ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0984/01

by Ulpu Iivari (PSE) to the Commission

(30 March 2001)

Subject: Poor quality of text used in an information campaign supported by the EU

The European Union and an organisation called Intercitrus are cooperating in the running of a marketing campaign to encourage the consumption of citrus fruit, part of which takes the form of the website www.orangefruit.net. The whole of the Finnish-language text on this site is linguistically clumsy and in many respects totally substandard. Even the European Union is referred to there as Euroopan yhteisyys.

The following excerpts give the flavour of the whole:

Since 1998, the European Commonwealth and Intercitrus have placed a bet on health, they have made different campaigns advertising the healthy and tasty qualities of natural oranges and clementines.

Disseminating the qualities of oranges and clementines and explaining the advantages of eating them to the customers, these are the objectives of the campaign, funded by Intercitrus and the European Commonwealth is also involved in the funding.

According to the website, at least 4,6 million have been spent on the campaign. It is running in eight Member States.

In the light of the above:

1. What measures does the Commission propose to take to improve the quality of the language used in this campaign?

2. What measures does the Commission propose to take to ensure that the language used in all campaigns receiving support from the European Union is error-free and comprehensible and thus that these campaigns also promote, inter alia, the objectives of the European Year of Languages 2001?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 May 2001)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that the dynamic link to the Finnish text from the home page of the Internet site in question ('orangefruit.net') has been severed. The Commission has also asked InterCitrus to remove the page in Finnish as well. Obviously the Community will not be part-financing the Finnish part of the site in any way.

The Commission would like to stress that this promotion campaign is under indirect management, which means that the designated competent body (in this case the Spanish Ministry of Agriculture) in normally responsible for checking the promotion programme. However, the Commission retains a monitoring role, which enabled it to take the action referred to above.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1150/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 April 2001)

Subject: Prices of farm products

Further to the Commission's answer to Question E-0338/01(1), will the Commission now estimate the percentage difference between the prices of the five most significant farm products within the Community at the end of each year for the last five years, based on the specific and updated information both on internal markets and on world markets mentioned in the answer?

The end is defined as the last trading day of the year, ideally at the end of the trading day. If the Commission feels that this information may be unrepresentative, the Commission is invited to supplement this information with end month figures for each month of the year for the last five years.

(1) OJ C 235 E, 21.8.2001, p. 180.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2001)

The percentage difference between the domestic prices and the world prices of the five most significant farm products within the Community at the end of each year for the last five years is given in the table below. It is based on the specific and updated information on prices both on internal markets and on world markets, used in the framework of the management of the common market organisations. This comparison is only illustrative of the situation existing at a given date as it depends on many factors, such as the particular market, the product specification, the/USD exchange rate, etc.

Difference between the domestic and world prices for some farm commodities at the end of each year:

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1184/01

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 April 2001)

Subject: Aid to Afghanistan

According to recently published information the Commission has approved 3 million of humanitarian aid to Afghanistan.

According to the same sources the purpose of that aid is to safeguard the supply of medical and food aid to the most vulnerable inhabitants of Kabul and other cities.

Afghanistan is currently in a highly precarious situation, particular as regards the lack of respect for human rights.

In view of the above, could the Commission specify what action it has taken in order to ensure that the 3 million in question actually reach the most vulnerable people in the country's major cities?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 2001)

The Commission has made substantial donations of humanitarian aid to Afghanistan in recent years. In 1999, the European Community's Humanitarian Office (ECHO) allocated 19 million addressing the needs of the victims of drought and ongoing conflict. From the budget line to aid uprooted people in Asia and Latin America, the Directorate general for External Relations (RELEX) allocated 27,5 million in 1999 and 16,5 million in 2000 to assist Afghan Internally Displaced People (IDP) and Afghan refugees in Pakistan and Iran.

In February 2000, ECHO allocated 2,5 million for IDPs in Afghanistan and Afghan refugees in Pakistan. Moreover, an intervention plan amounting to 13 million is in the process of being completed. Operations address mainly the general food insecurity in the country as well as assistance to displaced people.

The aid provided aims to alleviate the suffering of people affected by drought and civil conflict mainly through food security operations in urban and rural areas, provision of water (wells), primary health care, a nutritional programme for women and children and emergency assistance programmes for IDPs (tents, blankets ).

