ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3578/97 by Klaus Lukas (NI) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: The euro and price transparency

The introduction of the euro will result in a marked increase in price transparency throughout Europe. Normally, improvements in price transparency have an impact on competitiveness and on trade and production flows.

In this connection, what is the Commission's assessment of the introduction of the euro and its impact on employment?

How does the Commission intend to assess the requirement for a two-year membership of the EMS and what fluctuation margins are considered 'normal' in this context? (Can the Commission provide the relevant percentage fluctuations?)

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (23 January 1998)

The establishment of economic and monetary union (EMU) and the introduction of the euro will increase price transparency in the internal market. For consumers and enterprises it will be easier to compare prices of goods and services displayed in different Member States. This should lead to an increase of competition between producers and greatly facilitate trade inside the euro area.

The increase of competition, the reduction of transaction costs for cross border transactions and the creation of an integrated euro area capital market with the prospect of low interest rates will improve the conditions for investment in Europe. The single currency is therefore one of the main elements in the strategy of the Community to improve European competitiveness and to create the necessary conditions for long-lasting, non-inflationary growth and for employment creation.

As the establishment of EMU implies a single monetary and exchange rate policy inside the euro area, the link between wage settlements and employment will become more stringent. National monetary or exchange rate policies will no longer be able to accommodate wage and price developments which are not in line with the macroeconomic framework in Europe.

Concerning the convergence criteria 'exchange rate stability' it should be noted that Article 109 j (1) of the EC Treaty refers to 'the observance of the normal fluctuation margins provided for by the exchange rate mechanism of the European Monetary System, for at least two years, without devaluing against the currency of any other Member State'.

In August 1993, the ministers and the central bank governors of the Member States decided to widen temporarily the obligatory marginal intervention thresholds of the participants in the exchange rate mechanism of the European monetary system (EMS) to ± 15% around the bilateral central rates. At the same time, they reaffirmed their support for the procedures and criteria laid down in the EC Treaty with respect to the attainment of a sufficient degree of convergence in order to allow the realisation of EMU.

The Commission will base its assessment of this criterion on these bases when recommending in March 1998 the list of Member States which will have reached a high degree of sustainable convergence.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3660/97 by Cristiana Muscardini (NI) to the Commission (19 November 1997)

Subject: 'Adriatic corridor' study

When the EP approved the 14 priority projects for the trans-European transport network system the Commission, while not acknowledging its priority, did not reject the idea of the 'Adriatic corridor' as an intermodal system until 1995 was indicated as the date for initiating the project study.

Now, two years later, can the Commission answer the following questions:

1. When was the tender for the feasibility study concluded?

2. When will the study be concluded?

3. When, following conclusion of the feasibility study, will it deliver its opinion on the suitability?

4. What funding has it earmarked for the study?

5. When, as part of the transport policy, does it intend to propose the list of seaports of 'Community value'?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (16 December 1997)

Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 ((OJ L 228, 23.9.1995. )) constitutes the legal basis for the granting of Community financial assistance in the Trans-European Networks (TEN), including the Trans-European transport Network, during the current period 1995-1999. Under this Regulation, applications for financial assistance are submitted to the Commission by the Member State concerned, or by the body directly concerned with the agreement of the Member State.

In 1995 the Community co-financed a feasibility study for the Adriatic corridor with 1 MECU under the TEN-transport budget line (B5-700).

According to information in the Commission's possession the call for tender for the feasibility study was closed in June 1997 and the study will be completed in 1998.

As a general rule the national authorities and the Commission perform a technical and financial appraisal of feasibility studies after completion of the study when a claim for the payment of the last tranche of Community support is introduced.

The Commission expects to adopt a report on the integration of seaports, inland ports and intermodal terminals in the trans-European transport network this year.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3540/97 by Allan Macartney (ARE) to the Commission (12 November 1997)

Subject: ECHO - aid to money to Western Sahara refugees

Can ECHO say exactly how much and what percentage of the aid money to the Western Sahara refugees is used for publications, advertisements and stickers?

Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (17 December 1997)

Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/96 of 20 June 1996 concerning humanitarian aid ((OJ L 163, 2.7.1996. )) foresees that funds may be used to finance the costs of highlighting the Community nature of aid as well as public awareness and information campaigns aimed at increasing understanding of humanitarian issues, in Europe and in third countries where the Community is funding major humanitarian operations.

Bearing these principles in mind and in accordance with the relevant provisions of the framework partnership contract in the field of humanitarian aid, implementing partners are requested to contribute to the visibility of the humanitarian operations financed by the Community, provided that this does not harm its mandate, its basic principles or the safety of its staff.

As far as aid to the Western Sahara refugees is concerned, the table below expressed in ECU shows the amount and the percentage used for visibility purposes for the years 1996 and 1997.

Humanitarian aid for the refugee sahraouis for Tindouf (Algeria).

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4015/97 by Thomas Megahy (PSE) to the Commission (14 January 1998)

Subject: Misleading advertising by airlines

The United Kingdom Advertising Standards Authority has recently ruled that airlines and travel agents must advertise the true cost to the traveller of all flights, including airport and other taxes, seasonal premiums and all extraneous costs. Is the Commission aware of the situation in other Member States, and would it consider proposing a directive generalizing what will, from 1 January 1998, be the practice in Britain?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (26 February 1998)

The Commission was pleased to learn of the United Kingdom initiative on improved information to airline passengers relating to the true costs of all flights. The Commission has not been informed of any similar initiatives in other Member States.

However, the Commission has launched a comprehensive study to assess the conditions included in air transport contracts from the perspective of consumers. The issue of the best means of giving passengers adequate notice of required information (including prices) relevant to the decision about whether to enter into the contract is amongst the matters being addressed and is now the subject of industry-wide consultation. The Commission will consider whether new initiatives are necessary in the light of the study and the consultation process.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3959/97 by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission (12 December 1997)

Subject: Chinese population policy

Is the Commission aware of the reports of large-scale enforced sterilizations in Tibet which apparently took place between September and October 1996 (according to TSG Nieuwsbrief NL)?

Is the Commission aware that the Chinese authorities operate a compulsory lottery system to determine whether a married couple can still have children?

Does the Commission share the view that the Chinese population policy is designed to reduce the number of Tibetans?

Is the Commission prepared to protest to the Chinese authorities about this turn of events?

Is the Commission prepared to raise this question in the UN Commission for Human Rights?

Can the Commission indicate what steps it has already taken against China with regard to the population policy?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission (2 February 1998)

Respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms in China is still a matter of constant concern to the Commission. It has never failed, where it believes there is justification, to express its concern about the human rights situation in Tibet in particular.

The Commission has no precise information on the facts reported by the Honourable Member. Should they be confirmed, the Commission - as in the past - would undoubtedly raise any infringement of human rights or assault on human dignity as part of the bilateral dialogue with China.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3372/97 by Lis Jensen (I-EDN) to the Commission (22 October 1997)

Subject: Energy sector priorities

What is the Commission's position as regards requirements imposed by Member States' energy policies on power producers and distributors to take environmental aspects into account when planning power production, and on the indirect impact this may have on the functioning of the internal market in energy?

Take, for example, the specific case of power production in Denmark, where the law on the supply of electricity has been amended so as to require power producers to take energy from decentralized CHP units and renewable sources and the state also grants aid to such forms of production.

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission (5 December 1997)

The internal market for electricity is regulated through Directive 96/92/EC of 19 December 1996 ((OJ L 27, 30.1.1997. )) which establishes common rules for the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity. It entered into force on 19 February 1997 and Member States have in general two years to implement the Directive.

The Directive allows Member States to take environmental considerations fully into account when implementing it. Pursuant to Article 8 (3) of the Directive, Member States may require the system operator to give priority to electricity based on renewables and from combined heat and power when dispatching generating installations.

Member States may also, according to Article 3 (2), impose public service obligations on undertakings operating in the electricity sector. These obligations may, inter alia, relate to environmental protection.

Furthermore, when a Member State sets up the criteria for granting an authorization for constructing new generating capacity or lists the tender specifications a possible generator has to follow, it can also apply criteria (Article 5 (1) of the Directive), which relate to the protection of the environment.

