ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/73

(2004/C 78 E/0072)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2059/03

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(20 June 2003)

Subject: One-year delay by the Spanish government in extracting fuel oil from the wreck of the ‘Prestige’ off the Galician coast

The Spanish government has just stated that the extraction operations (entrusted to the Repsol company) for the 3 5 000 tonnes of fuel oil that still have to be removed from the wreck of the ‘Prestige’ off the Galician coast will be delayed for a year, i.e. until spring 2004. This serious delay contradicts the Spanish government's earlier promises, and will increase the risks generated by the presence of the wreck at almost 4 000 metres underwater.

The Commission has declared that the presence of this vessel, still with one-half of its original load, is a matter of European concern, and has expressed its willingness to cooperate with the Spanish government to deal with the problem.

Is the Commission aware of the Spanish government's decision? Does it consider it justified? What action will it take to hold the Spanish government to its promise to remove the fuel oil remaining in the hold of the ‘Prestige’ during 2003? Has it contacted the Spanish government on the matter? What contacts has it established with the Galician regional government to resolve the problem?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2003)

The Honourable Member is invited to refer to his previous Written Questions E-3595/02 (1), E-1259/03 (2) and his oral question H-69/03 during question time at Parliament's March 2003 session (3).

The measures to be taken concerning the extraction of the fuel oil still on board the Prestige fall primarily under the competence of the Spanish authorities.

A delegation from the Spanish ministry for development and representatives from Repsol have recently presented to the Commission services and to the Director of the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) the details of the plan for the extraction of the fuel from the wreck of the Prestige.

The Commission understands that the same information was made available by the Spanish authorities to the Parliament's rapporteur on the Prestige accident.

A copy of the CD-rom presented by the Spanish authorities is sent directly to the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 63.

(2) OJ C 280 E, 21.11.2003, p. 121.

(3) Written reply, 11.3.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/223

(2004/C 84 E/0268)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3148/03

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 October 2003)

Subject: Support for institutions working with women and girls who are victims of prostitution

In Portugal, there are institutions dedicated to the prevention and social integration of women and girls who are victims of prostitution. Shortage of funding poses real problems.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. What aid has been granted to Portugal under the Daphne programme? Which institutions benefited from this aid?

2. What other programmes, Community funds or budgetary items could be used by institutions working on the prevention and social reintegration of women who are victims of prostitution? What subsidies have been granted to Portugal?

3. What monies have been granted to Portugal in connection with sexually transmitted diseases?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(12 December 2003)

As regards the first question concerning the Daphne programme, the following information can be provided.

Since 1997 nine projects carried out by Portuguese organisations were financed under the Daphne programme for a total of EUR 680 000. Information on each of them is being transmitted direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

In addition, 59 Portuguese organisations or local authorities were partners in 32 Daphne projects.

With regard to Community aid for institutions which work on the prevention of prostitution and the social reintegration of women who are victims of prostitution, the European Social Fund can co-finance — under the Community Support Framework (CSF) III — measures for the benefit of disadvantaged groups in general. Special reference should be made to the operational programme ‘employment, training and social development’, which, in section five on social development, provides for measures to encourage social and occupational integration of the most vulnerable groups in society.

With regard to Community action in relation to sexually transmissible diseases, the main financing tool at present is the ‘public health’ action programme (2003-2008). The Commission has not yet taken a final decision on the projects accepted for financing following an initial call for proposals under this programme and so cannot yet state its position on participation by Portugal. With regard to precursor programmes, and in particular the programme on the prevention of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), the projects financed by the Community usually cover almost all Member States. Given that the Community aid is granted to the project coordinator, who, for his part, is responsible for distributing it to the project partners, the Commission cannot put a figure on the amount of aid granted to the Portuguese partners under this programme.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/271

(2004/C 78 E/0272)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3360/03

by Jean-Maurice Dehousse (PSE) to the Commission

(14 November 2003)

Subject: Free movement of persons

In closing with its frontier with Gibraltar, Spain has established a barrier to the freedom of movement of persons within the territory of the European Community.

