ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3239/98

by Marjo Matikainen-Kallström (PPE) to the Commission

(26 October 1998)

Subject: Assistance to victims of crime in the European Union

According to reports in the Finnish media, the crime victims service which was set up in Finland in 1994 is to be placed on a permanent footing. At present it is operated by volunteers, coordinated by the Finnish Red Cross.

The service has proved extremely necessary. In the course of the public debate, the possibility has been raised that it could be broadened through European coordination.

How will the Commission ascertain the scope for assisting victims of crime through Community policies? What view does the Commission take of the idea that crime victim services operating in the European Union could receive Community funding?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(16 December 1998)

In order to address the issue of victims of crime in Europe, the Commission has included the issue in its work programme for 1999, when it will initiate appropriate consultations with a view to taking subsequent initiatives for strengthening the situation of victims in Europe.

The Commission does not consider that Community funding for victim services should be the norm. The main responsibility for funding victim services is with the Member States, which have voluntarily subscribed to international obligations to provide adequate services of this nature.

The Commission has, however, on occasion supported financially individual projects in the field of victims of crimes in the context of its Grotius, STOP and Daphne programmes.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2777/98

by Johanna Maij-Weggen (PPE) to the Commission

(14 September 1998)

Subject: Prison sentence imposed on Akin Birdal, chairman of IHD, the Turkish human rights organisation

Is the Commission aware that Akin Birdal, chairman of IHD, the Turkish human rights organisation, has been sentenced to one year in prison for "inciting racial hatred", although all he is guilty of doing is writing an article on a peaceful solution to the war with the PKK, on campaigning against torture at police stations and against the burning of Kurdish villages by the Turkish army?

Is the Commission prepared to ask the Turkish government for a clarification of this matter and to call for the release of Akin Birdal?

Answer given by Mr van den Broek on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 1998)

The Commission is aware of the fact that Mr Akin Birdal was convicted and sentenced to a year in prison early this year by a State security tribunal. Following the judgment, Mr Birdal appealed to the Court of Appeal, and was not imprisoned. The Court of Appeal initially quashed the judgment. The case was sent back to the tribunal, which upheld its initial sentence. Mr Birdal appealed a second time to the Court of Appeal, and that case is currently pending. The Court's decision will be final. At present Mr Birdal is in France, for medical reasons.

The Commission stresses that improvement of the human rights situation in Turkey and continuing democratisation are crucial to the development of relations. The Luxembourg European Council, held in December 1997, reiterated that strengthening Turkey's links with the European Union also depended on that country's pursuit of the political and economic reforms on which it had embarked, including the alignment of human rights standards and practices on those in force in the European Union. Despite Ankara's decision to suspend all political dialogue with the EU, the Commission intends to continue to inform its Turkish interlocutors of the EU's views on such issues, including that raised by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3120/98

by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to the Commission

(16 October 1998)

Subject: The Leonia Bank's monopoly

The Leonia Bank, which is owned by the Finnish State, has enjoyed a total monopoly on payment transactions on behalf of the State. These transactions have not been subjected to competitive tendering, although the competition authority and other financial institutions have called for this to be done. According to the most recently published statement on the subject (published on 29 September 1998), the Finance Ministry did not consider it necessary to invite competitive tenders because the bank so far remains wholly owned by the State.

Is it right to exclude healthy competition from the State's financial affairs, particularly the execution of payment transactions, and if not, what will the Commission do to enforce competition?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1998)

The Commission would remind the Honourable Member that monopolies as such are not prohibited. However, in the case of a state monopoly such as the one referred to, Article 90 of the EC Treaty is applicable in so far as it stipulates that, as regards public undertakings and undertakings to which they grant special or exclusive rights, Member States must not enact or maintain in force any measures contrary to the EC Treaty.

In the case of Leonia Bank, the Commission does not possess sufficient information for it to determine whether or not the Community competition rules have been complied with.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2712/98

by Anneli Hulthén (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1998)

Subject: Agricultural aid for small farms

Aid to agriculture in the Community seems to be geared mainly towards larger farms. There are regions in Sweden where small and medium-sized farms predominate. Such farms will find it difficult in future to compete with larger holdings which benefit from support schemes. What prospects does the Commission see for increasing the support provided to smaller farms?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(2 October 1998)

The size of an agricultural enterprise is not always the appropriate indicator of wealth. Small and medium sized farms may, for instance, be specialized in certain production systems or provide additional services which allow an income per hectare or per animal significantly higher than average. Furthermore, families running a small or medium sized farm very often have developed non-farm sources of income. The influence of agricultural income policy is therefore limited in the case of small or medium sized part time farms.

