ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3212/02

by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 November 2002)

Subject: Airline price transparency

Airlines often run flyer, poster or other campaigns advertising particularly attractive fares. It is not usually made clear to the consumer that these offers are subject to extremely restrictive conditions and that the advertised fares only represent the basic price and not the final fare. This means that people are attracted by the offer of a particularly low fare, which later turns out to have various airport or other taxes added to it, to be valid only for a certain period or on particular days or to apply only to a certain length of stay.

In addition, different airlines which have confusingly merged into one supplier make one price offer in a single advertisement, which in fact applies to only one of the corporation's airlines.

Consumers, particularly those who do not fly frequently, are helpless in the face of this price jungle, and even frequent flyers often take some time to find their way through the medley of fares on offer.

What is the Commission's view of the problem of inadequate price labelling by airlines, and does it consider it necessary to take measures to ensure greater transparency?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2002)

Under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2409/92 of 23 July 1992, on fares and rates to air services(1) air carriers are free to set fares themselves. This has encouraged the development of low fares and of promotional offers, which generally benefit consumers even if they can be complex sometimes.

Advertising that deceives consumers is another matter. Council Directive 84/450/EEC of 10 September 1984 relating to the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning misleading advertising(2) obliges Member States effectively to control misleading advertising and to confer the necessary powers on the courts and the administrative bodies. It is their responsibility to implement the national laws transposing the Directive, although the Commission, of course, can launch infringement procedures if it considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil its obligations. In addition, the Commission is considering a legislative proposal on fair commercial practices, designed to tackle a number of consumers' grievances not covered by present legislation.

(1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992.

(2) OJ L 250, 19.9.1984.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3224/02

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Council

(14 November 2002)

Subject: Accession countries and joint implementation projects (Kyoto Mechanism)

Has the EU made any agreements in the accession talks for the ten new Member States to promote JI projects during the initial period of the EU emission trading scheme (2005-2007) or the subsequent period(s)?

Is there an estimate on how big a volume of such projects will be initiated during each of the ET periods (absolutely and in proportion of hot air)? Has the EU made any models on how effective implementation of JI projects would affect the price of emission allowances (and the actual reductions of emissions in the EU) and where have such models been published if they exist?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3222/02 and E-3224/02

(3 March 2003)

The Council is not aware of any estimates of the kind the Honourable Member is asking for, and in particular of estimates regarding project-volumes likely to be initiated. The EU has not made any agreements with the accession countries regarding the promotion of JI-projects. The Council is neither aware of specific models that quantify the eventual effects of JI-projects on the future price of emission allowances, and it should be noted that the present draft on the EU emission trading allowance scheme does not contain provisions regarding such inclusions. The Commission is expected, however, to make a proposal on the linkage between the Kyoto Protocol project mechanisms (CDM and JI) and the EU emission allowance trading scheme in 2003. In this context, it might be appropriate to put the questions raised to the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3295/02

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

(21 November 2002)

Subject: Promotion of the Barcelona-Puigcerdà-La Tour de Carol-Toulouse rail line and its inclusion on the Essen list

The White Paper on transport policy in the EU rightly highlights the need to develop trans-Pyrenean rail capacity as freight traffic is set to double over the next 20 years, the roads are already saturated and it is necessary to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

In view of this, the Commission asked for the trans-European transport network to be supplemented by a trans-Pyrenean rail link, leaving the route up to the Member States concerned. The latter decided to upgrade the line between Saragossa and Pau via Canfranc.

Although the upgrading of this line is undoubtedly highly desirable, it will not have a significant impact on freight traffic.

Does the Commission not consider that it would do more to relieve traffic congestion on Mediterranean roads if it included on the list of projects eligible for Community funding (Essen list), the modernisation of the Barcelona-Puigcerdà-La Tour de Carol-Toulouse rail line, and in particular the building of a tunnel under the Collada de Toses?

Answer given by Ms de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(23 December 2002)

The new specific projects proposed in the White Paper on European transport policy for 2010(1) and the proposal to amend the guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network which was adopted in October 2001(2) include a new high-capacity rail link across the Pyrenees.

