ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1122/01

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(6 April 2001)

Subject: Request for investigations into the liberalisation of the market in gas in Italy

Can the Commission say what measures the European Union intends to take to ensure that a policy of liberalisation with regard to the services of distribution, supply and sale of heating gas is at last introduced in Italy? At present these services are almost exclusively performed by subsidiary undertakings of Snam, amongst which ITALGAS and EDISON are in a dominant position. They impose conditions, tariffs and prices without any proper control by their supervisory authorities or consumers, who are unable to negotiate, discuss or check objectively the prices, consumption, quantity or quality of the services provided.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2001)

Directive 98/30/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998 concerning common rules for the internal market in naturel gas(1) introduces competition in the gas sector and obliges Member States to open up at least 20 % of demand to competition. Italy has implemented this Directive mainly through a Government Decree dated 23 May 2000 (Decree No 164/2000) which entered into force on 21 June 2000.

The implementation chosen by Italy goes further than required by the Directive in the sense that 65 % of final customer demand has already been liberalised. As from 1 January 2003, all customers will be eligible (100 % opening).

The fact remains that, as in many other Member States, effective choice will evolve gradually, due to the near monopoly structure of most of the gas markets. The Commission notes here that the Honourable Member seems to consider Edison to be a subsidiary company of SNAM. This is, however, not the case. Edison is part of the Montedison group, which is independent of the ENI group, of which SNAM forms part.

The Italian authorities have taken steps to improve the situation in which little competition exists, stipulating that from 1 January 2003, no operator can sell to final customers more than 50 % of the annual national consumption of gas and that 1 January 2002 no operator can introduce in the Italian gas pipelines more than 75 % of the annual national consumption of gas. These figure will be reduced by 2 % each year till 2010.

The Italian regulator is responsible for setting the transport, storage and distribution tariffs of natural gas in Italy, and the Commission understands that it is in the process of setting these tariffs.

In addition, the Commission's proposed new directive concerning common rules for the internal markets in electricity and natural gas(2) is intended to remove the remaining main obstacles to competition and create a level playing field in the Community gas market. Among other requirements, it strengthens the current provisions ensuring the independent behaviour of the operators of transmission and distribution system, and sets out minimum powers for national regulators.

(1) OJ L 204, 21.7.1998.

(2) COM(2001) 125 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2496/01

by Paul Lannoye (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(14 September 2001)

Subject: Electromagnetic field

Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC(1) of 12 July 1999, on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz), to provide a high level of health protection proposed that reference levels be respected by which that objective would be achieved. For the frequency of 50 Hz, used in the transport and distribution of electricity, magnetic flux density should never exceed 100 µT (100 microteslas).

Many scientists regard this value as far too high, believing that the precautionary principle would require a maximum level of 0.2 µT. The IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) recently wound up its consideration of the problem, on the basis of group analyses of original data from a number of properly carried out studies, by concluding that there was a statistically significant and coinciding link between childhood leukaemia and exposure to household ELF magnetic fields higher than 0.4 µT.

In fact the risk to a child constantly exposed to a field of 0.4 µT would be double. This new finding coming from a body of uncontested scientific authority completely invalidates the Council's recommendation as regards public exposure to a type of pollution which is widely present in our everyday environment. It also undermines the very approach in the present text, which ignores the precautionary principle and confines itself to taking into account adverse effects on health. Does the Council intend to amend its 1999 document without delay, in view of the possible implications for the quality of life of a large proportion of the population of Europe?

(1) OJ L 199, 30.7.1999, p. 59.

Reply

(10 December 2001)

Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC(1) of 12 July 1999, on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz) specifically invites the Commission to keep the matters covered by the Recommendation under review, with a view to its revision and updating, taking into account possible effects which are currently the object of research, including relevant aspects of precaution, and to prepare a report within five years which takes into account the reports of the Member States and the latest scientific data and advice. The Council stands ready to consider any proposal which the Commission may submit to amend the 1999 Recommendation in the light of the latest scientific data and advice.

The Honourable Member will also be aware that Article 249 of the EC Treaty clearly states that Recommendations have no binding force. Moreover, the Recommendation's preamble explicitly states that Member States may, in accordance with the Treaty, provide for a higher level of protection than that set out in the Recommendation.

