ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/160

(2004/C 70 E/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2908/03

by Franz Turchi (UEN) to the Commission

(1 October 2003)

Subject: Alcatel industrial plan

With reference to the Alcatel industrial plan for Italy and Europe, in view of the company's recent decisions which have particularly affected employment levels, especially at the Battipaglia and Rieti plants (the latter is to be closed with the loss of over 1 000 jobs), and given the company's situation as a consortium within the Galileo project and in the context of the TEN project, will the Commission say whether or not the plan contains any future strategies for the company, in terms of relaunching, selling or closing it?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-2901/03 and E-2908/03

given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2003)

The Commission has no competence to interfere with companies' decisions insofar as they do not violate Community law. With regard to the employment aspects of Alcatel's decision to close its Rieti plant, the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the answer it has given to Written Question P-2897/03, by Mrs Angelilli (1).

The Galileo project has now entered its development and validation phase. The Galileo Joint Undertaking has therefore full responsibility for that phase, but industrial contracts for the space segment (and related ground segment) will be managed by the European Space Agency (ESA). An invitation to tender will soon be issued by ESA concerning the first satellites and the core ground segment. Several companies in Europe are interested in these activities. A set of space manufacturers, i.e. Astrium, Alcatel and Alenia Spazio, have created a joint venture called ‘Galileo Industries’ which is most likely to bid for these contracts. At this stage, however, there is no guarantee whatsoever that Galileo Industries (hence Alcatel) will win them.

As regards Galileo, the Commission has no rights or obligations regarding the future of Alcatel's Battipaglia and Rieti plants. It could, however, be mentioned that a very first contract for a ‘demonstration and frequency protection’ satellite has been placed with Galileo Industries for a value of EUR 72 million. This activity could probably generate work for these sites.

As far as the negative effects on the economy are concerned, the territory of the province of Rieti is partly eligible for assistance from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) under Objective 2, and the municipality of Cittaducale, where one of the Alcatel plants is located, is an eligible area, as is the municipality of Battipaglia in Campania, which is an Objective 1 region.

In this connection, measures to convert production capacity may be financed following an initiative by the region of Lazio and the region of Campania, which are the authorities responsible for selecting and conducting operations in their geographical areas.

(1) OJ C 65 E, 13.3.2004, p. 242.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/148

(2004/C 70 E/153)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2860/03

by Jens-Peter Bonde (EDD) to the Council

(26 September 2003)

Subject: Article III-302 of the draft Constitution for the European Union

Article III-302, paragraphs 4 and 5 state that:

4. If the Council of Ministers approves the European Parliament's position, the proposed act shall be adopted.

5. If the Council of Ministers does not approve the European Parliament's position, it shall adopt its position at first reading and communicate it to the European Parliament.

Article 251, paragraph 2 of the EC Treaty (which is replaced by Article III-302, paragraphs 4 and 5) states that ‘The Council, acting by a qualified majority after obtaining the opinion of the European Parliament...’ It would appear, therefore, that the procedure is being changed from qualified majority to simple majority at the Council's first reading.

This interpretation is underpinned by Article III-302, paragraph 8, which states that ‘If, within three months of receiving the European Parliament's amendments, the Council of Ministers, acting by a qualified majority...’, i.e. an explicit reference to qualified majority.

In the light of the above, will the Council say by which majority it acts under Article III-302, paragraphs 4 and 5, and in which article(s) that procedure is laid down?

Reply

(8 December 2003)

The Council has not taken any view on any specific provisions in the draft Constitutional treaty drawn up by the Convention. This draft is on the table of the current Inter-Governmental Conference.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/187

(2004/C 70 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2998/03

by Bill Newton Dunn (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: Inconsistent exemptions from tax in the UK

In the Member State which I know best, excise duty is levied on unleaded petrol which is used by craft operated by sailing clubs in inland waters such as reservoirs or rivers — whereas identical craft operating in ports or coastal waters either do not have to pay this excise duty or, if they do, can claim it back again.

Is this a matter about which the Commission can do anything, or is it purely a question of national government policy and of subsidiarity?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2003)

The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that according to Article 8 (1c) of Council Directive 92/81/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the harmonisation of the structures of excise duties on mineral oils (1), Member States must exempt from the harmonised excise duty, under conditions they shall lay down, mineral oils supplied for use as fuel by vessels other than private pleasure craft for the purposes of navigation within Community waters. As far as taxation of mineral oils used as fuel by vessels navigating on inland waterways for other than pleasure purposes is concerned, Article 8, paragraph 2(b) of Directive 92/81/EEC leaves it to the discretion of the United Kingdom to decide, under certain conditions, whether to apply a total or partial exemption in the rate of the harmonised excise duty on these fuels.

Additionally, the United Kingdom has received a specific authorisation from the Council, under Article 8 (4) Directive 92/81/EEC, to apply until 31 December 2006 a partial or total exemption from the harmonised excise duty to mineral oils used as fuel by private pleasure craft.

Based on the specific authorisation granted by the Council, the United Kingdom could extend this exemption also to cover private pleasure crafts on inland waterways.

