ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3490/01

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Objective One

Is the Commission aware that Objective One funding has been allocated by Merseyside, in the UK, to the Liverpool City Council bid for the 2008 European Capital of Culture?

Whilst acknowledging that the partnership is permitted to make such a decision, would the Commission agree that this is an inappropriate use of funds, and puts other cities which do not qualify for such funding at an unfair disadvantage?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2002)

The Commission has no information regarding the total resources, public or private, allocated by the different cities in the United Kingdom, including Liverpool, in order to prepare bids for the 2008 European Capital of Culture.

With regard to the possible use of resources allocated to Liverpool under the Structural Funds for this purpose, the Commission wishes to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the decentralised nature of decision-making that applies to all European regional development programmes. In particular, the selection of the individual projects for support under these programmes is a matter for the regional partnerships once the broad strategic priorities have been agreed with the Commission, and in accordance with rules on eligible expenditures.

Many such programmes contain actions that aim to enhance a region's image and identity, for example, in order to attract outside investment and new jobs. In this context, it is possible that in the normal course of their work the regional partnerships may select projects for European support in a variety of fields that promote the image of the area and which could impinge, directly or indirectly, on matters relating to the preparation of a bid in the context of the European Capital of Culture.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3299/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 November 2001)

Subject: Aid to Slovakia

Is the Commission hopeful that one or more individuals will be convicted in the courts for fraud in respect of the Union's financial aid to Slovakia, and is the Commission hopeful that the financial resources misused will be recovered and repaid?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2002)

At the beginning of April 2001 the Slovak criminal police was informed about the allegations concerning the Director of the Foreign Aid Department responsible for PHARE coordination and started an assessment of the case, which is still going on. At the end of this assessment, the Slovak authorities will decide whether or not to begin a formal criminal investigation.

By the end of April 2001, shortly after being informed about the allegations, the European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) initiated an external investigation in the framework of which it provides expert assistance to the Slovak investigators and facilitates access to information.

The Slovak Supreme Audit Office (SAO) completed an audit of the Slovak Office of the Government for European Integration which is responsible for the implementation of pre-accession assistance. The Chairman of the SAO stated that no evidence of misuse of pre-accession funds was found but that the SAO report revealed serious deficiencies in the process of submitting, evaluating and approving of PHARE projects in the period 1997-2000 and, that, therefore, scope for possible corruption was created.

If it would appear from the results of the ongoing investigations that pre-accession funds have been used in a fraudulent or irregular way, the Commission would start the procedure to recover these funds. As a precautionary measure, the Commission has temporarily blocked 10 % of requests by the Slovak Authorities for PHARE payments on the programmes 2000 and 2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2971/01

by Alejandro Agag Longo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 October 2001)

Subject: Reduced VAT for amusement parks, animal and similar cultural facilities

Whereas in Article 12 of Council Directive 77/388/EEC(1) of 17 May 1977 (Sixth VAT Directive), as modified by Council Directive 92/77/EEC(2) of 19 October 1992 (approximation of VAT rates), lays down that from 1 January 1993, Member States may apply one or two reduced rates. These reduced rates may not be lower than 5 %, and shall apply only to supplies of categories of goods and services specified in Annex H,

Whereas category 7 of Annex H refers to admissions to [] amusement parks, [] zoos, [] and similar cultural events and facilities, although such activities are not defined in the Sixth VAT Directive,

Whereas the activities of aquatic, botanic, animal and mechanical amusement parks demand that they come under the activities recognised in category 7 of Annex H of the Sixth VAT Directive and, therefore, may benefit from the application of the reduced VAT rates to admission charges to their facilities, in implementation, inter alia, of the principles of VAT uniformity, the inherent fiscal neutrality of the common VAT system and the elimination of distortions of competition in the single market,

1. Does the Commission believe that the activities of aquatic, botanic, animal and mechanical amusement parks should be judged as being the same as the activities of amusement parks, zoos and similar cultural events and facilities, within the meaning of Annex H, category 7, of the Sixth VAT Directive?