(1) OJ L 199, 30.7.1999, p. 59.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2324/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Subject: Under-18 footballers and other industries

In the light of Commissioner Diamantopoulou's answer to my question E-1051/01(1), where the Commission maintains that Community law provisions on free movement of workers apply to all Union citizens who have reached the minimum age fixed by the host Member State for access to its labour market, and that they indicate certain conditions aimed at ensuring the protection of football players under the age of 18, can the Commission indicate if these certain conditions will apply to workers in other industries, and if so what are the conditions?

(1) OJ C 340 E, 4.12.2001, p. 156.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 2001)

The Commission would like to point out that, according to the principles set out in the outcome of its discussions with the International Federation of Football Associations/Union of European Football Associations (FIFA/UEFA), international transfers of players between the minimum working age in the country of the new training club and the age of 18 will be allowed, while their protection will be ensured through a code of conduct regarding their treatment by the training club. It is for the football authorities to establish such a code with due respect for the applicable Community and national rules.

This arrangement takes into account the specific characteristics of football and is not, thus, transposable automatically to other industries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2872/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 October 2001)

Subject: Border checks

Last July, a Portuguese citizen who has emigrated to Switzerland, João Paula Teixeira de Moura, set out on his holiday trip to Portugal. Having been unable to obtain a direct Zurich-Porto flight, he had to make a stopover in Madrid. On arriving at Barajas airport on 16 July at 4.20 p.m., he went through passport control, where the Spanish police said his passport was invalid since, they claimed, the bearer was not a Portuguese citizen. Although other documents were immediately produced (driving licence, identity card, tax payer's card), the Spanish police arrested Mr Teixeira, and at 5.10 p.m. the following day, sent him back to Zurich.

Strangely enough, the document drawn up by the Barajas police states, on the one hand, that this Portuguese citizen had presented himself with a passport, but adds that the latter did not meet the existing legislation for entry to Spain's requirement that a valid document be submitted.

While one can understand the need for rigorous controls at the Community's external borders, it is rather difficult to understand the attitude of a police force which declares documents issued by other EU Member States be invalid.

I would therefore ask the Commission what it intends to do to ensure that the creation of an area of security does not overwhelm the area of freedom and justice which we are supposed to be setting up within the Community.

With regard to the Portuguese citizen under discussion, what action does the Commission think should be taken to ensure that he is compensated for the prejudice suffered as a result of the action taken by the Spanish police?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(22 November 2001)

The Commission will make the necessary contacts with the Spanish authorities in order to obtain full details of the case described by the Honourable Member. Where appropriate, it will examine the file in the light of the procedure of Article 226 (former Article 169) of the EC Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3191/01

by Elizabeth Lynne (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 November 2001)

Subject: European CE standard markings on stun weapons

It has been brought to my attention that non-European Union manufacturers have been advertising that their stun weapons are marked with the CE safety standard mark. These weapons are frequently used as torture devices in prisons and detention centres. Could the Commission clarify the process by which European CE standard marks are awarded? Also, could the Commission explain how many stun weapon manufacturers are using the CE markings on their products? Finally, how is the Commission taking action to prevent stun weapon manufacturers from using CE markings to promote the sales of their products?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-2934/01, E-2965/01, P-3012/01, E-3108/01 and E-3191/01given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2001)

The Honourable Members are referred to the Commission's answer to Written Question P-2783/01 from Mr Ford(1).

(1) OJ C 81 E, 4.4.2002, p. 209.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1994/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(6 July 2001)

Subject: Distortion of the market in the sale of airline tickets for flights outside the EU

Is the Commission aware that certain airlines will only sell special offers for flights from the European Union within certain Member States and not across the whole of the EU? Does the Commission not believe this is a distortion of the internal market?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1993/01 and E-1994/01given by Mrs de Palacio and Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2001)

The Commission would first of all assure the Honourable Member that it is extremely vigilant regarding commercial practices which aim to compartmentalise the internal market at the expense of consumers.

The issue the Honourable Member has raised may involve two types of case:

(a) to attract passengers to their medium and long-haul flights, some airlines charge lower fares where the flight involves a connection. For instance, a flight from Amsterdam to New York might cost more than a flight from Frankfurt via Amsterdam to New York;

(b) some airlines reserve their lowest fares for specific Member States. For instance, the lowest fare for a flight between City A and City B might only be available in the Member State of departure or the Member State of arrival (or, in the case of a domestic flight, only within the Member State itself). It would be impossible to obtain the same ticket at the same low fare in another Member State.