The Commission would stress that the existing rail link between Barcelona, Puigcerda, La Tour de Carol and Toulouse is not on the trans-European network maps contained in Annex I to Decision 1692/96/EC of Parliament and of the Council of 23 July 1996 on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network(3). Moreover, simply modernising this single mountain track, which runs up and down steep slopes and passes over ridges at high altitude, is unlikely to provide sufficient capacity to attract a large volume of freight traffic, unlike the TGV South already on the Essen list and a new high-capacity rail link across the Pyrenees proposed by the Commission.

Within the framework of a more substantial amendment of the Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network (TEN-T), the Commission has set up a high-level group. The group brings together representatives from the Member States and observers from the candidate countries.

The mandate of this group, which is independent from the Commission, is to examine potential specific project proposals transmitted by the Member States. In particular it will look at how each project fits in with the objectives of European transport policy, its Community added value and the sustainability of its financing from now to 2020. The group is expected to send the Commission its recommendations in 2003.

(1) COM(2001) 370 final.

(2) COM(2001) 544 final.

(3) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3486/02

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 December 2002)

Subject: T-TENs review

Does the Commission intend to include the EuroVelo Network in the proposal for revision of the T-TENs in 2004, as this would contribute to the integration of environmental friendliness and intermodality into transport infrastructure policy?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3334/02 and E-3486/02given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(16 January 2003)

The trans-European networks policy is designed to facilitate the establishment of the internal market and, to this end, focuses on infrastructure which routes traffic over long distances clearly not applicable in the case of the bicycle. Accordingly, there are no plans to include a Europe-wide network of cycle paths in the forthcoming review of Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network.

On the other hand, as part of the effort to promote clean urban transport and the Civitas initiative, the Commission is backing innovatory measures to encourage urban mobility, including the promotion of the bicycle. The Commission is also currently preparing a thematic strategy on the urban environment, in accordance with the Sixth Environment Action Programme. Urban transport, which includes cycling, will be looked at in connection with this work.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3477/02

by Gerhard Schmid (PSE) to the Commission

(6 December 2002)

Subject: Discrimination on the ground of nationality in Amsterdam, the Netherlands

In Amsterdam, there is a road running alongside a canal where parking is restricted. Even so, it seems to be local practice for motorists to park their cars there. I have been informed, however, that foreign-registered cars (in the event, five German, three Belgian and two British) have been clamped, while vehicles registered in the Netherlands have not even been given a parking ticket.

1. Does this constitute discrimination of the ground of nationality, which is prohibited pursuant to Article 12 of the EC Treaty?

2. If so, what will the Commission do to remedy this situation?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2003)

The Commission is not aware of any other cases like this in Amsterdam and has no concrete information on this case which would lead it to suspect discrimination on the grounds of nationality.

The Honourable Member is requested to note that this type of problem can be sent to the Solvit network (http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/solvit/). This is a network set up by the Commission consisting of members of the national administrations who aim to find informal solutions to specific problems encountered by businesses or the public concerning the application of Community rules. All information on how to proceed and what can be expected of the network can be found on the above website.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3451/02

by Eluned Morgan (PSE) to the Commission

(6 December 2002)

Subject: Agriculture and IACS

What agricultural products are included in the IACS forms? Could you tell us how much Greece has received for these products in subsidies per year, since the IACS forms have been introduced? Could you tell us how much Greece was fined for not complying with the rules on IACS forms per year since the IACS scheme became compulsory?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 January 2003)

The Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) is a tool designed to provide an effective and efficient means to control direct aids to farmers, but there are no particular IACS forms as implied by the question. IACS was introduced as from claim or harvest year 1993 and presently covers animal subsidies in the bovine, ovine and caprine sectors, and in respect of surface subsidies it covers arable crops, rice, grain legumes and set-aside land.

IACS had to be completed by 1 January 1997 at the latest, since when IACS-related expenditure has been declared at EUR 669,6 million for 1998, EUR 755,7 million for 1999, EUR 734,6 million for 2000, EUR 752,6 million for 2001 and EUR 722,9 million for 2002.