2. If not, does the Commission intend to assess whether the activities of aquatic, botanic, animal and mechanical amusement parks should be included within the categories which may benefit from the implementation by the Member States of a reduced VAT rate, within the meaning of Annex H of the Sixth VAT Directive, and, if appropriate, include a proposal that they should be so included in its forthcoming two-yearly report?

(1) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 316, 31.10.1992, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(29 November 2001)

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that category 7 of Annex H to the Sixth value added tax (VAT) Directive does cover admission charges to all cultural and amusement activities. The listing of certain types of activities in this category is not exhaustive as the description ends with and similar cultural events and facilities. It should be noted that Member States are free to introduce reduced rates and to apply them to whichever categories they choose, as long as they comply with Article 12 of the Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977, on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment(1).

(1) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2860/01

by Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE-DE) to the Council

(19 October 2001)

Subject: Measures aimed at tackling the crisis in tourism following the terrorist attacks in the United States

A worldwide crisis is affecting international and European tourism following the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, not least because ordinary travellers understandably feel insecure.

This reluctance to travel is seriously jeopardising firms in the European tourist industry (losses are estimated at Lit 25 billion per day in Italy, for example), which are only to a small extent absorbed by the inadequate social provisions and flexible in the sector (particularly in the hotel sector).

Requests for urgent measures are being submitted by operators in the sector. These would include tax concessions for employees and firms, temporarily extending to travel agencies and tour operators instruments for compensation in the form of social and transport arrangements and the introduction and/or extension of organisational flexibility in the use of staff.

In view of Article 202 et seq. of the Treaty establishing the European Community, what rules does the Council intend to introduce to revive tourism and the related market?

Reply

(1 March 2002)

The Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the declaration by the Heads of State or Government of the European Union and the President of the European Commission (Ghent, 19 October 2001) on the review of the economic situation in the aftermath of the September 11 events.

As regards the specific problems of the tourism sector in this context, at its meeting on 27 September 2001 the Council asked the Commission to submit an information note on the repercussions of the events of 11 September in the United States on the tourist industry in the Community and returned to the subject at its meeting on 26 November 2001, when the Commission submitted an information note on the effects of the terrorist atrocities of 11 September 2001 on the tourism sector in the European Union. The Council agreed to return to the subject at a future meeting.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2740/01

by Jorge Moreira Da Silva (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 October 2001)

Subject: Electromagnetic fields

What steps is the Commission intending to take to protect human health against the negative effects of electromagnetic fields, specifically from mobile telephones?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(10 January 2002)

On 12 July 1999, the Council adopted a recommendation on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields(1), including the radio frequencies used by mobile telephone systems.

Given the very rapid development of these systems and the fears to which they give rise concerning the health of persons exposed, the Commission wished to take all necessary precautionary measures. It therefore asked the Health and consumer protection Directorate-General's Scientific Committee on Toxicology, Ecotoxicology and the Environment to reexamine the subject and issue, from autumn 2001, a new scientific opinion on the risks to human health from exposure and on suitable protection measures.

The Committee's opinion with regard to intermediate, radio and microwave frequencies from 1Khz up to 300 Ghz, such as those emitted by mobile phones, microwave ovens and television sets, states that the additional information that has become available does not call for any change in the exposure limits contained in the Council Recommendation of 1999.

The Commission will consult Member States on the implications of the report. It will also continue to cooperate with the World Health Organisation, which is engaged in a major epidemiological study of electromagnetic fields and human health.

The attention of the Honourable Member is further drawn to Community legislation ensuring that products like base stations and mobile phones are safe. In order to comply with this legislation (Directive 1999/5/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 1999 on radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity(2) and Council Directive 73/23/EEC of 19 February 1973 on the harmonization of the laws of Member States relating to electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits(3)), manufacturers need to ensure that products comply with strict safety standards following the latest scientific advice such as that laid down in the Council Recommendation.

(1) OJ L 199, 30.7.1999.

(2) OJ L 91, 7.4.1999.