The first of these two practices involves distinct products. In example (a) one passenger wants to travel from Amsterdam to New York and the other from Frankfurt to New York. An airline is not acting in breach of the competition rules if it decides, quite independently, to charge different fares for different products.

In example (b), on the other hand, different fares are charged for the same service. Practices such as this may in certain circumstances constitute a breach of the Community competition rules, and in particular Articles 81 and 82 (ex Articles 85 and 86) of the EC Treaty. This would be the case if the airline in question had a dominant position in the market concerned. It would also be the case if the commercial practice in question derived directly or indirectly from a horizontal agreement between airlines or from a vertical agreement through which an airline prevented its distributors from selling a particular category of tickets outside the Member State in which they were located.

The Commission is extremely interested in examining any information it might receive on this subject.

The Commission also plans to look into these issues as part of the survey to be carried out on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the implementation of the third package of air transport liberalisation measures.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2584/01

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 September 2001)

Subject: Risk of losing resources from the third CSF in Greece

According to reports in the Greek press, Greece is at risk of losing resources from the third CSF because of agencies' shortcomings in adjusting to stringent preconditions for efficient and successful use of resources. It is indicative that, of the 275 projects submitted by local authorities throughout the country for approval and funding by the Cohesion Fund, the 13 regional authorities responsible preselected 106, of which only 30 projects will finally be submitted for the approval of the appropriate Community bodies, since the remainder did not meet the eligibility requirements specified by the new regulations.

Could the Commission say whether it is possible that Greece may lose these appropriations through inability to make use of them? In its opinion, are the local agencies really to blame for not being able to meet the newly prescribed eligibility requirements?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2001)

The Commission welcomes the effort made by the Greek government for improved management of projects and programmes co-financed by funds of the Community. This is reflected in the press reports to which the Honourable Member refers.

A more rigorous approach for project selection and implementation has been introduced, both for the Structural Funds and for the Cohesion Fund, for the programming period 2000-2006.

The year 2001 is a transitional year for the establishment and operation of the new structures and procedures, which are expected to be fully operational by 2002.

Both the Greek government and the Commission recognise the need to reinforce the management capacity of local and departmental authorities and administrations, and the Community support framework for the 2000-2006 period provides for actions in this regard.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2371/01

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 August 2001)

Subject: EU budget for fisheries cooperation

Will the Commission give details of the annual EU budget earmarked for development cooperation with third countries and the percentage of that budget allocated to each country each year for the period from 1994 to 2002?

Will it say what amount was allocated each year from the European Development Fund (EDF) for fisheries cooperation during the period from 1994 to 2001?

What amount will be allocated from the EDF for fisheries cooperation during the period from 2002 to 2007?

Reply given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(24 October 2001)

Most of the EU's international fisheries agreements include support for targeted projects, financed under the relevant budget heading (B7-8000). In general, the aim of these projects is to strengthen activities relating to the fisheries sector of the parties' country, including control, monitoring, research, small-scale fisheries, study grants and training, statistics, and so forth.

As regards annual allocations for fisheries cooperation from the European Development Fund for the 1994-2001 period, according to the information in the OLAS database (OECD classification code 313), over the whole 1994-August 2001 period, fisheries activities in the Africa, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries received EUR 45 518 000. Of this total, almost EUR 11.5 million was used to support fisheries policy and administrative management, while almost EUR 24.7 million (including EUR 3 million of debt forgiveness in 1999) was for fisheries development. The other sub-sectors which received funds were education/training, research and services.

The yearly amounts allocated were as follows:

- 1994: EUR 10 678 000 (EUR 6.3 million for sectoral development; EUR 4.2 million for research; EUR 0.15 million for policy and administrative management support);

- 1995: EUR 13 518 000 (EUR 12.4 million for sectoral development; EUR 1.1 million for policy and administrative management support);

- 1996: EUR 5 000 0000 (research);

- 1997: EUR 20 200 (policy and administrative management support);

- 1998: EUR 447 000 (EUR 347 000 for development; EUR 100 000 for policy and administrative management support);

- 1999: EUR 3 112 000 (policy and administrative management support);

- 2000: EUR 14 866 000 (EUR 6.07 million for policy and administrative management support; EUR 8.7 million for fisheries development; EUR 0 042 million for services);

- August 2001: EUR 877 000 (policy and administrative management support).

