ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2670/98

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council

(1 September 1998)

Subject: EU aid programme for officials

At present there are 11 different programmes for promoting various activities involving officials (training, exchange of officials, exchange of information, improved cooperation). This proliferation of cooperation programmes is not in conformity with the repeated demand for transparency, effectiveness and proximity to the general public. This fragmentation has also been criticized accordingly in many quarters.

1. What aims do the individual programmes pursue and what purpose do they fulfill? How exactly do they differ from one another?

2. Is a review of these programmes planned during the presidency?

3. If so, what form is it due to take?

4. If not, what are the reasons for not carrying out such a review?

5. Since these programmes have in part already been opened to the applicant countries as well, I have the following further question: Could the Council give a detailed breakdown showing in which of these programmes participants from the CEECs are already involved?

Reply

(22 October 1998)

The Council would point out that the various Community programmes of actions for officials are administered by the Commission in cooperation with the Member States or the non-Member States concerned. Consequently, it is for the Commission to appreciate whether the aims pursued duly reflect needs in this area. To date, it has not submitted any proposal to review those programmes of actions for officials.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2704/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Maldives

On 18 June 1998 and the days following, the Maldivian authorities began to arrest and interrogate Christian believers living on the island. Reliable sources estimate that as many as 50 Maldivians suspected of being Christian believers have been arrested since that time.

Two of the Maldivians arrested on 18 June have been identified as Aneesa Hussain, aged 32, and Aminath Moonisa, aged 17, both of Pareeru-ge, Malé, Republic of Maldives. These two women have openly acknowledged that they are Christians, which is a crime under Maldivian law. We are particularly concerned about the safety of these women - reliable sources indicate that Aneesa Hussain has been physically assaulted and her life threatened.

Since the Maldives are members of the UN, and therefore bound in principle by Article 18 of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, which stipulates freedom of religion, and since Europe provides an important contribution to the economy of the Maldives, particularly through tourism, will the Commission bring pressure to bear on the Maldivian authorities to release Ms Hussain and Ms Moonisa and other Christians known to be in goal for their religious beliefs?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

The Commission is aware of the recent arrest of a number of Christians in the Republic of Maldives. The Commission delegation in Sri Lanka, accredited to the Maldives, is following the matter closely and has taken up directly with the Maldives high commissioner in Colombo, the case of the two Maldivian women to whom the Honourable Member refers.

The high commissioner has informed the Commission delegation that the two named women are under arrest while their case is investigated. The women are held in an open prison island about 5 kilometres from Male. Any suggestions of threats or violence being used against them are claimed to be baseless and the delegation was offered the opportunity to visit the women.

In its relations with third countries, the Commission places the greatest importance on respect for human rights and fundamental liberties. It is concerned that the Republic of Maldives whilst bound by Article 18 of the United nations Declaration of human rights, nevertheless forbids, through its constitution, the practice by its citizens of any religion other than Islam.

The Commission believes that formal responses and actions on matters such as this are most appropriately made by the Community and its Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2042/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(7 July 1998)

Subject: Continual fines and charges imposed on Greek international road haulage operators

Greek international road hauliers are facing enormous problems in passing through the FYROM and Albania. The authorities of these countries are constantly imposing excess weight charges, exorbitant transit levies, decontamination levies etc. on Greek road hauliers, while hundreds of Bulgarian, FYROM and Albanian lorries (which are in a terrible condition) are allowed to move freely on Greece's road network.

Will the Commission say whether it is considering the possibility of making representations to the authorities of the countries which are continually causing problems for EU road hauliers (and singling out Greeks in particular) to cease adopting a provocative policy towards EU international road hauliers and constantly fining them, especially since these countries receive generous aid from the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1998)

The imposition on Greek hauliers of transit and disinfection taxes in Albania and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia is principally made, for the time being under the terms of bilateral agreements or arrangements concluded between individual Member States and the third country in question.

In the case of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, however, the relevant provisions of the agreement between the Community and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia in transport(1) also apply. The agreement provides that the taxation of road vehicles, tolls and other charges must be non-discriminatory. It also provides that until 31 December 2002 at the latest, road vehicles that do not comply with the existing standards of the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia may be subject to a special non-discriminatory charge that reflects the damage caused by additional axle weight.

