos (Portugal)

According to Nestle's Director of Public Relations, the company's Longa Vida factory in Matosinhos (Portugal) is to be closed and production is to be transferred to either France or Spain.

This decision will put over 100 workers out of a job and it follows on from other decisions taken by Nestlé, which has already closed its Rajá and Findus factories and has already made approximately 70 workers redundant at its Longa Vida factory.

The decision is all the more significant in view of the fact that Longa Vida is a modern industrial plant which has received financial support from the Portuguese Government and the European Union in order to enable investment to be made which, over the last five years, has totalled over 3 000 million escudos.

Since this is yet another case of relocation (in this particular instance within the territory of the Community) and since substantial amounts of Community support are apparently involved, would the Commission say whether or not it is aware of the situation, whether there are any framework contracts to which it is party or of which it is aware, and whether the Nestlé company has received any further financial support in connection with its relocation?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3116/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Global warming

We need to build on the first steps taken by the Member States' Governments at Kyoto last December in order to prevent a global climate crisis.

What action will the Commission take to persuade Member States to take stronger action to follow up the Kyoto protocol when they meet in Buenos Aires in November?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 1998)

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that Kyoto is only a first step and that there is a need to build upon it in order to prevent a global climate crisis. The Kyoto protocol only provides for a 5,2 % cut in developed country emissions, whereas the International panel on climate change has estimated that the world needs to cut emissions by between 50 % to 70 % if current concentrations of greenhouse gases, the main agent of climate change in the atmosphere, are to be stabilised.

Whatever the limitations of the Kyoto protocol, the Commission's main objective is to get it ratified and for it to enter into force. Moreover, it is important to ensure that the rules and procedures governing various elements in the protocol, in particular the flexible instruments, are defined in such a way that the environmental objectives of both the convention and the Kyoto protocol are achieved in the most cost-effective manner. On the basis of the work programme agreed at Buenos Aires the Commission will make every effort in the immediate future to ensure that these objectives are secured.

It should also be recognised that the Community cannot reverse climate change on its own since it only accounts for around 25 % of industrial country emissions and developing country emissions are growing more rapidly than the developed countries. The Commission believes that the developed countries must take the first step, but in the long run global participation will be necessary. In this context, if the momentum achieved at Kyoto and Buenos Aires could be maintained and the Community delivers on policies and measures to reverse emission trends, both at national and Community level, then it will be easier for the Community and indeed all other parties to make the further commitments that will be necessary.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3235/98

by David Martin (PSE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Compliance with the reporting provision of the 1992 "Pregnancy" Directive

Can the Commission say whether all Member States have complied with the requirement set out in Council Directive 92/85/EEC(1) (known as 1992 "Pregnancy" Directive), to report on "... practical implementation of the provisions of the Directive, indicating the points of view of the two sides of industry?" When, and in what form, will the Commission be publishing its first report on the practical implementation of the Directive?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 1999)

Under Article 14(4) of Council Directive 92/85/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health at work of pregnant workers and workers who have recently given birth or are breastfeeding (tenth individual Directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC)(2) the Member States report to the Commission every five years on the practical implementation of the provisions of the Directive, indicating the points of view of the two sides of industry.

The Commission addressed a detailed questionnaire to the Member States on the national implementation of the Directive. All Member States returned reports, with varying degrees of detail, except for Greece and Luxembourg (which only sent their implementing legislation).

A report on the implementation of the Directive is being finalised for adoption by the Commission in the near future. It will be sent to the Parliament, the Economic and social committee and the advisory committee on safety, hygiene and health protection at work.

(1) OJ L 348, 28.11.1992, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 348, 28.11.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2852/98

by Umberto Bossi (TDI) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Preservation of natural habitats

The Ravenna district and provincial authorities and the Emilia Romagna regional authority have signed an agreement on a programme for the implementation of the "Ravenna port area" special programme involving the building of a marine passenger terminal and connecting roads.

Under the preliminary plans, the connecting roads are to run through state-owned areas of pine forest, the Pialassa Baiona and the Pineta di San Vitale, in violation of numerous laws that protect the last unspoilt areas of the Adriatic.

- The Italian Constitutional Court has repeatedly reaffirmed the "primacy" of landscape and environmental considerations and the special protective regulations in this area,

- the construction work planned in the Pialassa Baiona (an area protected by the RAMSAR Convention and benefiting from Community funds under the LIFE programme) involves raising the level of the road system considerably and the installation of street lights,

- the planned project would violate specific regulations designed to protect pine forests in nature reserves (the ASFD pine forest - Staggioni section and the Pineta di San Vitale),

- in addition, some of the areas affected are regarded as ZSPs (zones of special protection) and others have been designated by the regional authorities as SCIs (sites of Community importance),

- the project cannot be regarded as being intermodal since it encourages the use of road transport,

- following repeated protests from citizens, the above authorities have drawn up a second agreement on the programme, which, however, does not replace the previous one.

In view of the above, can the Commission say whether the implementation of the "intermodal" project described above contravenes Directive 92/43(1) or any other directive?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 October 1998)

A complaint concerning the project mentioned by the Honourable Member has been recently registered. The case is currently being examined by the Commission.

A request for information has been sent to the Italian authorities in order to obtain more detailed elements on the case mentioned.

The Commission will take the appropriate steps in order to ensure the observance of Community law.

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3418/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Ambient air

With reference to the proposal for a Council Directive relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air (COM(97) 0500 final - 97/0266 SYN)(1), would the Commission ascertain whether the limit values for sulphur dioxide (SO2) will be sufficiently rigorous, both with regard to public health and for the prevention of material damage? The possibility of setting a limit value to prevent material damage might also be considered in this connection.