While the Commission has on many occasions expressed its dissatisfaction with the way expenditure is shared between producers, it has proved very difficult to modulate payments in favour of small producers at Community level. Criteria that seem adequate in some situations have negative side-effects in others. For instance, large farms may employ many people and in this case size would not be an adequate criterion of modulation.

What the Commission has proposed in the context of Agenda 2000 is that Member States should be given the power to modulate direct payments according to the specific situation in every Member State but respecting commonly agreed rules. This is an application of the principle of subsidiarity, based on the idea that Member States know the real situation better than the Commission and are capable of defining modulation criteria adapted to their specific problems. Member States may decide to reduce the amounts of direct payments in cases where the labour force used on their holdings falls short of limits to be determined by the Member States.

The Commission also has proposed to introduce a proportional reduction covering all direct payments granted under common market organizations when the sum of these payments exceeds a ceiling of ECU 100 000. This will lead to degressivity in the direct payments big producers can receive per hectare or per animal.

Furthermore, the Community will continue to support structural adaptations in the framework of a renewed rural development policy. In this context, eligibility of part-time farmers for Community support will be increased significantly.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3316/98

by Nelly Maes (ARE) to the Commission

(27 October 1998)

Subject: The Flemish Fertiliser Action Plan (MAP) and Flanders' compliance with Directive 91/676/EEC on nitrates

On 28 May 1995 and 28 October 1997 the Commission wrote to the Kingdom of Belgium concerning the application of Directive 91/676/EEC on nitrates(1) in the Brussels Capital Region and the Flemish Region. Pursuant to Article 169 of the Treaty, the competent authorities were asked to respond to the Commission's remarks on the failure to comply with this directive. In particular, these remarks referred to the failure to identify vulnerable areas, the absence of a code of good agricultural practice, the incorrect and incomplete transposition of the directive into provisions of internal law, the specification of larger quantities of nitrogen applied per hectare and year than permitted (in Flanders 450 kg rather than a maximum of 210 kg as of December 1998!) and the absence of an action programme.

1. How did the competent Belgian, Flemish and/or Brussels authorities react to the letters forwarded by the Commission on 28 May 1995 and 28 October 1997?

2. How far did the competent authorities comply with the Commission's remarks?

3. Is the Commission considering legal steps to force the Flemish Region and Brussels Capital Region to ensure the correct implementation of the directive referred to above? If so, what legal steps? Can the Commission also provide a timetable?

4. What sanctions can the Commission impose in this case?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 1998)

Under Article 155 of the EC Treaty, the Commission must ensure that measures taken by the institutions under the Treaty are applied. To this end, the Commission was required to verify the implementation by the Member States of Council Directive 91/676/EEC of 12 December 1991 concerning the protection of waters against pollution caused by nitrates from agricultural sources.

In this context, the Commission has started infringement proceedings, as provided for in Article 169 of the EC Treaty, against Belgium and decided to issue a reasoned opinion. As the Commission points out in the press release which it issued on that occasion(2), the reasoned opinion raises several problems, in particular the insufficient number of vulnerable areas in Flanders, the lack of surveillance in Brussels and the absence of an action programme for the Walloon region and for Brussels.

If Belgium failed to conform to this reasoned opinion, the Commission might have to bring the matter before the Court of Justice for a ruling on whether Belgium has failed to meet its obligations.

Lastly, it should be pointed out that, under the rules regarding publicity about infringement proceedings, the details of these proceedings are confidential. With regard to any comments made by a Member State in the framework of such proceedings, it is for the authorities of that State to decide whether or not the public should be allowed access to the comments.

(1) OJ L 375, 31.12.1991, p. 1.

(2) IP/98-367, 7.7.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2459/98

by Honório Novo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Bad weather and damage to agriculture in Portugal

Recent weather conditions in Portugal (torrential rain, hail and wide fluctuations in temperature) have caused serious damage in some of the country's main agricultural sectors.