These essentially humanitarian operations are implemented through operational partners such as non-governmental organisations (NGOs), international organisations, and the Red Cross family and United Nations (UN) agencies. Following ECHO's mandate which specifically envisages support to the most vulnerable, the choice of operations to be financed is mainly guided by the focus of activities on those most in need and by the inclusion in the proposed operations of mechanisms such as monitoring provisions, selection criteria, pre-assessment and ex-post evaluation indicators, to ensure that those targeted for aid are actually reached. Furthermore, ECHO has field experts in the country who also follow very closely the ongoing projects to ensure correct delivery of aid.

Finally, the Member of the Commission responsible for Development and Humanitarian aid is planning a mission to Afghanistan in September 2001 to get a direct impression of the situation and the Commission's humanitarian response.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1040/01

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

(3 April 2001)

Subject: Spanish central government's budget dogmatism, imposing a zero deficit by law on the state budget and on the budgets of the autonomous communities

Does the Commission consider it appropriate and necessary or legitimate, with a view to complying with the Stability and Growth Pact adopted by the Amsterdam European Council in 1997, that a government, in this case the Spanish government, should impose a zero deficit by law on the drawing-up of the state and autonomous community budgets, ignoring, in the latter case, their constitutionally guaranteed autonomy?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2001)

Spain, as a member of the Monetary Union, has committed itself to respect a medium-term objective for the general government budgetary position of close to balance or in surplus. This objective was established in the Stability and Growth Pact(1). It is broadly accepted that the achievement of this goal provides a stable macroeconomic framework on a sound basis and contributes to improve the medium-term prospects of the Spanish economy.

The Council Opinion on the January 2001 updated stability programme of Spain encouraged the continuation of fiscal consolidation and considered that the budgetary adjustment would be facilitated by its being shared by all levels of government.

However, the Commission does not advocate any specific form regarding the necessary internal co-ordination between the different general government sub-sectors so as to fulfil the objectives of the Stability and Growth Pact. This issue is for the decision of each Member State.

Likewise, the Commission cannot assess the constitutionality of the draft budget reform law (Law of Budgetary Stability) currently under discussion in the Spanish Parliament.

(1) OJ C 236, 2.8.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1665/01

by Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Transport of works of art

The transport of works of art is connected with the organisation of public exhibitions and events, and is therefore subject to public procurement procedures. The Commission is working to end discriminatory practices that prevent firms from competing for contracts in other Member States. German museums, for example, have been known to insist that a German firm be responsible for all transport of its works of art, even where a contract procedure and exhibition take place in Spain. It thus occurs that a Spanish firm may win a contract in Spain, but the German museums refuse to have their works of art transported by any firm other than their preferred German firm, thereby refusing to accept the result of a tender procedure organised in Spain.

Is the Commission aware of the effect of the practice of German museums on public contracts in States such as Spain? If not, will it devote particular attention to this question in view of the value of the works transported and with a view to achieving the objectives of the Single Market?

Is it acceptable that a State that respects Community directives on public procurement should have to accept that German museums and the public authorities that run them should oblige Spanish bidders to use a German agent? Is it acceptable that the German firm that is the preferred agent should participate in tender procedures, directly or indirectly?

In view of the need to achieve uniform regulation of the transport of works of art with regard to the requirements that firms providing these services must fulfil, does the Commission see the need to draw up a proposal on this question?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 July 2001)

The Commission is unaware of any discriminatory practice by German museums with regard to the transport of works of art.

It will not fail to act on the Honourable Member's request that the competent authorities be questioned on this matter and that any impact the matter may have on the application of Community law on public procurement and the freedom to supply services be assessed.

As the Honourable Member points out, both the Community directives on public procurement and Article 49 (ex Article 59) of the EC Treaty prohibit direct or indirect discrimination based on nationality.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0225/01

by Rosemarie Müller (PSE) to the Commission

(29 January 2001)

Subject: Build-up of resistance resulting from excessive use of antibiotics in farming

Recently there have been reports in the media that antibiotics (in particular azoles) which are used on a large scale in farming can very easily cause a build-up of resistance which could jeopardise the effect of antibiotics used for treating humans.

