ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2957/00

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE), Claude Turmes (Verts/ALE), Dirk Sterckx (ELDR), Karl Olsson (ELDR), Torben Lund (PSE), Eryl McNally (PSE), Peter Liese (PPE-DE) and Jorge Moreira Da Silva (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 September 2000)

Subject: Energy saving with intelligent pumps for hot water circulation

Electronically controlled pumps for the circulation of hot water in central heating systems use 50 % less energy then non-electronic pumps. Electronic pumps work only when it is really necessary. If all the pumps in the EU were of the electronic type then the EU would save 23 million tons of CO2. That is almost 7 % of the total reduction target of the EU Kyoto commitment.

80 % of the existing pumps will have to be replaced in the coming 10 years, so this is an excellent opportunity. These intelligent electronic pumps are a bit more expensive, but the savings on the electricity bill will more than compensate for this extra price. 80 % of the installed pumps today are still of the non-electronic type, so a small push to realise this win-win situation is necessary. Referring to a similar previous Directive, the so-called Ballast for fluorescent lights Directive, is the European Commission prepared to propose in the long term a Directive to make electronically controlled pumps obligatory in the European Union and to encourage use of these pumps in the short term?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 2000)

The Commission is aware of the large energy consumption of pumps for the circulation of hot water in central heating systems. The Commission has launched a study to assess the savings potential and the most appropriate policies to stimulate the market penetration of the most energy efficient products.

The Commission is already planning to introduce a labelling and classification scheme for these pumps and is also considering proposing a directive to introduce minimum efficiency requirements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2217/00

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Felling of tropical rainforests and oil palms in Borneo

In order to export tropical timber to Europe a certificate is now required to show that the timber was obtained by sustainable felling. Although such a certificate is to be welcomed, the boycotting of commercially felled tropical timber has been of little benefit to the forests, since they are being destroyed just as quickly as before. Once a forest has been felled the main markets for the tropical wood being Japan, Korea and China the worthless areas remaining are converted into oil palm plantations. Several million hectares of rainforest in Borneo have been converted in this way.

The oil is used as an industrial grease, and the cosmetics industry uses it in the manufacture of soap, lipstick and hand-cream. However, most often it finds it way into the food industry. The product which uses the most palm oil is margarine.

1. Is the Commission aware that the main consumers of this palm oil are in Europe?

2. Does not the Commission also consider that the purchase of this oil by industry the EU encourages the felling of rainforests?

3. Is the Commission funding programmes in Borneo to combat further felling of rainforests in order to promote the sustainable use of these forests?

4. Is the Commission considering funding programmes to regenerate destroyed areas of rainforest (e.g. in order to manage them in an environmentally sound manner) so as to prevent further felling and conversion to palm oil plantations?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 September 2000)

In order to export tropical timber to Europe, no certificate is required to show that the timber was obtained by sustainable felling. Some European buyers require such certificates, but Community regulations do not contain such requirements.

The Commission is aware of the fact that Europe is a major consumer of palm oil, it being mostly used for diverse products in the food and cosmetics industries.

Demand for palm oil from European consumers does imply the establishment of palm oil plantations in tropical countries and the Commission is concerned about the conversion of natural forests into oil palm plantations. However, national policies of the countries concerned still determine on which type of land such plantations are established (waste land, agricultural land, forest land).

The Commission has two major projects in Kalimantan, designed to bring about sustainable forest management (Berau and South/Central Kalimantan projects). Details are available under http://www.eu-flb.or.id.

The Commission is already financing programmes for the renewal of affected forest areas under a component of the above mentioned South/Central Kalimantan project.

More generally, as set out in the recent communication on development policy(1), the Commission will take steps to improve coherence between development policy and other Community policies.

(1) COM(2000) 212 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2805/00

by Imelda Read (PSE) to the Commission

(4 September 2000)

Subject: Japanese Automotive Manufacturers Association

Since December 1999, the European Commission has invited the Japanese Automotive Manufacturers Association (JAMA) to the European Commission's Motor Vehicle Working Group and, since February 2000, to the Motor Vehicle Emissions Group. This is particularly welcome because neither JAMA, nor any Japanese car manufacturer, was involved in the discussions relating to Auto-Oil I and II.