The collapse in production of pears (by around 70 to 80 % at national level), cherries (around 70 % in the Beira Interior and Trás-os-Montes regions), grapes (around 60 % in the Ribatejo, Douro-Minho and Trás-os-Montes regions) and olives (above all in the Alentejo and Trás-os-Montes regions) are some of the most serious examples. It is thus clear that there will be a sharp fall in income, especially for small farms and small family farms.

Can the Commission provide information on the following:

1. Has the Portuguese Government already submitted to the Commission a detailed quantitative and qualitative assessment of the damage arising from the bad weather for the purpose of requesting EC administrative measures and exceptional financial support to tackle the adverse consequences? If so, is the Commission prepared to grant the request?

2. Does the Commission consider it appropriate to consider the possibility of contributing additional appropriations to mitigate the damage to agriculture arising from the bad weather in Portugal?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 1998)

1. The Portuguese Government did not submit any request to the Commission for financial aid to cover the losses of farm income mentioned by the Honourable Member, because the Commission does not have a legal basis making it possible to provide compensation for losses of agricultural production caused by bad weather.

2. Article 5(h) of Council Regulation (EEC) 4256/88 of 19 December 1988 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) 2052/88 as regards the EAGGF Guidance Section(1), as amended by Regulation (EEC) 2085/93(2), provides that the EAGGF Guidance Section can take part financially in restoring agricultural and forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, drawing upon the total appropriation for the structural measures in the Community support framework (CSF).

With regard to the bad weather in November and December 1997, the Portuguese authorities asked for financial aid for restoring the production potential damaged on this occasion. The Commission complied with this request by granting an amount of ECU 20 million from the appropriations still available for Objective 5(a).

Moreover, in July 1998 the Azores benefited from an extra ECU 26,38 million from the EAGGF Guidance Section and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), from the 1998 CSF deflator for Portugal, to cope with the damage caused by the earthquake of 9 July 1998.

(1) OJ L 374, 31.12.1988.

(2) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3496/98

by Bernd Posselt (PPE) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: 'Youth for Europe' application forms

The application forms for the "Youth for Europe" programme are at least 15 pages long, with very many questions only some of which are necessary. Accordingly, for voluntary youth leaders who have to struggle with these applications and have little experience of form-filling, they are a major obstacle and they are biased towards large organisations will full-time officials. That is not what I regard as the point of European youth work. Even with equivalent programmes in Germany the forms are much shorter and more manageable.

Does the Commission see any scope here for getting rid of bureaucracy and simplifying things in the interests of young people?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

The Youth for Europe III programme will come to an end in 1999. A fundamental change of the forms for this popular programme is not planned for its last year.

The current application forms for the different actions of the programme facilitate first of all a thorough evaluation of projects in the framework of the selection process. It is also necessary to be able to ascertain to what extent the young people themselves are involved in the project. In addition, the data given in the project application serve as a basis for the evaluation of the final report on both the project content and financial issues.

The Commission, however, is aware of the fact that some applicants do consider the forms burdensome. It will therefore simplify and shorten - as far as possible - the application forms for the future Youth programme from the year 2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3815/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(22 December 1998)

Subject: Programmes and projects in the field of agriculture in Catalonia

Bearing in mind the policy of transparency pursued by the Commission in relation to its spending, can the Commission say what projects implemented in Catalonia benefitted from each type of aid available in the area of agriculture and fisheries for the period 1994-1999?

Can the Commission further specify what amounts were finally allocated to each of the above projects?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 1999)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3438/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Community policemen and petty crime in large cities

The proposals put forward in Italy in order to improve safety in areas which are particularly difficult to police, such as certain parts of Rome, include one concerning the appointment of community-based police officers.

One of the most serious problems in the major cities of Europe is that of protecting the general public in the face of ever-increasing levels of petty crime, the widespread nature of which has a significant social impact on the community.

In view of the above, could the Commission say:

1. whether there are any Commission documents or studies concerning safety in the major cities of Europe?

2. whether there are any documents or directives concerning strategies to combat petty crime?

3. whether there are any documents concerning community-based police officers?

4. whether, in other Member States, there are similar strategies which take the form of community-based institutions?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 1999)

The Commission is aware of the problems posed by petty crime and their impact on ordinary people in their everyday lives. It agrees that the measures taken by the Union to combat organised crime must take account of urban crime - an approach followed by the action plan to combat organised crime adopted by the Council in 1997(1).