The Commission monitors the correct application of these provisions. Any problem notified to the Commission, may be raised in the framework of the relevant transport or co-operation Committees in order to reach mutually acceptable solutions. If Greek operators have reason to believe that these provisions are not applied correctly, they should immediately provide detailed information to the Commission.

Financial support by the Community, including European investment bank (EIB) lending, is granted to the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania and other countries in Eastern Europe to assist with the improvement of the main transit routes to Community standards, with a view to abolishing any special charges levied on overweight vehicles once these roads have been upgraded.

Where the roadworthiness of vehicles from the countries mentioned by the Honourable Member is concerned, the national authorities of any state where these vehicles circulate have the right to take off the road any vehicles that are deemed unsafe.

(1) OJ L 348, 18.12.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2412/98

by Sir Jack Stewart-Clark (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Relief from customs duty for charities

According to Council Regulation (EEC) 918/83(1) of 28 March 1983 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty, charities may apply for relief of import duty for medical equipment manufactured outside the EU.

The Royal Marsden NHS Trust in my constituency of East Sussex and Kent South submitted a claim which was approved by the UK Department of Trade and Industry but was disallowed by the Dutch authorities.

Is there a time limit within which claims are to be submitted?

If so, what is the duration of this period?

Will retrospective claims be eligible to receive relief?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

Commission Regulation (EEC) 2290/83(2), which lays down the provisions for implementing Articles 50 to 59 of Council Regulation (EEC) 918/83 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty, stipulates that authorisations for importing goods duty free shall be valid for six months. As things stand, such authorisation cannot be requested retrospectively, i.e. when the goods have actually been imported.

However, if such authorisation has been given when the goods are imported but is not presented in support of the customs declaration, subparagraph 2 of Article 256(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) 2454/93 of 2 July 1993(3) laying down certain provisions for implementing Council Regulation (EEC) 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code allows the document authorising import free of duty to be submitted within up to three months from the time the declaration for release into free circulation was accepted.

(1) OJ L 105, 23.4.1983, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 220, 11.8.1983.

(3) OJ L 253, 11.10.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2303/98

by Fernand Herman (PPE) to the Commission

(22 July 1998)

Subject: Equal treatment for European Union citizens

Participants in a recent trip organized by a senior citizens' association noted that admission charges for museums - in this instance, the Doges' Palace in Venice - infringed the principle of equal treatment for all European citizens, as Italian pensioners were admitted free, whereas Belgian pensioners were not.

This is a blatant case of discrimination on the grounds of nationality, which is contrary to the Treaty. What does the Commission, as custodian of the treaties, intend to do to end discrimination of this kind?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 1998)

The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member that the inequality of treatment as between Italian residents and residents of other Member States regarding admission charges to museums might indeed constitute a form of discrimination that was in breach of Articles 6 and 59 of the EC Treaty. It will therefore contact the Italian authorities with a view to obtaining further information.

In a similar case the Court of Justice found that a Member State had failed to fulfil one of its obligations in connection with the imposition of an admission charge for museums in its territory(1).

(1) Case C-45/93 Commission v Spain [1994] ECRI, 911.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3122/98

by Luciano Vecchi (PSE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: Shortcomings of the Commission with regard to the EDF project to repair the Goma- Rutsuhuru (phase 1) and the Bukavu-Kavumu (phase 2) roads in the Democratic Republic of Congo (former Zaire)

Because of the recent bloody civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo, in November 1996 the Commission ordered the EDF contract to repair the Goma-Rutsuhuru (phase 1) and Bukavu-Kavumu (phase 2) roads to be suspended.

Despite the fact that on 15 December 1997 it definitively rescinded the contract with Astaldi S.p.a., it has still not paid the compensation due.

What are the reasons for this delay, and when and how does it intend to duly compensate the contractor?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1998)

The Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the fact that this was a special situation provided for in Article 63 of the 7th European Development Fund (EDF) financial regulation of 29 July 1991, in which the EDF's chief authorising officer replaced the EDF's national authorising officer. While the Commission acted as the awarding authority for this contract, it did so not on its own behalf but in the place of the government of the state concerned.

In acting as it did, the Commission complied with the conditions governing the works contract with Astaldi.

However, it is also worth recalling that it was not the Commission who decided to rescind the contract but Astaldi, by letter dated 9 January 1998. Neither then nor since has the Commission received an update of the statements of claim it presented on 2 May 1997.