Can the European Commission indicate when JAMA, an association representing 33 000 direct and approximately 150 000 indirect jobs in the European Union and producing over 1 million vehicles in the EU, could be invited to join other working groups and/or committees, such as the European Enhanced Safety Vehicle Committee? Such involvement would permit JAMA, and its members, to contribute their expertise for the benefit of European consumers.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2000)

As correctly indicated by the Honourable Member, the Commission has invited the Japanese Automotive Manufacturers Association (JAMA) to participate in meetings of its motor vehicle working group. This initiative has been taken by the Commission in a spirit of transparency and openness towards an important economic sector in the automotive industry.

JAMA was invited for the very first time to participate in the motor vehicle working group meeting held in June 1999. It was further invited to all subsequent meetings of the same group and, as from February 2000 onwards, also to meetings of the ad hoc motor vehicle emissions group (MVEG).

The Commission will of course continue to invite JAMA to participate in these meetings in the future. It is also the Commission's intention to invite JAMA to participate in all forthcoming meetings of its other ad hoc working groups, which directly report to the motor vehicle working group.

It should further be observed that the Commission does not manage the European enhanced safety vehicle committee. The Commission can therefore not commit itself to invite JAMA to participate in this committee's meetings.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2169/00

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 2000)

Subject: Stability of FYROM

According to press reports, there have recently been attempts to infiltrate groups of persons into FYROM with the aim of destabilising the country. These groups, come from Kosovo, consist of UCK units,

come from Kosovo, are engaged in drugs trafficking, smuggling, illegal arms shipments and the illegal trade in people and recently have sought to acquire a political facade, involving themselves in plots to undermine efforts to normalise the situation in Kosovo. However, it is necessary and politically indispensable to ensure the stability, peace and security of a state such as FYROM which has repeatedly acted responsibly in the Kosovo crisis, and in the region in general. Furthermore, it is assumed that the bodies responsible for the administration of Kosovo are answerable for their actions to the European Union.

What measures does the Commission intend to take to put an end to the efforts by these circles to destabilise FYROM?

Has the Commission checked whether cooperation ties have been established between these groups and the peculiar authority which has been established in Kosovo?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

The Commission is not aware of the specific incidents to which the Honourable Member refers. It would, however, observe that the UCK/KLA was demilitarised and disbanded in September 1999 to the satisfaction of the international military administration in Kosovo.

The bodies responsible for the administration of Kosovo to which the Honourable Member refers are, as regards the international civil administration, the United Nations Mission in Kosovo (UNMiK) and, as regards the international military administration, KFOR. These are established under United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 1244 and are, contrary to the Honourable Member's assumption, answerable not to the Union but to the United Nations. Obviously, those parts of the international civil administration which are in receipt of Community funds are answerable to the appropriate Union authorities as regards the use of such funds.

As regards the cooperation ties which the Honourable Member alleges to have been established between the groupings to which he refers and the peculiar authority which has been established in Kosovo, the Commission would like to recall that the authority in Kosovo as described above is based on a UN Security Council Resolution and is in no way peculiar. The Commission is equally sure that the Honourable Member is not implying that this international civil administration is engaged in illegal or questionable activities.

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concerns about the importance of the stability, peace and security of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and is currently engaged in negotiations with that state on the establishment of the first of the new stabilisation and association agreements.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3046/00

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 September 2000)

Subject: EU centres for study and research

A number of EU Centres for Study and Research exist around the world, of which several are located in the USA.

What is their purpose?

What funding do they receive?

What have they achieved over the past two years?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2000)

There are many study and research centres around the world whose names contain the word European, including some in the United States.

However, the only research centre directly funded by the Union is the Joint Research Centre (JRC), which is a Directorate-General of the Commission. The JRC is located at a number of sites around the Union: Ispra (Italy), Karlsruhe (Germany), Petten (Netherlands), Seville (Spain) and Geel (Belgium).

The JRC helps implement the Framework Programme for research and technological development. Its activities are covered in annual reports, the two most recent having the reference numbers COM(1999) 222 final and COM(2000) 366 final.