It is not strictly correct to refer to fines in relation to the Commission's clearance of accounts procedure, according to which the Commission decides to refuse expenditure for which a Member State fails to provide the Commission with reasonable assurance as to the effectiveness of the management and control procedures used to check the legality and regularity of the aid schemes. Financial corrections are not applied by enquiry but by financial year and so, in answer to the question, a global amount is considered more appropriate. In respect of Greece, for claim years 1997 to 1999, a total amount of EUR 156 153 993 has so far been refused Community financing in this way in respect of IACS-related schemes. However, the clearance of accounts procedure continues in respect of the years 1999 onwards, and further refusals to finance are envisaged during 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3802/02

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

(7 January 2003)

Subject: Natura 2000 network in Galicia (Spanish state)

A large number of areas of natural beauty for which applications have been made for inclusion at a future date in the Natura 2000 network are now severely affected by the Prestige oil spill. Will the Commission now treat these areas as de facto parts of the Natura 2000 network, with a view to enabling implementation of all the economic, legal and scientific observation measures provided for under the habitats directive (92/43/EEC(1))?

(1) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(31 January 2003)

The Honourable Member has expressed his concern in relation to the accident caused by the Prestige and its impact in the Natura 2000 network in Galicia, Spain. The incident poses a serious threat to marine wildlife and coastal habitats in Galicia especially to the Natura 2000 sites.

Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, the Habitats Directive, is the main Community instrument for safeguarding the European bio-diversity. The preservation, protection and improvement of the quality of the environment, including the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, are essential objectives of general interest for the Community. The main instrument to reach these goals is the Natura 2000 network of protected areas. Therefore any site included in the Natura 2000 network has to be considered as of high ecological value. Each Member State is responsible for identification, designation and conservation of the sites, which are important for the protection of the species and habitats of Community interest.

In the provisions of the Habitats Directive it is stated that Member States shall take the appropriate steps to avoid the deterioration of natural habitats and habitats of species as well as the maintenance and restoration at a favourable conservation status.

The coastal areas of Galicia are included in the Atlantic bio-geographical region. The Spanish authorities have proposed 60 Galician sites of Community importance to be included in the Natura 2000 network.

For the Commission all these sites are parts of the Spanish proposal for the Natura 2000 network, therefore, all the provisions of the Habitats Directive must be applied to the sites.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3359/02

by Dana Scallon (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 November 2002)

Subject: Research on supernumerary embryos

At its 2451st meeting held in Brussels on 30 September 2002, the Competition (Internal Market, Industry and Research) Council adopted an arrangement under which:

the Council and Commission agreed that detailed implementing arrangements for research activities involving the use of human embryos and human embryonic stem cells that may be financed under the sixth framework programme would be laid down by 31 December 2003 and the Commission stated that, until then, it would not propose to finance such research projects unless they involved banked or isolated human embryonic stem cells in culture.

Does the term banked or isolated human embryonic stem cells in culture mean the same thing as supernumerary embryos up to 14 days?

Is it true that funding is currently being provided under the sixth framework programme for research on supernumerary embryos up to 14 days in countries where such research is authorised?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 2003)

Banked or isolated human embryonic stem cells in culture are not the same as human supernumerary embryos.

Supernumerary embryos are embryos created by in vitro fertilisation (IVF) for infertility treatment to enhance the success rate of IVF, but no longer needed for this purpose. They are intended to be discarded but instead, may be donated for research by the couples concerned.

Banked or isolated human embryonic stem cells in culture refers to human embryonic stem cells, which have been derived from the inner cell mass of embryos at the blastocyst stage and grown in culture (in a test tube). These stem cell lines may be frozen and deposited in a cell bank. (The blastocyst stage corresponds to 5-7 days after the fertilisation of the egg, when the embryo resemble a hollow ball containing a mass of stem cells.).

As the first calls for proposals and funding of projects under the 6th Framework Programme (FP6) were only launched in December 2002, no funding is yet being provided for projects under FP6.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2933/02

by Jorge Moreira Da Silva (PPE-DE) to the Council

(17 October 2002)

Subject: Application of the European Convention on the Academic Recognition of University Qualifications (ETS 32)

If a State signatory to the European Convention on the Academic Recognition of University Qualifications (ETS 32) withholds equivalence of (non-vocational) qualifications from a graduate because certain parts of the syllabus concerned do not meet its requirements, thereby requiring all graduates from another State signatory to retake all or part of their syllabus, can this be considered as contravening the aforementioned convention?

Does Article 4 of the convention oblige the authorities competent to deal with issues of equivalence, including the education ministries of the States signatory, to notify applicants for equivalent status of the subject areas of the syllabus that fail to meet their requirements? Must they also provide holders of foreign university qualifications with a list of the examinations they must pass?