It should, however, be underlined that when a Member State applies the provisions of the Directive it must be done in an objective, transparent and non-discriminatory way. The provisions cannot be used to favour producers in the Member State itself.

The specific case of Denmark will be examined according to the provisions of the Directive, including the abovementioned provisions allowing Member States to take environmental aspects into account.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3212/97 by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission (16 October 1997)

Subject: Airline timetabling

In view of the fact that airlines publish flight times that only on the rarest of occasions are met, does the Commission consider it should take action to regulate these timetables?

Might it consider, in the interests of improved customer information, recommending that schedules must reflect the average performance achieved duirng the previous twelve months?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission (26 November 1997)

The Commission understands and shares the concerns of the Honourable Member about the fact that the actual departing times of airlines - and often arrival times - frequently deviate from the scheduled times. While in 1996 delays were slightly better than in 1995, which was a year with very poor results in Europe, the situation in 1997 seems again to be deteriorating. On average 18.4 % of all departures were delayed by more than 15 minutes in 1995. For 1997, September included, on average as many as 19.6 % of all flights were delayed by more than 15 minutes.

The Commission also recognises the importance of providing adequate information to passengers. However, rather than recommending that average performance achieved should be reflected in the timetables, which could be misleading, the Commission is investigating other methods of improving information to passengers.

A feasibility study on the establishment of a 'Community punctuality reporting system' was launched a year ago as a follow-up to the communication on congestion and crisis in air traffic ((COM (95) 318. )). Following a call for tender the contract was awarded to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), which recently submitted its report. The study investigated the practicability of an information system which would enable the publication on a regular basis of punctuality indicators. The information would be primarily directed to passengers in order to inform them of the quality of the services provided, and enable them to compare and plan their travel accordingly.

It is the intention of the Commission to pursue this idea further with a view to defining which measures should be taken, and at which level, so that there would be a reliable basis for any measures that implemented a punctuality reporting system.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3930/97 by W.G. van Velzen (PPE) to the Commission (12 December 1997)

Subject: Proposed merger of Worldcom and MCI on the Internet market

There have been reports in the papers recently about the proposed merger of Worldcom and MCI. If this merger actually goes ahead, the new company will occupy a dominant position on the Internet market.

1. Does the Commission intend to examine whether the effects of this proposed merger on access to the Internet are in line with European rules on competition, and in particular Articles 90, 85 and 86 of the Treaty?

2. Does the Commission feel there are grounds for laying down conditions for this proposed merger in the light of development of the market in the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission (3 February 1998)

On 20 November 1997 the Commission received from WorldCom, Inc and MCI Communications Corporation a joint notification of an operation by which the two companies would merge within the meaning of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on the control of concentrations between undertakings ((OJ L 257, 21.9.1990. )) ('the merger regulation'). The notification is under investigation in accordance with the terms of the Regulation. No proceedings in relation to the notified operation are in progress under Articles 90, 85 or 86 of the EC Treaty.

On 18 December 1997 the notification was declared incomplete. The Commission is awaiting the complete information. From the point at which complete information is submitted, the Commission will have under Article 10 of the merger regulation a period of one month from the day following receipt in which to take a decision under Article 6 of the same Regulation.

If proceedings are initiated under Article 6(1)(c) of the merger regulation, Article 8 enables the parties, during those proceedings, to offer modifications to their original concentration plan aimed at ensuring that the concentration does not create or strengthen a dominant position as a result of which effective competition would be significantly impeded in the common market or in a substantial part of it. In the event that such proceedings were opened, it would be for the parties themselves to decide whether to propose such modifications.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3607/97 by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission (13 November 1997)

Subject: Commission communication on the impact of the introduction of the euro on capital markets (COM(97) 0337)

On the subject of fixed capital markets, one of the possibilities suggested in this document for redenomination of existing debt would be to work on the basis of a fixed minimum denomination with cash compensatory payments (the 'top-down' method).