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 1999)

The proposed limit values for sulphur dioxide in the proposal for a Council directive relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air(2) are based on the new air quality guidelines adopted by the World health organisation in October 1996. They will provide a high standard of protection for human health and the natural environment. They will also reduce damage to materials. The Commission is of the opinion that it is not possible at present to develop and implement separate limit values specifically for the protection of materials. The Commission is however continuing to support research into the effects of sulphur dioxide and other pollutants on human health, the natural environment and Europe's cultural heritage. It will take into account the most recent scientific evidence on effects in all these fields when it reports on implementation of the proposal by 31 December 2003.

(1) OJ C 9, 14.1.1998, p. 6.

(2) OJ C 360, 23.11.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3443/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Ambient air

With reference to the proposal for a Council directive relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide, oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead in ambient air (COM(97) 500 final - 97/0266 SYN)(1), the decision temporarily to establish limit values only in respect of particles of up to 10µm in diameter, with action levels indicated only for smaller particles (2,5µm), merits approval. These reference sizes should be revised once more sophisticated measuring techniques have been devised and once the results of the measuring exercise have been submitted.

Will the Commission submit a report on the subject no later than two years after the entry into force of the directive?

Will the Commission also consider whether or not the timetable for the entry into force of the limit values for particles with a maximum diameter of 10µm can be speeded up in view of the fact that, in certain Member States, the limit values scheduled for 2010 may be applied as early as 2005?

Lastly, will the Commission ensure that no limit value for the prevention of material damage is proposed in respect of particles?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 1999)

The Commission will submit a report on the implementation of the proposed Council directive relating to limit values for sulphur dioxide and oxides of nitrogen, particulate matter and lead by 31 December 2003 at the latest. It will reconsider the question of material damage at that point.

It is the Commission's view that it is not possible to speed up the timetable for meeting proposed limit values for particulate matter. Meeting the proposed limit values will be a considerable challenge for most of the Community. The Commission assumes that the national standards cited by the Honourable Member are those to be met in the United Kingdom by 2005. Although superficially similar, these standards are not in fact directly comparable to the proposed indicative limit values to be met in the Community by 2010. The measurement method for particulate matter used in the United Kingdom is different from that set out in the proposed directive. If this is taken into account the United Kingdom national standards are less challenging than the proposed limit values.

(1) OJ C 9, 14.1.1998, p. 6.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3441/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: New rules on taxis in Rome

The Rome city authorities intend, over the next few weeks, to introduce new rules for the city's taxis, rules which have been fiercely contested by the entire taxi trade. In particular, the unions representing the city's taxi drivers are not in favour of an untrammelled liberalisation of shifts, working hours and fares.

Although there is a need for free competition, the introduction of the new rules would result in anarchy devoid of any kind of regulation capable of (inter alia) providing guarantees for users.

In view of the above, could the Commission say:

1. Whether there are any directives or documents on the subject?

2. What the current trends are in this area in other EU Member States?

3. Whether such deregulation betokens a potential threat to the rights of users?

4. What its general view on the matter is?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 1999)

Taxi services in many European towns and cities are subject to very restrictive regulations. The Commission is aware that some of these regulations can affect economic efficiency and lead to a rise in prices. This is particularly the case when the regulations unjustifiably limit admission to the occupation (numerus clausus) or restrict the scope of authorised services (for example, when they oblige drivers to return from airports without passengers).

The Commission has not yet exercised the powers conferred on it by Article 90 (3) of the EC Treaty, feeling that the regulations in question have their negative effect on the national market. This excludes them from the field of application of Article 90 (1) of the EC Treaty, since the criterion of affecting trade between Member States does not appear to be met. Moreover, Community law on market access(1) and on admission to the occupation(2) for road passenger transport refers only to passenger transport services using vehicles suitable for carrying more than nine persons, including the driver. No measure has yet been adopted at Community level for passenger transport using vehicles for less than eight persons.

In this context, it should be pointed out that regulation of the national, regional or local taxi services falls primarily under the jurisdiction of the authorities of the Member State. However, the Commission welcomes any measure of liberalisation in this sector which can improve its economic efficiency.

In this particular case, the Commission does not have at its disposal the text of the regulation issued by the City of Rome.

(1) Council Regulation (EEC) 684/92 of 16 March 1992 - OJ L 74, 20.3.1992, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) 11/98 of 11 December 1997 - OJ L 4, 8.1.1998 Regulation (EC) 12/98 of 11 December 1997 - OJ L 4, 8.1.1998.

(2) Directive 96/26/EC of 29 April 1996 - OJ L 124, 23.5.1996, as amended by Directive 98/76/EC of 1 October 1998 - OJ L 277, 14.10.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3674/98

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council

(4 December 1998)

Subject: The 1999 budget

The draft budget, entitled "Budget for the taxpayer", was adopted by the European Parliament at first reading. Efforts were made to cut back, particularly on the expenditure side. However, the budget for Parliament was increased by 1,7 % over the previous year. One of the reasons given was increased costs for the forthcoming elections.

1. What specific measures are involved, and what exactly are these increases?

2. Who will have access to these funds?

Reply

(29 March 1999)

The Honourable Member is asking the Council about the increase in the European Parliament's budget between 1998 and 1999.

In its Resolution relating to the section of the budget concerning the European Parliament, which was recorded in the minutes of its meeting on 22 April 1970, the Council undertook to make no amendments to the estimate of expenditure of the European Parliament insofar as the estimate of expenditure did not conflict with Community provisions. Consequently, the European Parliament's budget is the exclusive responsibility of the Parliament itself.