Further information on the Joint Research Centre can be found on the JRC website at http://www.jrc.cec.eu.int
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2517/00

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) and Sergio Berlato (UEN) to the Commission

(2 August 2000)

Subject: Protection of pure olive oil

Commissioner Fischler has admitted that the question on the search for an analytical method to ascertain the presence of hazelnut oil in olive oil is a valid one.

Does the Commission therefore not consider that once such a method has been determined and incorporated into Regulation (EEC) No 2568/91, its aim should be to safeguard the various types of pure olive oil rather than to please the multinationals?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 2000)

A method of analysis is laid down in Community legislation only after it has been tested several times and has been subject to many rigorous laboratory tests to analyse its level of precision.

To this end the Commission calls on the assistance of expert chemists from each Member State, who meet regularly in Brussels. They are professionals from universities or research centres and their standing in their particular fields of expertise is beyond question. As already stated in the reply to the Honourable Member's earlier written question P-1763/00(1), these experts together with other researchers from the main non-member countries that produce olive oil also take part in research work coordinated by the International Olive Oil Council (IOOC), based in Madrid. It must be stressed that the IOOC is an international organisation which counts the Community among its members and is part of the United Nations.

Under the circumstances, the analytical methods laid down in Commission regulations are chosen precisely because of their scientific objectivity vis-à-vis the physical and chemical problems to be overcome. They do not work towards political ends and so do not pursue the two goals referred to in the question.

(1) OJ C 72 E, 6.3.2001, p. 111.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3367/00

by Linda McAvan (PSE) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Pig welfare

Article 6 of Council Directive 91/630/EEC(1) laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs requires the Commission by 1 October 1997 to submit to the Council a report on intensive pig-rearing systems. Article 6 requires the Commission's report to be accompanied by appropriate proposals.

On a number of occasions the Commission has stated that it will publish its report and proposals shortly. When does the Commission plan to publish the report and proposals required by Article 6 of Council Directive 91/630/EEC?

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, p. 33.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 2000)

The Commission report is nearly finalized and will be submitted before the end of this year to the Council and to the Parliament accompanied by a proposal to amend Directive 91/630/EEC with a view to improving the welfare conditions of pigs.

Information available to the Commission confirms that in recent years Member States have adopted legislation for the protection of pigs providing additional measures to those required under Council Directive 91/630/EEC.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2660/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Council

(3 August 2000)

Subject: Persecution in the Moluccas

The European Parliament has already adopted two resolutions on human rights violations in the Moluccas (Indonesia), the first in January 2000 and the second in July 2000, in order to protest against the persecution of Christians and the devastation of villages inhabited by Indonesians practising the Christian religion, violations which have now been going on for months.

Can the Council indicate what it has done on the basis of those two resolutions to bring about a genuine improvement in the situation?

Reply

(30 November 2000)

The Council has on several occasions, in particular through the Heads of Mission of the EU Member States represented in Jakarta, raised with the Indonesian authorities including the President and the Vice-President of the Republic its deep concern at the inter-community conflict in the Moluccas. It has called, inter alia, for free access for humanitarian organisations. The Community is giving consideration to a further contribution of some 2 million in humanitarian assistance to displaced persons.

A European mission composed of representatives from the Embassies of nine Member States and the European Commission in Jakarta visited the Moluccas from 12 to 19 October 2000. Open as it was to all European Union Member States represented in Jakarta, the mission met the major players in the community, i.e. the administrative authorities and police, the Muslim, Protestant and Catholic religious communities and the international and Indonesian NGOs. The series of contacts was completed by visits to the refugee camps in Ambon and Ternate. The mission confirmed that the tension and violence in the Moluccas was damaging the exercise of people's fundamental rights, a matter of some concern for the Union. The members of the mission came to the conclusion that support for humanitarian aid projects could foster a return to normality, especially if it took place within a proper framework of dialogue with the parties concerned.