Given the situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo a site visit will be conducted with the company as soon as conditions allow in order to establish a final statement of account.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2783/98

by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(14 September 1998)

Subject: Infringement of the WHO/UNICEF code of conduct on the marketing of human milk substitutes by European firms

Is the Commission familiar with the report "Breaking the Rules, Europe" on infringement of the WHO/UNICEF code of conduct on the marketing of human milk substitutes, and is the Commission familiar with the report's criticism of the marketing practices of manufacturers established in the European Union?

Can the Commission indicate what parts of the Council resolution on marketing practices for human milk substitutes have been implemented by the Commission, and what consequences this has for the infringements referred to above?

Can the Commission confirm that the Dutch government has already sought clarification of this matter on two occasions, and can the Commission say why the Dutch government has still not received an answer to its questions?

Answer given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 1998)

The Commission is aware of the report in question produced by a Dutch non-governmental organisation. The report concerns marketing practices in some Member States and in some third countries. The Council Resolution of 18 June 1992(1) on the marketing of breast-milk substitutes in third countries by Community-based manufacturers is not applicable to such practices in Member States.

With this Resolution the Community designated the Commission and its delegations to serve as contact points and receive any complaints or criticisms from the authorities of third countries with respect to the marketing practices of Community based manufacturers. The Commission and its delegations have received no such complaint or criticism from the authorities of a third country which would induce any action in conformity with the above mentioned Council resolution.

The Dutch government has indeed sought clarification of this matter on two occasions. A first letter on 1997 received a reply at the time. A second letter in the summer of 1998 will receive a reply shortly.

(1) OJ C 155, 20.6.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2632/98

by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (V) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Europe-Chile Business Foundation

The remarks on budget line B7-311 refer to a "Europe-Chile Business Foundation", its purpose being "to promote mutual economic relations".

Can the Commission provide further information on:

1. the objectives this foundations pursues,

2. the members of its supervisory board,

3. the resources that have actually been transferred to this foundation,

4. the specific projects of the foundation that have been assisted?

Answer given by Mr Marín on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 1998)

1. The Europe-Chile Business Foundation was set up in 1992 to promote contacts between Chilean and European businesses and foster the access of the latter to the Chilean market.

Article 2 of its statutes states that the Foundation's purpose is to promote and strengthen economic and industrial cooperation and the transfer of technology between the European Community and the Republic of Chile. This is to be achieved by the establishment and management of budget headings and projects to build Chilean firms' capacities in the spheres of management, innovation, staff training, production and marketing.

In particular, the Foundation's role is to establish mechanisms for increasing exchanges between public and private institutions or agencies and individuals in the Community's Member States and Chile, increase economic, technological, trade and social cooperation and provide back-up for third parties carrying out schemes pursuing the same or similar ends, with an overriding emphasis on SMEs in the manufacturing and service sectors.

The Foundation also acts as Chile's Eurocentre for business cooperation.

2. Last year the Foundation was restructured with a view to simplifying its administration, appointing a single executive director and drawing up an annual activity plan to ensure the consistency and continuity of the proposed activities. The board currently consists of a chairman and vice-chairman (both Chilean) plus twelve advisers drawn from business and financial circles in Chile and Europe. Their term of office is two years.

3. The Foundation was set up with public-private funding of ECU 12 million, half of it provided by the Community. Drawn from budget heading B7-5073 for support to non-governmental organisations working in Chile, this sum was distributed in three equal instalments for the 1992, 1993 and 1994 budget years.

4. Projects run by the Foundation and financed by the Community under budget heading B7-311 for economic cooperation with the Asian and Latin American countries include the Programa Biotecnólogico Chile/Europa, which received ECU 912 000 in 1995, and the Programa de formación en el sector túrismo (Formatur), for which ECU 409 000 was made available in 1996. In its role as a Eurocentre, the Foundation received ECU 36 000 in 1996 and ECU 30 000 this year.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1452/98

by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Community funding of hydraulic projects in Spain

1. Can the Commission supply a comparative table concerning ERDF spending up to the end of 1997 under the CSF for Spain on measure 6.1 (hydrological plan) as contrasted with expenditure on major hydraulic projects in Portugal?

2. Can the Commission also draw up a comparative table of the conditions attached by the ERDF to these payments in the case of each of the two Member States?