The amount of EDF funds that will be allocated to fisheries cooperation for the period 2002-2007 is not yet known, as programming is still being carried out for this period. The Commission will be able to reply to this question once programming has been completed.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2426/01

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 September 2001)

Subject: Equal treatment of religions in Slovakia

The John Calvin theological college in Slovakia does not receive any subsidy from the Slovakian government, whereas other smaller and larger church institutes are recognised as seminaries and/or faculties.

The college has been waiting for recognition as a faculty for six years. The report by the Commission requesting that the college should be recognised as a faculty was published ten months ago. If recognition is refused, payment of the pastors and ministers will be stopped. Other historical churches are allocated broadcasting time on public radio and television. This is not the case for the Calvinists. With 90 000 members, the Calvinist church is the fourth largest in the country.

Will the Commission investigate, in the negotiations with Slovakia, whether there is discrimination on the grounds of practising a particular religion or whether the reason for this discriminatory treatment is rather to be found in the fact that the Calvinists belong to the Hungarian minority?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(8 October 2001)

The Commission is closely following the respect of freedom of religion in Slovakia in the framework of the Copenhagen political criteria. In its 1999 Regular Report(1), the Commission came for the first time to the conclusion that Slovakia fulfils the political criteria. The same conclusion was drawn in the following Report of 2000(2).

The Commission can confirm that the Jean Calvin theological college has sought to be accredited, but so far has not been recognised as a faculty. The Commission can also confirm that the vast majority of Calvinists in Slovakia belong to the Hungarian minority.

This has, however, according to Commission's information, neither influenced the public financing of this church, nor the presence of Calvinists on public television and radio stations. Both financing and providing broadcasting time for churches are regulated by law. The state is responsible for paying the salaries of church ministers and partly also for its administration. The Calvinists' church in Slovakia is financed in the same manner as the other 14 registered churches in Slovakia.

The Commission will continue to monitor closely the fulfilment of the political criteria in the further course of accession negotiations, including the respect of freedom of religion.

(1) COM(1999) 511 final.

(2) COM(2000) 711 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3025/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(23 October 2001)

Subject: Support for tourism and the Philoxenia programme

The terrorist attack of 11 September has caused a sharp decline in tourism. The number of travellers cancelling their journeys as shipping companies cancel cruises and airlines withdraw flights from their schedules is increasing at an exponential rate.

Given the importance of tourism in the European Union (it is the most job-creative sector, accounting for 13.5 % of GDP and directly employing 9 million people) and the grave situation which has developed since the terrorist attack on 11 September, does the Commission have data available concerning the medium-term impact of the crisis on tourism in the Union or the Member States? Does it intend to take any action? Does it propose to reformulate the Philoxenia programme?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-2861/01 and P-3025/01given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(5 December 2001)

On 13 November 2001, the Commission adopted a report entitled Follow-up of the European Council of 21 September: the situation in the European tourism sector(1) which deals with the impact of the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States on European tourism in particular.

In this report the Commission emphasises that some of the measures proposed in its communication of 10 October 2001 on the Repercussions of the terrorist attacks in the United States on the air transport industry(2) also respond to requests made by the European tourism industry. It further comes to the conclusion that the challenge will be to develop a strategy for the European tourism sector that meets the medium and long-term political and economic challenges ahead.

Such strategy that also corresponds to the requests from the European tourism industry stakeholders for integration and cooperation should be met by the new cooperative approach for the tourism industry set out in the Commission communication of 13 November 2001 entitled Working together for the future of European tourism(3). The measures favoured under this approach aim at improving the integration of the concerns of all tourism stakeholders in Community policies and initiatives affecting tourism, and at promoting a better interface with the tourism industry and other parties involved. This approach does, however, not mean to reformulate the former proposal for a multiannual programme to assist European tourism (Philoxenia).

Since uncertainty remains, the Commission will continue to monitor the impact of current events on tourism and keep it under review. This will be done in cooperation with the Member States, the tourism industry, and the other stakeholders. But, despite the immediate crisis situation with which specific market segments, sectors and destinations are faced, measures which harm the long-term prospects for growth and competitiveness of the European tourism industry should be avoided.

(1) COM(2001) 668 final.

(2) COM(2001) 574 final.

(3) COM(2001) 665 final.