ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/466

(2004/C 88 E/0479)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3517/03

by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Subject: Fair trade

Would it be considered as discriminatory under EU public procurement regulations to stipulate that Fair Trade products must be used in public tenders for catering services?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2004)

Once a contracting authority has decided on the subject matter of the procurement contract intended for its catering services (what generic type of products to buy), it is free to define the technical specifications of those products. The requirements must, however, relate to the characteristics or performance of the products (e.g., glasses or plates made out of recycled material) or the production of the products (e.g. organically grown ones).

A contracting authority wishing to procure Fair-trade products (meaning products certified using standards set by the private Fair-trade Labelling Organisations International) for catering services must define the technical specifications of the products in relation to the social or environmental performances underlying the label. While the contracting authority may indicate that products having that label are deemed to comply with the technical specifications, it must also allow economic operators to prove compliance with the technical specifications by other means of proof. Only on a case by case basis it can be determined which of Fair-trade's diverse standards (or parts thereof) describe the characteristics or performance of the product to be purchased.

Contracting authorities procuring goods must respect the fundamental Community principles, including the principle of equal treatment, of which non-discrimination is a specific expression. It follows from established case law of the European Court of Justice that not only acts of de jure discrimination are prohibited under the EC Treaty, but also acts which hinder non-nationals more than nationals (de facto discrimination).

Due to the wide range of standards comprised by the Fair-trade label and the wide range of products available in the catering business, it is only possible on a case by case basis, taking into account all circumstances surrounding the purchase, to determine whether a contracting authority infringes upon the principle of non-discrimination.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/150

(2004/C 88 E/0160)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3565/03

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(2 December 2003)

Subject: Enlargement preparations in EU border regions

In the run-up to enlargement the European Union is making appropriations available under the programme of ‘Preparatory Actions on the Impact of Enlargement in the Border Regions of the EU’.

The arrangements for 2004 include publication of a call for proposals for ‘qualification initiatives for vulnerable groups of the labour force in EU regions bordering the candidate countries’ (1). One purpose of the project is to assist employees at risk from enlargement by using qualification and training measures to raise their occupational and geographical mobility. The programme provides for social partners, educational institutions, vocational training centres and universities located in an EU Member State to apply for a grant.

Why is it that, although the social partners as a whole are considered as eligible for assistance under this programme, individual employee organisations are not?

Will a call for proposals for qualification initiatives for vulnerable groups in border regions be published again in 2005? If so, will the range of organisations eligible for assistance then be extended to include employee representatives? If not, why not?

What other projects are included in the arrangements for implementing the programme of ‘Preparatory Actions on the Impact of Enlargement in the Border Regions of the EU’, in which employee representatives' organisations can take part?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2004)

The organisations eligible for the call for proposals to which the Honourable Member refers were ‘social partners, educational institutions, vocational training centres and universities’. ‘Social partners’ encompasses organisations representing employers and/or trade unions. Accordingly, individual employee organisations are eligible for assistance. Applications are currently under evaluation. At least two trade union organisations have submitted applications.

The Union budget does not provide for further measures in this field in the 2004 budget, hence no calls for proposals can be expected in 2005.

As part of the programme of ‘Preparatory Actions on the Impact of Enlargement in Border Regions of the Union’, trade union organisations were eligible as partners in the following calls for proposals:

— ELARG/1/140503/SME/B53003: ‘Regional Partnership Events for Micro-enterprises in Union Regions Bordering the Candidate Countries with a focus on Support Services’ (2).

— ELARG/3/140503/ADM/B53003: ‘Cross Border Initiatives for Local and Regional Authorities in Union Regions Bordering the Candidate Countries’ (2).

Proposals received in response to the above calls are currently being evaluated by the relevant committees. Applicants will be notified of the outcome once the evaluation process has been completed within the next few weeks.

(1) OJ C 206, 2.9.2003, p. 25.

(2) OJ C 206, 2.9.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/100

(2004/C 84 E/0136)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3789/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(11 December 2003)

Subject: Update on funding for the municipality of Prato the action programme to promote civil protection

In reply to my earlier question E-1101/03 (1) asking whether the municipality of Prato had submitted projects and obtained funding under the action programme to promote civil protection, the Commission said on 22 April 2003 that the municipality had not submitted any application.