Reply

(3 March 2003)

The Council would inform the Honourable Member that it is not for the Council to interpret the content of the European Convention on the Academic Recognition of University Qualifications. That is a Council of Europe Convention, not an act of the Council of the European Union.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2530/02

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

(11 September 2002)

Subject: Torture inflicted on prisoners held by the United States after 11 September 2001 according to reports by Human Rights Watch

According to a report by Human Rights Watch, published on 15 August, the policy pursued by the United States after 11 September 2001, under its President George Bush, has led to people being arbitrarily detained, human rights violations, prisoners being held in solitary confinement for long periods without any formal charges being brought, and cases of torture. What steps is the Council taking vis-à-vis the Bush Administration to put an end to such criminal behaviour?

Reply

(20 February 2003)

As laid down in Articles 6 and 11 of the EU Treaty the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms and the attachment to the principles of liberty, democracy and rule of law are essential elements of the EU's common foreign and security policy.

The fight against terrorism is a priority for the European Union. Terrorism is not only a threat to the security of States but also one of the most serious threats to the exercise of human rights, the right to life and human dignity. However, the fight against terrorism must respect human rights and the rule of law, as the Laeken, Barcelona and Seville European Councils have underlined. This position has been made known to the United States in both official and informal contacts over the last year.

The EU maintains a dialogue on the theme of human rights with the United States. The EU will continue to use such meetings to make known its position of the need to respect human rights in all situations, including in the fight against terrorism. There can be no exceptions under any circumstances to the right to life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom from torture or cruel and degrading treatment, irrespective of nationality, race or religion.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1670/02

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 June 2002)

Subject: The use of EU funding in the Palestinian territories

Could the Commission indicate whether it has reason to believe that the claim by the Israeli Government that EU funds administered by the Palestinian Authority under the direct control of President Arafat have been used to fund terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians is correct, and, if not, has the Commission studied the evidence produced by the Israeli authorities to support that claim?

Could the Commission also comment on allegations that Palestinian children have been provided with textbooks paid for by the European Union containing inflammatory passages such as:

The final and inevitable result will be the victory of the Muslims over the Jews(1).

This religion will defeat all other religions and it will be disseminated, by Allah's will through the Muslim Jihad fighters(2)?

(1) Our Arabic language for 5th grade

542 page 67.

(2) Islamic Education 7th grade

564 page 125.

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(19 July 2002)

The Commission examined the allegations that have been made by the Israeli authorities on the misuse of Community funds. The Commission has looked carefully at the evidence provided by the Israeli government (Minister Naveh) and by the Israeli Defence Forces. The Commission also invited the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Palestinian Authority (PA) to comment on the allegations. The Commission, on the basis of the material it has examined, has not found any evidence of Community funds being used for purposes other than those agreed between the Community and the PA. The Commission takes this matter extremely seriously and will continue to give utmost priority to the examination of any further allegtions of misuse of Community funds.

The Commission has never paid for text books used by the Palestinian Authority. As regards the contents of text books, the Commission would like to refer to the Council Document Palestinian Schoolbooks: The EU View published on the Council's web site http://ue.eu.int/newsroom/NewMain.asp?LANG=1
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3209/02

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

(12 November 2002)

Subject: Massacre in Russia

What is the Council's position and what measures has it taken vis-à-vis the criminal and irresponsible action of President Putin and the Russian Government, which caused the deaths not only of the Chechen rebels responsible for the hostage-taking but also of hundreds of the hostages themselves?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3209/02 and E-3325/02

(20 February 2003)

The holding in Moscow of over 700 hostages, from 23 to 26 October 2002, was a source of grave concern in the EU, as it was in Russia. The European Council, on 24/25 October 2002, expressed its position on this set of events in the declaration issued on 25 October and contained in Annex III of the related Conclusions of the Presidency.

On the occasion of the EU-Russia summit held in Brussels, on 11 November 2002, the European Union and Russia made a joint statement on the fight against terrorism, in which they declared to stand united in this fight with due regard for the rule of law, for democratic principles and for the territorial integrity of States. On the basis of common commitments they drew common aims with a view to developing their strategic partnership in this respect, including the definition of EU-Russia co-operation in the fight against terrorism.