The Commission considers that the position of the United Kingdom authorities seems in line with the provisions of the Community fiscal legislation in force and, therefore, that no specific action seems called for on this issue. It should be noted that similar provisions have been agreed and appear in the new Council Directive on taxation of energy products, which will replace Directive 92/81/EEC as from 1 January 2004.

(1) OJ L 316, 31.10.1992, pp. 12-15.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/114

(2004/C 70 E/115)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2587/03

by Marco Pannella (NI) to the Council

(8 August 2003)

Subject: Execution of Faramaz Mohammadi, the 19-year-old leader of the student movement at Tabriz University (Iran)

On 22 July Xalq Qazeti, an Azerbaijan newspaper, published a report according to which:

— some days earlier the Tabriz Revolutionary Court had sentenced a leader of the student movement, Faramaz Mohammadi, to death;

— Faramaz Mohammadi, a nineteen-year-old Azerbaijani citizen, was a student at Tabriz University and a key figure in the student movement;

— after the execution her body was taken to Ardabil;

— she was one of the organisers of the student movement at Tabriz University and had delivered radical speeches against Iran's Persian and mullah regime;

— although the court had passed the death sentence a month before, she had been executed two days earlier.

Is the Council aware of the events described and, if so, what action has it taken or does it intend to take? Does it not consider that all relations with Iran should be suspended and any resumption thereof be made subject to respect for fundamental human rights and a moratorium on capital punishment?

Reply

(5 December 2003)

The Council is not aware of the events described and never comments on information contained in press releases. The Council normally bases its decisions to act in individual cases on corroborated reports. To the Council's knowledge, this particular information has not been corroborated.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/81

(2004/C 70 E/083)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2238/03

by Proinsias De Rossa (PSE) to the Commission

(7 July 2003)

Subject: Article 10 of the EC Treaty and Ireland

In the answer to my question E-1491/03 (1) regarding the number of letters of formal notice and reasoned opinions sent by the Commission to the Irish Government over its failure to respond to Commission queries on environmental complaints (i.e. non-respect of Article 10 of the EC Treaty) in the period since 1 May 1999, the Commission replied that two letters of formal notice were sent on 15 May 2003 against Ireland under Article 226 of the EC Treaty.

In this answer, why did the Commission not refer to the letters of formal notice and reasoned opinions as referred to in IP/00/1219 and IP/00/741 which highlighted the Commission's concern about the lack of cooperation from the Irish Government with regard to the application of the Waste Framework Directive (Dir 75/442/EEC (2)) at Poolbeg in Dublin, Kilbarry and Tramore in Waterford, Lea and Ballymorris in Laois, and Drumnaboden, Muckish and Glenall in Donegal, and the application of the Wild Birds Directive (Dir 79/409/EEC (3)) in Dublin Bay?

Could the Commission provide a definitive list of all its queries to the Irish Government that have given rise to the letters of formal notice and reasoned opinions to Ireland for non-respect of Article 10 of the EC Treaty since 1 May 1999 similar to those referred to in the above two press releases and also set out the current situation with regard to each of these queries?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 2003)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.

(1) See page 47.

(2) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975, p. 39.

(3) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979, p. 1.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/135

(2004/C 70 E/138)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2754/03

by Samuli Pohjamo (ELDR) to the Commission

(15 September 2003)

Subject: The possibility for Commission translators to work in their home countries

It has been put to me that Commission translators could be given more flexible opportunities than at present to work from their home countries. Given modern technology, this would be perfectly possible. Some Commission translators — both officials and those on contract — feel that ‘compulsory’ posting to Brussels detracts from their quality of life.

Aspects which are perceived as particularly problematic are the cost of housing and personal difficulties in acclimatising to life in the big city. It may also be observed that if translators worked in their home countries, this would cost the Commission less. More permanent residence in the home country would also perform an important role in helping translators to keep in touch with their own culture and thus in maintaining their professional skills.

Could translators be offered more flexible working conditions by making it the norm for them to work from their home countries?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 2003)

The Commission understands the considerations put by the Honourable Member but has to confirm that officials working as translators have the same rights and obligations as other officials and they are employed under the same terms and conditions of the ‘Regulations and Rules applicable to officials and other servants of the European Communities’. They must, therefore, comply with Article 20 of the Staff Regulations, which provides that:

An official shall reside either in the place where he is employed or at no greater distance therefrom as is compatible with the proper performance of his duties.

As a result, to allow officials who do not originate from the country in which they are employed to work on a permanent full-time basis from their home countries would not normally be regarded to be in accordance with the requirements of the Staff Regulations. The same provision also applies to translators employed in exceptional cases as auxiliary agents or temporary agents.

The Commission does not intend to derogate from this provision in the context of the introduction of telework schemes.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 70/155

(2004/C 70 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2888/03

by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 September 2003)

Subject: Island flights — declaration of public service

For many European citizens, air transport to the Balearic Islands means a holiday trip. For the inhabitants of the islands, however, it is a vital necessity, providing access to the mainland.