Can the Commission say whether, since that date, any projects have been submitted and what the outcome was?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 144.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/238

(2004/C 84 E/0282)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3473/03

by Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(17 November 2003)

Subject: Statements made by the Presidency at the EU-Russia Summit of 7 November 2003

The Joint Statement of 31 May 2003 issued at the EU-Russia Summit in St Petersburg expressed the hope that ‘the recently started political process as well as the economic and social reconstruction will lead to the restoration of the rule of law, thus promoting the protection of human rights, and to a genuine reconciliation in Chechnya’.

The Declaration of 8 October 2003 made by the Presidency on behalf of the European Union on the presidential elections in Chechnya stated that ‘the EU had already noted negative developments as, inter alia, the lack of real pluralism of candidatures to the presidency and the absence of independent media’ and that ‘considering these developments, the EU expresses serious concerns regarding the conditions in which these elections were held.’

In the same Declaration the Presidency said ‘the EU once again would like to express its hope that commitments will be followed by their implementation and that an immediate, significant improvement of the human rights situation in Chechnya will bridge the divide between the authorities and the population. The EU urges the Russian authorities to do their utmost to advance a genuine political process and to intensify its cooperation with international organisations, and in particular with OSCE, as agreed in the EU-Russia Joint Statement at St. Petersburg.’

Can the Council say what new facts the Presidency has in its possession that allowed Mr Berlusconi to claim that the problems linked to Chechnya can be considered as ‘tales’ put about by the international press?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-3415/03 and P-3473/03

(9 March 2004)

The Council underlines that it is not for the Council to comment on the declaration quoted at the end of the question.

Regarding the situation in Chechnya, it was discussed in detail during the EU-Russia summit in Rome on 6 November 2003. The absence of a reference to Chechnya in the joint statement from the summit reflected the persistent disagreement between the EU and Russia on the situation there. The EU in particular regretted and rejected the linkage made by Russia between the situation in Chechnya and the situation of the Russian minorities in the Baltic states. The agreed Council position, as quoted in the question, has therefore not changed as a result of the summit.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/317

(2004/C 78 E/0319)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3766/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(11 December 2003)

Subject: Update on the use of funds from the Leonardo programme for the Florence municipality

In response to my previous question E-1064/03 (1) asking whether the Florence municipality had submitted projects and obtained funding under the Leonardo programme, the Commission stated on 8 May 2003 that Florence had not applied for such funding.

Will the Commission state, again in respect of centrally managed funds, whether any projects were submitted subsequently and, if so, what decision has been taken on them?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 151.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/323

(2004/C 78 E/0335)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3802/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(11 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the Culture 2000 programme by the municipality of Siena

In its answer to question E-0989/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Siena had submitted projects or secured funding under the Culture 2000 programme, the Commission stated, on 30 July 2003, that the municipality had not submitted any projects by 2002. Can the Commission say if this has been the case subsequently and up to the present?

(1) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 200.
2.

The Law 1730/87 defines the mission of the Greek public broadcaster which is to inform, to educate and entertain the Greek nation. ERT's broadcasts must be governed by the principles of objectivity, polyphony, good quality of broadcasts, preservation of quality of the Greek language, promotion and dissemination of Greek culture and traditions. Furthermore, ERT must ensure radio and television coverage of the activities of the Parliament, of the pre-election campaigns by the political parties, of issues related to local government, and of the activities of other organisms involved in the cultural, social and economic development of the country. This definition of the broadcasting public service mission appears to be in line with Article 86(2): the Protocol of Amsterdam (2) and the Communication from the Commission on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting (3), recognise that the definition of the public service mandate falls within the competence of the Member States. Furthermore, the Commission considers that it is within the competence of each Member State to choose the mechanism to ensure effective supervision of the fulfilment of the public service obligations. The National Commission of Electronic Means of Communication (Ethniki Epitropi Ilektronikon Meson Epikinonias, EEIME) established by the Law 2173/93 in order to control the fulfilment by ERT of its public service obligations is an independent authority attached to the Government. Its members enjoy personal and functional independence and are not submitted to administrative control in the framework of their duties. Finally, regarding the separation of accounts, as stated in the Communication on the application of State aid rules to public service broadcasting, Member States may consider the whole programming of the broadcasters as covered by the public service remit, while at the same time allowing for its commercial exploitation. Thus, costs attributable to public service activities, but also benefiting commercial activities, need not be apportioned between the two and can be entirely allocated to public service. However it is necessary that the State support does not exceed the net costs of the public service mission, considering also other direct or indirect revenues derived from this mission. The main question is therefore the proportionality of the public support granted to ERT which is still being investigated by the Commission.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/84