(3) OJ L 77, 26.3.1973.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3633/01

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(11 January 2002)

Subject: Smuggling of cigarettes to Italy via Montenegro

In paragraph 30 of its resolution of 29 November 2001 on the 2000 report on measures to combat fraud Parliament called on the Commission to take steps to secure from the Italian authorities an immediate report on the action they have taken after being provided, in the wake of two UCLAF missions to Montenegro in 1996 and 1997, with evidence clearly identifying the organisers of smuggling operations.

Can the Commission state what moves it has made to comply with that call and can it summarise the key findings of the report submitted by the competent Italian authorities and, in particular, state in how many cases criminal proceedings have been opened against the organisers behind the smuggling operations?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2002)

The Commission, via the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), is in close and constant contact with the Italian police, customs and judicial authorities, notably the national anti-mafia directorate (DNA) where organised crime in cigarette smuggling is concerned.

The missions to Montenegro referred to by the Honourable Member had significant results.

The documentation obtained during the 1996 mission led to some forty people being brought before the public prosecutor by the Italian authorities for smuggling cigarettes from Montenegro.

The 1997 mission was carried out at the request of the Bari anti-mafia judicial authorities, as part of an investigation launched in 1996 into cigarette smuggling from Montenegro and the laundering of the profits generated by this criminal activity. The documentary evidence obtained during this mission was used in the investigation which led, in November 1999, to the issue of 49 arrest warrants for smuggling and money laundering. As part of the same investigation, in May 2000 the President of the Lugano Court was arrested for corruption and in February 2001 the Bari judicial authority issued 17 further arrest warrants for cigarette smuggling, money laundering and mafia-type criminal association.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2987/01

by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 October 2001)

Subject: Anniversary of the birth of Walter Hallstein

17 November 2001 marks the 100th anniversary of the birth of Walter Hallstein, the first President of the Commission. My conversations with members of the Commission's Protocol Service do not suggest that they are aware of this anniversary.

Does the Commission really intend to ignore the anniversary of the birth of a great European?

If it does change its mind, how does it plan to commemorate Walter Hallstein's life and work?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(30 November 2001)

The Commission fully agrees with the view expressed by the Honourable Member that Walter Hallstein, the first President of the Commission, was a great European. For this reason, President Prodi dedicated his speech in Bruges on 12 November 2001 to Walter Hallstein and he paid tribute to this great figure of European history to whom we owe so much.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3654/01

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(15 January 2002)

Subject: Fire at Paris hotel checks on observance of European fire prevention standards

On 17 December 2001 four people, including two young Italian women, died in a fire probably of criminal origin at the Hôtel du Palais in Paris.

This tragic occurrence has pointed up the frequent and deliberate failure to apply the strict European rules on fire risks and their prevention in full, or, indeed, at all, especially at hotels.

Does the Commission not consider that checks should be made concerning the real observance of the anti-fire standards in the Member States?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2002)

The Commission has been informed about the fire which claimed the lives of four people and injured seven at the Hôtel du Palais in Paris during the night of 17 December 2001.

According to the initial police findings, it was an act of arson and the perpetrator, a habitual offender, was apprehended on the spot.

Given these tragic circumstances, the Commission is unable to comment on the way in which safety standards were implemented in the case in question. This is particularly so when there is a deliberate intention to start a fire, in which case even rigorous application of the preventive arrangements in force may prove insufficient.

However, generally speaking, the Commission shares the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member and is currently working, in collaboration with the Member States, on improvements which could be made to the main Community instrument applicable: Council Recommendation 86/666/EEC of 22 December 1986 on fire safety in existing hotels(1).

The first phase of this work was concluded with the adoption, on 27 June 2001, of a Commission report on application of the Recommendation(2). This report points out that the Recommendation has helped to improve safety, particularly in areas where it was most needed, and also identifies grey areas which ought to be addressed. In this connection, the report raises points for consideration with a view to furthering the Commission's work on the subject.

The second phase (improvement of the existing arrangements) has just commenced and will initially entail updating the requirements contained in the Recommendation's guidelines. Subsequently, in the course of 2003, the measures taken should help to reinforce the objective set out in the Recommendation, namely to provide consumers with a high and consistent level of safety protection against the risks of fire in all the hotels of the Community.