Does the Commission intend to draw up a more detailed working document on this method?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3607/97 and E-3608/97 given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission (13 February 1998)

In the Commission communication on the impact of the introduction of the euro on capital markets ((COM(97) 337 final. )), a number of methods for the redenomination of debt are examined. The two main methods examined are called 'top-down' and 'bottom-up'. The communication expresses a preference for the 'bottom-up' method. According to this method, redenomination would not alter the total volume of securities issued and the potential for rounding differences would be reduced to insignificant amounts.

According to the 'top down' approach the original issue is broken down into a number of 'pieces' with identical minimum denominations. Each of these minimum denominations is redenominated using the conversion factor and rounded to the nearest cent. The new total amount of the issue is then calculated by multiplying the minimum denomination in euro by the number of 'pieces'. This new total is likely to be different, because of rounding differences, from the direct conversion of the total amount of the issue. The difference would have to be accounted for through compensatory payments.

The compensatory payments would be necessary to avoid the possibility of artificially generating or destroying stock. This cash payment would expose either the issuer or the investor to reinvestment risk. As a consequence of such compensatory payments, the cash flow generated by coupon payments and in the maturity value of the bond would be slightly modified. This could have implications for the related derivative instruments since the hedges set up prior to redenomination are based on the exact expected cash flows generated by coupon payments and in the maturity value. If such cash flows are modified, even if the amounts are very small, they would no longer correspond to the related derivatives operations. If a 'top down' approach is chosen, it should be implemented in a way to avoid the potential problems. However, as mentioned above, the potential disruption would only appear in case of outstanding derivative contracts related to the denominated bond.

Detailed examples to illustrate the 'top down' method are included in the Commission communication (page 12 of the English version).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3671/97 by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission (19 November 1997)

Subject: Social welfare rights for people with disabilities moving to another state within the EU

At the moment people with disabilities who are in receipt of a disability allowance in their native country are not entitled to receive the same payments if they move to another EU state.

This would appear to breach the EU's commitment to non-discrimination.

Has the Commission any proposals to end this discrimination?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission (8 January 1998)

Disability allowance is a special non-contributory benefit within the meaning of Article 4.2.a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community and Regulation (EEC) No 574/72 laying down the procedure for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 ((OJ L 28, 30.1.1997. )). These special non-contributory benefits, which have the characteristics of both social security and social assistance, are listed in Annex IIa. Article 10a of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 stipulates that such benefits shall be granted exclusively in the territory of the Member State in which the claimant resides. In other words, special non-contributory benefits cannot be 'exported' to another Member State.

It has to be noted, however, that a person who moves to another Member State and resides there is entitled to the special non-contributory benefits provided under the legislation of that Member State under the same conditions as the nationals of that Member State. There is, therefore, no discrimination on the grounds of nationality, and this situation is not contrary to the principle of equality of treatment (Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71).

The question of the interpretation and of the validity of these specific rules of coordination for special non-contributory benefits, introduced in 1992, was raised before the Court of justice in the case of Snares ((C-20/96), concerning the award of disability living allowance provided for under British legislation. Having examined the provisions in dispute in the case, the Court decided in its judgment of 4 November 1997 that they are compatible with Article 51 of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3338/97 by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission (22 October 1997)

Subject: European Commission's opinion on Estonia and Slovakia on the application for membership of the European Union

Could the Commission prepare a comparative analysis of Estonia and Slovakia on the basis of the criteria set up by the Copenhagen European Council, particularly in the field of:

1. protection of, and respect for, national minorities,

2. economic performance including the capacity to cope with the market forces within the European Union, and

3. current state of approximation of national legislation with that of the European Union.

Answer given by Mr Van den Broek on behalf of the Commission (2 December 1997)

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to its report, Agenda 2000 for a stronger and wider Union, and the opinions on the individual applications for membership submitted by ten countries of central and eastern Europe, which were published on 15 July 1997. The opinions are based on a thorough and objective analysis of the conditions in each applicant country on the basis of the criteria agreed by the Copenhagen European Council in 1993. These documents, in particular the opinions on Estonia ((COM(97) 2006 final. )) and Slovakia ((COM(97) 2004 final. )), cover the issues raised by the Honourable Member.