In order for this border closure to comply with the principle of freedom of movement, it needs to be based on one or more specific, legal provisions concerning derogation.

Can the Commission state what the condition(s) is/are in this case? Are they furthermore applicable in the Community, and under what conditions? Are there furthermore other provisions of the same kind, i.e. capable of producing the same effects?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2004)

The Honourable Member is invited to refer to the reply given by the Commission to oral question H-0668/03 by Glyn Ford during question time at Parliament's plenary session of November 2003 (1).

(1) Written reply, 18.11.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/287

(2004/C 84 E/0333)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-4035/03

by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

(5 January 2004)

Subject: Implementation in Portugal of the regulation on automobile distribution

1. At a meeting held on 9 December 2003 in Brussels by the Association of European Automobile Constructors, the chairman of that association (Mr Louis Schweitz, chairman and CEO of Renault) said that, in the wake of the new regulation on automobile distribution, manufacturers would harmonise the basic prices of motorcars sold in the various EU countries.

2. It was pointed out to Mr Schweitz (who agreed) that this would lead to an increase in the price of motorcars sold in Portugal.

3. Since the purpose of the new regulation on automobile distribution is the precise opposite (i.e. to bring about a reduction in the consumer price of motorcars, to increase the volume of sales and to cause old cars to be replaced by newer models, with all the implications which that would entail in terms of vehicle safety and a healthier environment), would the Commission give its views on this matter, which is naturally causing the greatest concern amongst consumers and Portuguese automobile distributors?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2004)

The Commission's policy on competition in the motor vehicle sector has always been that motor vehicle distributors, whether or not they are based in the same EU Member State, should be subject to free competition. This approach, which is enshrined in the new block exemption regulation (1) which entered into force on 1 October 2002, helps to create a single market in the motor vehicle sector and enables today's European consumers to take advantage of the best prices in the EU. For some manufacturers, this process of integration of national markets is reflected in a policy of convergence of basic tax exclusive prices for vehicles of the same make and model throughout the European Union.

As regards the point made by the Honourable Member concerning the increase in the basic price of cars in Portugal, the Commission would point out that a pricing policy determined on an independent basis by a motor vehicle manufacturer is strictly the business of that manufacturer. The Commission has no mandate to intervene in respect of manufacturers' business decisions.

However, price increases decided by joint agreement between a manufacturer and its independent dealers, or between competing manufacturers, are generally prohibited under European competition law. If evidence were found of concerted price increases the Commission would not hesitate to take action in accordance with its role as guardian of fair competition in the internal market.

To date, however, no information of concerted price increases on the Portuguese market has come to light.

(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1400/2002 of 31 July 2002 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle sector, OJ L 203, 1.8.2002.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/888

(2004/C 78 E/0939)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3982/03

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(6 January 2004)

Subject: Political rights of the Macedonian minority in Greece

The Macedonian minority in Greece is represented within the European Free Alliance by the Rainbow Party (Ouranio Toxo).

Following repeated unlawful acts and threats, this party was physically prevented from holding a conference in preparation for the European elections by Greek fascist-inspired organisations.

Despite numerous appeals to the Greek authorities at both local and national level, the authorities have taken no action against these organisations. The party conference, originally scheduled for 30 November and subsequently put back to 7 December, has been postponed indefinitely because of the risks involved.

Is the Commission aware of this attack on the political rights of minorities?

Does the Commission know the reasons for the Greek authorities' inaction on the matter?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2004)

The Commission will approach the Greek authorities for information about the facts to which the Honourable Member refers.

It will let him have the results of its examination of the case as soon as possible.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/596

(2004/C 88 E/0609)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0277/03

by Brian Simpson (PSE) to the Commission

(7 February 2003)

Subject: Soda ash imports

Will the Commission investigate the dumping of soda ash by the USA into the EU market? Further, will the Commission support the retention of the import tariffs on this product during the future WTO round but ensure that if tariffs do have to be removed, it is done in a phased and controlled way?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(10 March 2003)

As regards the dumping of soda ash by the United States into the European market, the Commission wants to inform the Honourable Member that anti-dumping proceedings are conducted on the basis of Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the Community (1), which states that a Community industry has to file a complaint with the Commission. This complaint should contain sufficient evidence as regards injury and dumping. So far, no such complaint has been received. In the event that such information is brought to the attention of the Commission, the evidence will of course be examined expeditiously.