(1) OJ L 384, 31.12.1986.

(2) COM(2001) 348 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3130/01

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Council

(15 November 2001)

Subject: Terrorist attacks against Christians in Pakistan

The massacre which took place on 28 October in Bahawalpur (Pakistan), where 18 Christians were shot at point-blank range and several dozens more were injured, is unfortunately only the latest in a series of killings which, in the name of a holy war, have been carried out against Christians in a number of Muslim countries (or in areas with an Islamic majority), from the Philippines to Nigeria (where 200 Christians were massacred only a few days ago) and Sudan, where the attacks are in response to a call from the Vice-President, Ali Osman Taba, for a jihad against the country's non-Muslim residents.

In countries in which Islamic fundamentalism is rampant, missionaries have been a target for years: 604 of them have been killed over the last decade.

In view of the above, would the Belgian Presidency of the Council say:

1. what emergency action it intends to take in order to prevent the massacre of Christian minorities from continuing whilst the international community stands idly by?

2. whether it considers in particular that any EU aid being supplied to governments which do not provide proper protection for persecuted religious minorities (especially Christians persecuted in Islamic countries by fundamentalists stirred by murderous hatred) should be suspended?

Reply

(18 March 2002)

1. The Council has not discussed the particular events of 28 October in Bahawalpur (Pakistan), to which the Honourable MEP refers. However, the Council firmly condemns, as a general policy, any attacks or other forms of violence against all religious or ethnic minorities, wherever they occur.

2. As regards Pakistan, the Council has repeatedly raised the issue of inter-ethnic and religious violence with the government of this country and has urged the authorities to undertake determined efforts to clamp down on such attacks and to bring their perpetrators to justice. The Council will continue to raise this issue during forthcoming political dialogue meetings, or at the level of local Heads of Mission, whenever necessary.

3. The Council is, however, not convinced that the suspension of any aid being supplied to governments would constitute an appropriate response to the problem. It has to be examined in each single case which response is most appropriate. For example, it would seem very problematic to suspend humanitarian aid or other aid which goes only to the most vulnerable parts of the population concerned. Assistance for social or educational projects could even contribute to fostering religious tolerance in problematic regions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2572/01

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(21 September 2001)

Subject: Protection of designations of origin outside Community territory

Queijo de São Jorge cheese is the main product of the island of São Jorge and within the Community has a protected designation of origin (PDO).

One of the most important markets for the cheese is North America, and there are increasing reports that imitations are being manufactured in the United States.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. Are PDO products protected outside the Community under WTO agreements?

2. If so, is the Commission responsible for enforcing that protection in relation to non-Community countries?

3. Should the case arise, what evidence does the Commission consider necessary to enable it to take legal action in the event of an infringement?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(5 November 2001)

1. Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs) belong to a wider category of geographical indications defined under the Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs-Agreement) under the World Trade Organisation (WTO). To the extent that PDOs pertain, under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14 July 1992, on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuff, to certain agricultural products and foodstuff other than wines and spirits, the TRIPs Agreement obliges WTO Members to provide the means for PDO right-holders to prevent certain uses of the protected names that may mislead the consumer. Likewise, the registration of trademarks that mislead the consumer vis-à-vis a PDO are prohibited. It should be nonetheless noted that the protection offered to Community PDOs or protected geographical indications (GIs) under Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 is more stringent than that required under the TRIPs Agreement. Consequently, Community GIs are protected in the Community beyond the minimum standards of the TRIPs Agreement. The Commission is ready to assist any Community producers whose PDO or GIs are adversely affected in any WTO Member.

2. Each WTO Member is responsible for ensuring that the level of GI protection required by the TRIPs Agreement is available to all legitimate GI right-holders in their territory. Accordingly; right-holders are themselves responsible for the enforcement of their GI rights within each WTO Member's administrative and judicial system. The TRIPs Agreement, however, enables the WTO Members (including the European Communities and their Member States) to monitor that other WTO Members' legislation is in conformity with the TRIPs Agreement.

3. The type of evidence required to substantiate a violation of the TRIPs Agreement by other WTO Members varies from case to case.