(2004/C 84 E/0093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3684/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the Ecos-Ouverture II programme by the municipality of Livorno

In its answer to question E-1107/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Livorno had submitted projects and secured funding under the Ecos-Ouverture programme, the Commission stated that no funding had been granted by 1999.

Can the Commission say whether the municipality submitted any projects and obtained and used any funding in the subsequent budget years?

Has the Commission completed its examination of the final reports mentioned in its answers and, if so, can it supply any information on the outcome?

(1) OJ C 11 E, 15.1.2004, p. 139.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/45

(2004/C 88 E/0048)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1840/03

by Michael Cashman (PSE) to the Commission

(26 May 2003)

Subject: Post-Iraq-War aid

Given the recent record of human rights abuses in Egypt, can the Commission explain the rationale and decision-making process that led to the conclusion to send an accelerated package of eur 175 million in financial assistance to Egypt?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 2003)

The EUR 175 million which the Commission intends to provide in the form of budgetary support to Egypt is an acceleration in disbursements within existing programmes funded from the MEDA budget.

This decision is designed as an emergency response to mitigate the negative economic effects of the Iraq war on the Egyptian economy. The immediate economic impact of the Iraq war on Egypt has been considerable, especially in lost tourist revenue and diverted direct foreign investment.

On the issue of Egypt's record on human rights, the Commission has not hesitated to raise issues of concern with the Egyptian authorities when it has been judged appropriate to do so. The Association Agreement, currently under ratification, will offer an additional and useful forum to discuss such issues.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/190

(2004/C 78 E/0196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2924/03

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 October 2003)

Subject: European Council to guarantee energy supplies

Summer 2003 will be remembered, inter alia, for the number of electricity black-outs which left various international communities deprived of the energy supplies, that public authorities should guarantee their citizens.

The fact that one of those communities was London, the capital of the UK, has led analysts to wonder whether the EU needs a European Consultative Council for guaranteeing energy supplies, in all forms, so that the distress occasioned by this summer's blackouts does not spread to other parts of the Community.

Does the Commission believe that it should set up a consultative council for secure energy supplies, with a view to protecting the whole EU from black-outs?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(13 November 2003)

No electricity system can be 100 % immune from interruptions. Having said that, a repeat of the large number of incidents during 2003 on a regular basis would be unacceptable to European citizens.

Generally, the Commission believes that it is the task of Member States to ensure the continuity of electricity supplies. This applies both to generation adequacy (sufficient generation capacity to meet the consumption at any time) and to network adequacy (sufficient transmission and distribution network capacity to serve the loads at any time).

However, as the electricity transmission of the whole Europe is interconnected, there is a need for a close co-operation between the system operators. To this end, the Union of Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity (UCTE) at the request of the ‘Florence’ Electricity Regulation Forum, has initiated the work on the Operational Handbook which aims at binding security and reliability rules in the UCTE network.

This work serves mainly to consolidate existing agreements between system operators which have been in place for a number of years. The Commission, European regulators, the transmission system operator (TSOs) outside the UCTE area and other stakeholders have also participated in this work. The Regulation on cross-border trade of electricity provides for the possibility to include, in the guidelines on congestion management, common rules on minimum safety and operational standards for the use and operation of the network. It is the intention of the Commission that the future guidelines will include basic rules of this type in support of the development of the Handbook.