The Council would assure the Honourable Member that it will remain vigilant regarding any development in the situation in question.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2840/00

by María Izquierdo Rojo (PSE) to the Council

(6 September 2000)

Subject: Community patent and damage to Spain's interests

The Lisbon European Council agreed (as stated in its conclusions) that the Community patent should come into existence before the end of 2001 and the French Presidency is planning to begin discussions on the matter at forthcoming meetings in September 2000. However, the Commission has adopted a legislative proposal which, in its current form, is clearly damaging to Spain and which will have serious implications for the Spanish Patent Office. The proposal unacceptably downgrades Spanish in favour of German and, according to Spain's permanent representative to the EU, it has been drawn up in a form which is highly convenient to France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the Commission, under the pretext of reducing the cost of patenting inventions to a minimum.

In the light of the above facts, will the Council answer the following questions?

1. Does the Council accept that the forthcoming regulation on the Community patent may have serious implications for the Spanish Patent and Trademark Office as it currently exists?

2. Will the Council ensure that, under the forthcoming regulation, responsibilities are distributed fairly?

3. Will the Council ensure that the regulation does no damage to Spain's interests, as seems likely from the draft version which has been adopted by the Commission?

4. Will Spanish be included as one of the working languages or will it be downgraded in favour of German?

Reply

(16 November 2000)

The proposal for a Council Regulation on the Community patent, which the Commission submitted to the Council on 2 August 2000, has as its legal basis Article 308 of the EC Treaty, which requires consultation of the European Parliament. The Honourable Member will understand that the Council cannot state its position on the substance of the Commission proposal before such consultation.

The Council would also point out that Article 308 requires unanimity by the Member States in the Council to act on the Commission proposal.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2873/00

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

(14 September 2000)

Subject: The Cohesion Fund and the project for constructing a new airport in Madrid in addition to the previous investment of ESP 300 billion in the existing Madrid airport

The Minister of Public Works of the Spanish state recently announced that not only ESP 300 billion would be spent on constructing two new runways and a new terminal building at the existing Madrid airport but work would, in addition, begin imminently on a new airport in Madrid (an airport for southern Spain), the evident intention being to centralise air traffic within Spanish territory even more than at present, thus adversely affecting the airport facilities of other regions of the Spanish state, such as Galicia, whose inhabitants are obliged to change plane numerous times, starting in Madrid, if they wish to fly anywhere in Europe. Is the Commission aware of this project of the Spanish government? Is the Spanish government using Cohesion Fund monies to construct the new runways and the new terminal building of the existing Madrid airport? Following this extraordinary spending, will the Spanish government be able to use Cohesion Fund monies to construct the new airport in Madrid, in a centralising act running totally counter to any prospect of territorial and economic balance within the Spanish state?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 2000)

No Cohesion Fund aid has been given, or any applied for, for construction of new runways or a new terminal building at the existing Madrid airport.

The Commission cannot take a decision on an application for aid before it is actually made by the national authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2465/00

by Mary Banotti (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 July 2000)

Subject: European standards for the embalming and transfer of remains

The question of repatriation of human remains within the EU was dramatically brought to my attention with the case of the transfer of the body of a person who died suddenly in Portugal to Ireland. The body arrived in such an advanced state of decay that the family were unable to view the body before the funeral, thus causing unnecessary added stress to the family concerned.

Given that EU citizens are moving more and more frequently between Member States both for work and leisure and that inevitably there will be an increase in the number of transfers of remains from one EU Member State to another, would the Commission consider looking into the provision of a regulation governing standards in the field of embalming and transfer of remains in order to avoid such distressing circumstances arising in the future?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2000)

The Commission regrets the distress suffered by the family of the dead person to whom the question refers.

Regulations governing the transfer of remains of dead persons are laid down in the International Agreement of Berlin (1937, No 4391 League of Nations Treaty Series) and by the Agreement on the transfer of corpses of the Council of Europe concluded in September 1973. As stated in its reply to Written Questions E-0144/95 and E-0428/95 by Mr White(1), the Commission, following extensive consultations with all parties concerned, concluded that detailed harmonisation of national rules in this area over and above what already exists is neither desirable nor necessary and would not be justified from the point of view of subsidiarity and proportionality.

(1) OJ C 202, 7.8.1995.