The action plan supports the use of Union instruments to help prevent European cities becoming a breeding ground for organised crime. Projects can be financed from the Community Structural Funds, but to date only Italy has availed itself of this possibility.

The problems of urban crime are also raised in a communication recently adopted by the Commission on urban policy, which includes a chapter on developing initiatives to prevent urban crime.(2)

Finally, at its meeting on 3 and 4 December 1998 the Council (Justice and Home Affairs) reached agreement on a draft resolution on the implementation of a strategy for preventing organised crime, which also includes measures to prevent urban crime. The resolution, which sets out a timetable and describes the tasks to be carried out by the Member States, Europol and the Commission, will be formally adopted shortly.

As regards the documents mentioned by the Honourable Member, the Commission has not commissioned any studies on petty crime. Moreover, it feels that, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, it is primarily up to the Member States to decide on the implementation of structures such as community policing and to lay down the appropriate powers.

The Commission could co-finance projects for the prevention of organised crime - including links to urban crime - through its own programmes, in particular the Falcone programme. It could also provide support for a mechanism designed to pool experience and good practice in the prevention field.

(1) OJ C 251, 15.8.1997.

(2) COM(98) 605 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2859/98

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(28 September 1998)

Subject: Regional cultural development

Measures in the field of culture help promote awareness of European cultural identity and instil a sense of European citizenship. Furthermore, they are a factor in endogenous regional development, which can play a prominent role in job creation.

Few resources are allocated to purely cultural programmes (at the end of 1997 the figure was a mere 8 % of all resources) or to Community initiatives to promote regional cultural development.

That being so, does the Commission not think that the budgets devoted to fostering and preserving European culture and to stepping up Community initiatives to promote regional cultural development should be increased?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 1998)

The Commission undertakes cultural activities under a variety of heads. It has been using specifically cultural programmes to support cultural projects with a European dimension for several years. Although the budgetary allocation for ongoing cultural programmes is small, as the Honourable Member points out, this has not prevented the Commission from prompting and supporting a large number of European projects (around 1400 projects for the period 1994-97), in relation to contemporary cultural creation Kaleidoscope programme), books and reading (Ariane programme) and to safeguarding the heritage (Raphael programme).

Article 128(4) of the EC Treaty further requires the cultural dimension to be integrated in other Community policies. The Commission has accordingly, for the first time, launched pilot interregional cooperation projects in cultural matters in the context of programming under Article 10 of the European Regional Development Fund(1) for the period 1994-99, worth a total of ECU 15 million.

It must, however, be emphasised that the main reason for launching these pilot projects is to facilitate the exploitation of a cultural heritage that is in many instances underdeveloped by the less favoured areas of the Community by helping to bring them into networks with other areas in order to stimulate the learning process and transfer know-how and economic development. The pilot interregional cooperation measures in the cultural field thus find their place in the cohesion policy.

These projects are now running and therefore closed. No new calls for proposals are planned before the new programming period - 2000-06.

But it should be noted that the regional cultural heritage dimension as a means of creating or preserving jobs on a sustainable basis is integrated into other forms of interregional cooperation, in particular in the most recent call for proposals for ECOS-Overture (external interregional cooperation) dated 13 June 1998.

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3517/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(25 November 1998)

Subject: Monitoring of State aid

With reference to the proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 93 of the EC Treaty (COM(98) 0073 final - 98(0060 CNS)(1), whilst supporting the Commission's effort to make the recovery of unlawful aid more efficient, in particular by means of suspension injunctions and provisional recovery of aid (Article 11) and the provision laid down in Article 14 (3) that "remedies under national law shall not have suspensive effect", I would point out that the regulation does not say what will happen if the national legal procedures do not allow immediate and effective execution of the Commission's decision.

To comply with the fundamental principle of equality of conditions, the Member States must undertake to ensure that unlawful aid can be recovered immediately.

Can the Commission therefore ensure that time-wasting procedures are not established or implemented, given that aid granted unlawfully must be recovered as soon as it becomes incompatible with the Community rules and therefore intrinsically illegal?

(1) OJ C 116, 16.4.1998, p. 13.