It is also considered important that the regulatory framework in place ensures adequate investments to the electricity generation and transmission infrastructure in medium and long term. The Commission intends to produce a Communication on this subject by the end of 2003, which will contain some specific proposals on this subject.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/487

(2004/C 84 E/0565)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2350/03

by Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(11 July 2003)

Subject: Protection of the Darwin Mounds

Further to its reply to Written Question P-0213/03 (1) concerning the protection of the Darwin Mounds, will the Commission confirm whether it has been contacted by the UK Government with a request or with justification for the use of emergency powers by the Commission as provided by Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 (2) in respect of this area? If so, will the Commission also confirm the date on which this approach was first made by the UK Government, given the implication that this had not occurred at the time of the Commission's response to Question P-0213/03?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(4 August 2003)

The Commission can confirm that it has been contacted by United Kingdom authorities about the protection of the Darwin Mounds further to its reply to Written Question P-0213/03.

The United Kingdom authorities put the issue to Directorate General Fisheries in March 2003 and asked about the possibility of emergency measures. On 24 June 2003, the Commission received a letter from the United Kingdom authorities asking it to take action to close the Darwin Mounds to methods of fishing likely to cause further irreparable damage to them. The Mounds already show signs of damage caused by bottom trawling. As fishing of the kind is still taking place in the area, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs asks the Commission to consider its emergency powers under Article 7 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002 of 20 December 2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy, to address the problem immediately.

Our services have already started to prepare a proposal for a Council Regulation to prohibit the use of bottom trawls and other towed gear in the Darwin Mounds. This will be done by way of an amendment to Council Regulation (EC) No 850/98 of 30 March 1998 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms (3) and, therefore, the Parliament will be duly consulted.

As far as the emergency procedure is concerned, we are now considering whether this case meets the requirements of Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002. If there is a case for using such procedure the Commission will swiftly adopt legislation similar to the one mentioned above, which will be valid for six months and which can be extended for another six months.

(1) OJ C 161 E, 10.7.2003, p. 195.

(2) OJ L 358, 31.12.2002, p. 59.

(3) OJ L 125, 27.4.1998.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/118

(2004/C 88 E/0125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2884/03

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 September 2003)

Subject: Persecution of Christians in Egypt

Is the Commission aware of the recent arrest at Cairo airport of two Egyptian Christians, Malak Cuirguis Fahmay and his wife Sarah Mikhail Lahzy (formerly known as Naglaa Hussein Ibrahim), a convert to Christianity, on the grounds that she had forged her identity card in order to reflect her new identity as a Christian as a result of the official policy of preventing converts from Islam to Christianity from changing their name and religion in their papers? Does the Commission regard such a policy as a fundamental breach of human rights and, if so, has the Commission raised this with the Egyptian government as well as the arrests at the airport and the treatment of the accused?

Is the Commission also aware of concern on the part of the Egyptian Coptic community about systematic intimidation directed against members of their community and of the failure of the government to and police to offer proper protection, of which the murder of twenty-one Christians in El-Kosheh in January, 2000 was the most tragic expression, and, if so, has the Commission raised with the Egyptian government the issue of the safety of the Coptic community in Egypt?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(21 October 2003)

In previous answers to Written Question E-2086/03 by Mrs Kinnock (1) and E-2557/03 by Mr Evans (2), the Commission has reiterated its awareness of the problems faced by the Egyptian Christian community and in particular of the case of Malak Cuirguis Fahmay and his wife Sarah Mikhail Lhazy. They were accused of having illegally altered her identity documents to reflect her change of faith. The Commission understands that the Criminal Court of Northern Cairo will examine their case by the end of October 2003.

The Commission, together with the Member State Embassies in Cairo, have made representation to the Egyptian Government on several occasions with respect to human rights issues involving the Egypt Coptic community. The Honourable Member can be assured that the Commission will continue to follow their case and to raise these issues with the Egyptian Authorities when and as appropriate.

(1) See page 65.

(2) OJ C 51 E, 26.2.2004, p. 257.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/20

(2004/C 78 E/0020)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0622/03

by Brice Hortefeux (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 March 2003)

Subject: Combating cartels

As a member of Parliament's Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, I am following with great interest all Mr Monti's efforts against unlawful agreements, abuse of a dominant position and the formation of cartels.

I should therefore particularly like to thank him for taking an often courageous stance, even though the companies concerned sometimes seek support from Members of Parliament, claiming that what has happened is incomprehensible.

Could the Commission provide a list of European companies against which action has been taken since 1999 and the amounts they have been fined?

Could it also indicate the collection rate?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(2 April 2003)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.