As regards the current multilateral negotiations under the Doha Development Agenda, the Community proposes that all World Trade Organisation (WTO) Members agree to reduce all tariff duties considerably by compressing them into a flatter range of tariffs to eliminate tariff peaks and high tariffs. Given that the main goal of this round is sustainable development, and since exceptions and further sheltering of sectors can only result in distortions and costs that developing and least developed countries can ill afford, the mechanism shall apply without sheltering of any sector. This does not prevent the Community, though, from proposing implementation timetables that are in keeping with our economic sensitivities.

(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/65

(2004/C 84 E/0070)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3504/03

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Information on the level of EU funding granted to Rhineland-Palatinate between January 1997 and December 2002

1. For what measures was EU funding paid to Rhineland-Palatinate between 1997 and 2002, and what were the sums involved from the following programmes and funds: (a) the European Social Fund; (b) the Fifth Framework Programme for Research; (c) the European Regional Development Fund; (d) EU environmental and energy programmes; (e) the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (Guidance Section and Guarantee Section); (f) other EU programmes?

2. How much was paid from the programmes and funds for cross-border projects involving Rhineland-Palatinate and, respectively, Luxembourg, Belgium, Lorraine and Alsace? What are the projects involved in each case?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2004)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/87

(2004/C 84 E/0100)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3705/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update concerning the funds for the Altener II programme for the municipality of Ancona

With reference to question E-0961/03 (1), in which the Commission was asked whether the municipality of Ancona (Italy) had submitted projects and obtained funds under the Altener II programme, the Commission replied to the effect that no proposal had been submitted.

Can the Commission provide information on any projects submitted since the date of its reply (25 April 2003)?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 169.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/16

(2004/C 78 E/0016)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0293/03

by Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 February 2003)

Subject: Animal welfare in Greek slaughterhouses

A report by the European Commission's Food and Veterinary Office in 2000 (DG(SANCO)/1060/2000) exposed serious animal welfare problems in Greek slaughterhouses. A new film has now exposed continued serious animal welfare problems in Greek slaughterhouses. The film revealed goats being slaughtered without any attempt at pre-stunning, in breach of Council Directive 93/119/EC (1), and sheep being stunned so ineffectively that a significant proportion regain consciousness before throat-cutting, which is also in breach of Directive 93/119/EC.

What steps is the Commission planning to take to press the Greek Government to ensure that animals in Greek slaughterhouses are slaughtered in accordance with Council Directive 93/119/EC?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(17 March 2003)

The Commission is aware both from past mission reports of its Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) and information supplied by animal welfare organisations that there have been serious deficiencies in ensuring respect of the requirements of Council Directive 93/119/EEC of 22 December 1993 on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter and killing in Greek slaughterhouses.

The poor situation in the past led the Commission to open infringement proceedings against this Member State. The FVO recently completed a follow-up mission to that mentioned by the Honourable Member. This mission was carried out between 13 and 17 January 2003. Although the final mission report is not yet available, some positive developments have occurred since the previous report. The competent Greek authorities have, for example, provided appropriate instructions to official veterinarians working in slaughterhouses in relation to animal welfare, improved the system for reporting deficiencies and recruited additional official veterinarians. The mission team indicated that in the three slaughterhouses visited, although deficiencies remained, these were not as severe as indicated in previous reports. However, the level of progress is not considered conclusive. A further follow-up FVO mission is therefore planned in 2003.

The report of the inspection will be sent to the Parliament when finalised, in accordance with the Commission's usual procedures, and will be published on the website of Directorate General Health and Consumer Protection: (http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/inspections/index_en.html).