1. Does the accelerated build-up of resistance resulting from the use of antibiotics in farming jeopardise the effect of antibiotics used for treating humans?

2. Would it be possible to reduce substantially the use of antibiotics in farming?

3. Does the Commission feel there is a need for legislation in this respect?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2001)

Antibiotic resistance is a complex issue that requires co-ordinated actions to be taken in a number of both legislative and non-legislative fields concerning human medicine, animal welfare, health and nutrition and plant health.

Inappropriate use of antibiotics including in farmed animals can contribute to increased or accelerated resistance in pathogenic bacteria for humans. For this reason all antibiotics which are or may be used as human or veterinary medicine for therapeutical purposes have been banned for use as growth promoters.

Implementation of prudent use policies and guidelines for therapy to ensure rational usage of antimicrobials is widely stimulated by competent bodies, including the Community, the Office international des épizooties (OIE), World Health Organisation (WHO) and national authorities. Resistance monitoring programmes are being implemented to study and guide the effect of these policies.

In line with the conclusions of the opinion of the Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) on microbial resistance of 28 May 1999 the Commission is of the opinion that further reduction in the use of antibiotics in human medicine, veterinary medicine, animal production and plant protection should be possible. Indeed in some sectors improved hygiene conditions and development of new vaccines have already contributed to the reduction of their need.

Actions to address the antibiotic resistance issue should form part of a more comprehensive strategy. A Commission communication on such a strategy will be presented later this year.

The strategy will refer to possible proposals for new legislation, for example, to phase out those antibiotics still authorised as growth promoters in farm animals. This phase out process must be planned and co-ordinated since precipitous actions could have repercussions for animal health. At the same time it is a prerequisite for the replacement of the antibiotics that alternatives are available thus avoiding possible overprescription and illegal uses as well as environmental problems by using inappropriate substitutes.

This proposal is being considered for presentation this year.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0528/01

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: Economic forecasts

On 19 January 2001, Commissioner Solbes stated that oil prices are lower than expected, and the euro exchange rate has improved vis-à-vis the working hypotheses which were used by the Commission in November when drawing up its macroeconomic forecasts.

How and to what extent will these exchange rates affect the Community's macroeconomic fundamentals?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2001)

The Commission forecasts published on 22 November 2000 were based, among other things, on assumptions of an average oil price in 2001 of USD 30 per barrel Brent and a USD/ exchange rate of 0,90. So far in 2001 (up to 13 March) the oil price has been around 12 % lower and the USD/ rate 3 % higher than previously assumed.

These changes to the oil price and exchange rate are not particularly significant and within the normal range of volatility for these variables. If this situation were to prevail over the year, it would have a limited impact on the economic performance of the Community.

In particular:

- inflation should be lower than otherwise with unchanged exchange rates and oil prices. Only taking into account the direct impact on fuel prices (and disregarding possible secondary effects on other consumer prices), an easing of the harmonised consumer price index (HICP) rise of around 0,1 % to 0,2 % could be expected for 2001. The stronger euro would slightly reinforce this effect on headline inflation;

- as regards gross domestic product (GDP) growth, a lower oil price, on the one hand, stimulates real household incomes and business profitability and, thus, consumption and investment. On the other hand, a higher exchange rate weighs on the price competitiveness of exporters, and therefore lowers exports and growth. Hence, the net effect of the changed oil price and exchange rate on GDP growth in 2001 is, to some degree, uncertain.

The changes in oil prices and exchange rates are not the only new elements in the external environment for the Community economy. Most notably, the extent of the American slowdown since late last year was not fully visible at the time of the last Commission forecast.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1654/01

by Prof. Sir Neil MacCormick (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 June 2001)

Subject: Animal welfare and foie gras

Is it the Commission's opinion that the production of foie gras by forcefeeding is compatible with any reasonable conception of animal welfare? Does the Commission contemplate taking any action on the basis of its opinion on this matter?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2001)

The production of foie gras is an accepted and traditional practice in some Member States.

In the Community, Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998(1) establishes the main principles for the protection of all species of animal kept for farming purposes, including those kept for the production of foie gras.