Joint answer to Written QuestionsE-1447/98 and P-1452/98 given by MrsWulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(20 May 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2790/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 September 1998)

Subject: European-wide leagues

What does the Commission intend to do to encourage the formation of European-wide leagues in various sports?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(16 November 1998)

Most major sports federations have long been organising European competitions. Football, for instance, has the champions league and basketball the European league. If the Honourable Member's question is about the creation of European leagues outside the federations, the Commission is not planning any particular action to encourage such moves. This is a matter for the sports organisations. The Commission has neither a legal basis nor the political interest to interfere. Nevertheless, the Commission stresses the importance of keeping real solidarity between elite and grass roots sport. Furthermore, where the rules or actions of existing or new sports organisations fall within the scope of the competition rules of the EC Treaty, the Commission has the duty to ensure that these rules are respected.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2430/98

by Frédéric Striby (I-EDN) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Road transport - harmonisation of conditions of competition

The French Ministry of Transport tabled a "memorandum" with the Commission on 19 November 1997 asking for driving and rest times to be harmonised through the incorporation of times other than driving times in Regulation 3820/85(1).

Has the Commission considered these proposals? What are the current European rules on this matter?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 1998)

On 19 November 1997, the French government submitted a memorandum to the Council for European harmonisation of social rules in road transport. The memorandum made suggestions in three areas: regulations of all periods of activities in road transport particularly for drivers; the introduction of obligatory professional training for all drivers; and a harmonisation of enforcement measures and penalties.

The Commission took note of the suggestions and indeed is actively engaged in addressing all three areas. Firstly, in the absence of an agreement between the Social Partners on Working Time, the Commission is drawing up its own proposals for Community-wide rules covering "mobile" workers in road haulage. The Commission also intends to propose to extend the Working Time Directive (93/104) to cover non-mobile workers. Secondly, a Commission communication on driver training is in preparation. Thirdly, the Commission is gathering information from the Member States to form the basis of a report on the efficiency and effectiveness of enforcement levels and current penalties.

(1) OJ L 370, 31.12.1985, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3155/98

by Felipe Camisón Asensio (PPE) to the Council

(19 October 1998)

Subject: Natural gas consumption

Recent data shows that the consumption of natural gas is being reduced significantly in Member States such a Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, France, Finland and Austria, while it is increasing significantly in Greece and Spain. Does the Council know of any socio-economic reasons for this difference? In this connection also, what are the Council's forecasts with regard to the consumption of natural gas in the region of Extremadura?

Reply

(20/21 December 1998)

Consumption of natural gas has varied over the years and will continue to do so due to different factors, including weather. However, the general trend in the European Community indicates a steady growth. The Council expects this trend to be reinforced by the entry into force of the Directive on natural gas.

The Council has not discussed the consumption of natural gas in any specific region.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2408/98

by Leonie van Bladel (UPE) and James Janssen van Raay (UPE) to the Council

(28 July 1998)

Subject: Nationality of the Surinamese December murderers

1. Is the Council aware of the judgment of the Amsterdam Court, which stated that the Netherlands Public Prosecutor "had not done his homework" in the investigation into the nationality of those who were responsible for or accessories to the December murders in Suriname in 1982?

2. Does the Council realize that the wrongful laconic attitude of the Netherlands Public Prosecutor or the Netherlands' political parties in the matter of the investigation into the massacre in Suriname in 1982, in which murderers and accomplices of Dutch nationality may well have been involved, although the Public Prosecutor has acted as if the investigation concerned a case of a stolen bicycle, is resulting in a steady decline in the European citizen's confidence in the legal system and in politics?

3. Does the Council not feel that the Netherlands Public Prosecutor should do his utmost to discover precisely what was the nationality of those responsible for the murders in Suriname on 8 December 1982 and the then nationality of their accomplices?

4. Does the Council subscribe to the view that the Netherlands Minister for Justice bears sole responsibility for what the Amsterdam Court describes as the total failure of the investigation conducted by the Netherlands Public Prosecutor?

5. Does the Council believe that action should be taken as a result of the failure of the policy pursued by the Netherlands judiciary, and if so, what action?

Reply

(27 November 1998)

The Council is not in a position to answer the Honourable Member's questions which do not come under the competence of the European Union.