The Commission remains very concerned about the level of deficiencies in the compliance by Greece with Community Animal Welfare Legislation, and notably on inadequate enforcement of the rules. It will not fail to take such other action as is necessary to secure better observance of Community law in this domain including in particular use of the infringement procedure under article 226 of the EC Treaty.

(1) OJ L 340, 31.12.1993, p. 21.
1.

It is a matter for Member States to decide upon their domestic legislation, except in areas where it has been considered appropriate to harmonise or approximate legislation. Article 33 of the Treaty on European Union provides that European legislation shall not affect the responsibilities incumbent on Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order. It remains the responsibility of holidaymakers to acquaint themselves with the relevant laws of any other Member State they may wish to visit. Ignorance of the law is not a defence available to nationals of a Member State. The Commission does not believe that foreign visitors should be treated differently from nationals. The Commission has no reason to believe that either the law at issue here or the manner in which it is enforced is discriminatory against non-nationals.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/91

(2004/C 84 E/0112)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3717/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update concerning the funds for the SAVE II programme for the municipality of Massa

With reference to question E-0966/03 (1), in which the Commission was asked whether the municipality of Massa (Italy) had submitted projects and obtained funds under the SAVE II programme, the Commission replied on 25 April 2003 to the effect that no proposal had been submitted.

Can the Commission state whether, since then and up to the present, it has received any SAVE II projects from that municipality?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 169.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/171

(2004/C 78 E/0176)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2810/03

by Ari Vatanen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(17 September 2003)

Subject: Allowing longer truck combinations in Europe

Finland and Sweden are allowed to use vehicles up to 25,25 m in length on their territories. This has proved very effective and safe.

The benefits of longer trucks are multiple:

— less fuel consumption

— less emissions per tonne km

— less room taken on the roads

— less tear and wear of the road network

— lower transport costs and thus lower prices for consumers

More specifically, in a study made by the Swedish Road Administration (Vägverket) in connection with the so-called Extra Project it was concluded that the large trucks make unnecessary approximately one third of journeys and reduce total costs by 23 %.

Already now modular solutions (motor vehicle coupled to two modules of 13,6 m and 7,82 m) are allowed in the EU. However, for the better functioning of the internal market it would be logical to permit the use of the Finnish and Swedish types in the entire EU. Naturally there may be roads where such long combinations prove difficult but this should obviously not preclude their use on the rest of the road network.

1. Does the Commission acknowledge the benefits of the truck lengths used in Finland and Sweden and the market inefficiencies the current system leads to?

2. If it does, how and when will the Commission act in order to ensure that these benefits are extended to the rest of the European Union?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 2003)

The Commission is aware of the fact that the use of long vehicles could contribute to a more efficient transport of goods. Although the modular concept is allowed in the Union, Member States have not made any use of this possibility except for some limited experiments such as in the Netherlands. Reasons could be that it is not yet clear how such vehicles will impact on road safety under different traffic and road conditions nor how their use would affect the distribution of the transport of goods between the various modes.

The Commission has the intention to organise a meeting in the beginning of 2004 with Member States' experts in the field of vehicle weights and dimensions to discuss the need for any change to the existing related Community legislation.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/117

(2004/C 84 E/0152)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3912/03

by Ole Krarup (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 December 2003)

Subject: Oil extraction in the North Sea

Can the Commission state, as regards the Danish government's agreement with A.P. Møller and the Dansk Undergrund Consortium on the conditions for oil extraction over the next 40 years in the North Sea, whether the clause in the agreement protecting the concession holders from additional taxation, has been notified as a state aid in accordance with Article 88(3) of the Treaty? If the agreement has not been notified, can the Commission state whether agreements between governments and private concession holders which grant the latter tax relief for a long period in the future should be regarded as state aids?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(17 February 2004)

The Commission would point out that it was not given prior notification of the agreement to which the Honourable Member refers under Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty. However, the Danish authorities have sent the detailed documents on the agreement. These documents are currently under study, and the Commission cannot at this stage give a decision as to the type of measure.

The Commission would recall that as a general rule tax relief confined to certain activities or certain firms could constitute state aid.