Two recommendations for the protection of ducks and geese bred for the production of foie gras were adopted in June 1999 in the framework of the European Convention for the protection of animals kept for farming purposes.

The recommendations state that the production of foie gras shall be carried out only where it is current practice and that the competent authorities shall monitor this type of production to ensure the implementation of the recommendations. The recommendations also state for the Parties to the Convention to inform the Standing Committee annually of the results obtained and measures taken to improve housing and management procedures and to control the production.

The Member States, all of which are contracting parties to the Convention, are expected to give effect to the recommendations. In addition the Commission will encourage the development of systems for feeding ducks that are less problematic for the welfare of the animals. At present the Commission does not envisage any proposals to oblige changes in feeding practices.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0886/01

by Nuala Ahern (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(27 March 2001)

Subject: Data on quantities of depleted uranium stocks held in each EU Member State

Will the Commission publish up-to-date data on quantities of depleted uranium stocks held in each EU Member State?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2001)

The Commission will publish a table showing the quantities of depleted uranium stocks held in the Community in a report on the operation of the Euratom Safeguards Office, which will be presented in due course. The Commission is, however, not entitled to provide information on the stocks held per Member State without their prior authorisation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0968/01

by Eurig Wyn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(30 March 2001)

Subject: Restricted use of farm vehicles

Can the Commission confirm that the proposed Physical Agents Directive will restrict vehicle use on farms to as little as two or three hours a day?

Does the Commission agree that these proposals are impractical for the majority of farmers?

Does the Commission also agree that these proposals do not take into account the realities of agriculture, in particular at harvest time, and also the difference in size of different farm holdings and therefore differing needs with regards to farm vehicles and the lengths of time for which they are used?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0698/01 and E-0968/01 given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(8 May 2001)

The Commission adopted a proposal for a Directive on the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents in December 1992(1). Further to the opinions of the Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee, the Commission submitted an amended proposal in July 1994(2).

The main characteristic of the proposal had been to provide a general framework for all categories of physical agents in order to establish a clear and coherent prevention strategy capable of protecting the health and safety of workers exposed to these agents.

The proposal deals with those physical agents for which there is sufficient scientific evidence for Community action - noise (risks to hearing); vibrations (risks to the hand, arm and whole body); electromagnetic fields and optical radiation (risks to health from induced currents in the body, shock and burn hazards and from absorption of thermal energy).

The Commission's proposal does not limit the use of vehicles on farms nor does it specify emission limit values for machines.

In addition, the socio-economic impact study made by the Commission at the time of proposal does not show any unreasonable burden imposed on farmers when applying the prevention measures specified.

(1) OJ C 77, 18.3.1993.

(2) COM(94) 284 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0570/01

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 February 2001)

Subject: Statement of Assurance for DG Transport and Energy

At the meeting of the Committee on Budgetary Control of 7 February 2001, Commissioner Fischler stated that the exact error rate in 1999 for financial transactions within DG Agriculture was 3,06 %.

In the spirit of cooperation and transparency between the European institutions, could the Commissioner with special responsibility for Transport and Energy provide a similar figure for financial transactions within that Directorate-General? If not, why not?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-0553/01, E-0554/01, E-0555/01, E-0556/01, E-0557/01, E-0558/01, E-0559/01, E-0560/01, E-0561/01, E-0562/01, E-0563/01, E-0564/01, E-0565/01, E-0566/01, E-0567/01, E-0568/01, E-0569/01 and E-0570/01 given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(11 April 2001)

The Commission wishes to remind the Honourable Member that the Court of Auditors does not provide an error rate in the framework of its Statement of Assurance for the general budget as it considers that it is an oversimplification to gauge the success of the Commission's financial management on the basis of this single indicator.

Thus the Court decided three years ago to stop the publication of a global error rate and to develop its Statement of Assurance methodology in order to provide to the Discharge Authority with more detailed descriptive information.

Moreover, the Court of Auditors has said on several occasions that if it was to generate error rates at a lower level (eg. by sector or by Directorate general) from a general error rate, these would be wholly misleading. The restricted number of transactions that the Court audits does not make it possible for it to determine a valid error rate at this lower level.

Consequently, the Commission is not in a position to provide to the Honourable Member the requested information.