As laid down in Article 4 of EU Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 (1), ‘A Member State, following consultations with the other Member States concerned and after having informed the Commission and air carriers operating on the route, may impose a public service obligation in respect of scheduled air services to an airport serving a peripheral or development region in its territory or on a thin route to any regional airport in its territory, any such route being considered vital for the economic development of the region in which the airport is located, to the extent necessary to ensure on that route adequate provision of scheduled air services satisfying fixed standards of continuity, regularity, capacity and pricing, which standards air carriers would not assume if they were solely considering their commercial interest’.

Does the Commission believe there could be any impediment to the Spanish Government's agreeing to declare flights from the airports of Menorca, Eivissa and Palma to the Iberian Peninsula, as being flights of public interest?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 2003)

The expediency of introducing public service obligations (PSOs), in accordance with the criteria laid down in Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes, is a matter for the Member State concerned. Pursuant to Article 4(3), the Commission cannot assess whether PSOs which have already been imposed are in conformity with the Regulation until it has examined the information supplied by the Member State concerned.

(1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992, p. 8.
2.

In its judgment of 13 June 2002 (6), the Court of Justice declared that ‘by failing to send to the Commission, within the period prescribed, all the information required under Article 8(3) of Council Directive 91/689/EEC of 12 December 1991 on hazardous waste, in the version resulting from Council Directive 94/31/EC of 27 June 1994, the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.’ The Greek authorities have communicated to the Commission the measures taken to comply with the Court's judgment, namely information concerning establishments or enterprises which dispose of and/or recycle hazardous waste. The Greek authorities affirm that they have fulfilled their obligations under Article 8(3) of Directive 91/689/EEC. This information is being examined. If the Commission finds that the judgment of 13 June 2002 has not been implemented, it will not hesitate to initiate the infringement procedure provided for in Article 228 of the EC Treaty. With regard to the disposal of hazardous waste, it should be noted that the Commission has brought a case before the Court (Case C-l63/03) since it considers that Greece has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 2(1) and 6(1) of Directive 91/689/EEC. In the Commission's opinion, Greece has not taken the measures necessary to ensure that hazardous waste is recorded and identified in the region of Thriassio Pedio where it is discharged, and has not drawn up plans for the management of hazardous waste for that region. In addition, in its judgment of 5 June 2003 (7), the Court declared that ‘by failing to draw up, within the prescribed period, summaries of inventories of equipment with PCB volumes of more than 5 dm3, plans for the decontamination and/or disposal of inventoried equipment and the PCBs contained therein, and outlines for the collection and subsequent disposal of equipment that is not subject to inventory, in accordance with Articles 4(1) and 11 of Council Directive 96/59/EE of 16 September 1996 on the disposal of polychlorinated biphenyls and polychlorinated terphenyls (PCBs and PCTs), the Hellenic Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive.’
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/255

(2004/C 84 E/0302)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3858/03

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 December 2003)

Subject: Invalidity pensions in the European Union

It transpires from the Court of Auditors' Special Report 3/2003 (1), on the invalidity pensions scheme of the European institutions, that in 2001, 0,78 % of the European Communities' staff retired due to invalidity.

Could the Commission state the percentage of staff awarded invalidity pensions in 2002, and what checks and controls have been undertaken?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(11 February 2004)

In 2002 invalidity pensions were awarded to 1,1 % of Commission staff (officials and temporary agents).

In those instances where, in its decision granting invalidity, the Invalidity Committee recommend that checks are necessary, they are carried out systematically until the former official reaches the age of 60 (in accordance with Article 15 of Annex VIII of the Staff Regulations).

Every individual official subject to such checks is required to undergo an in-depth examination by the medical service. If deemed appropriate, that examination is complemented by a further analysis carried out by external experts.

In 2002, 154 such checks were carried out. Three officials were reinstated during this period.

The attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the reply by the Commission to the special report from the Court of Auditors 3/2003, in which the Commission announced its intention of developing an overall policy aimed at both preventing invalidity and helping and encouraging rehabilitation, and to inform the Parliament of the results of its work.

(1) OJ C 109, 7.5.2003, p. 1.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/747

(2004/C 78 E/0795)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2614/03

by Albert Maat (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 August 2003)

Subject: Planting of vineyards with the help of EU funds

Is the Commission aware that in the Spanish winegrowing area of Toro, vineyards are being planted (with irrigation) with the help of EU funds?

Does this policy not conflict with the restriction of surplus overproduction in viticulture? (1)

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 September 2003)

Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine (2) provides for a system of restructuring and conversion of Community vineyards to improve the adjustment of production to market demand.

Under that system, an instrument for funding restructuring and conversion operations was introduced in 2000 under a budget managed by the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) Guarantee Section.

That budget is shared out among the various Member States by the Commission on the basis of the criteria laid down in the Council Regulation and its use is strictly governed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1227/2000 of 31 May 2000 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1493/1999 on the common organisation of the market in wine, as regards production potential (3).

Therefore the Commission is fully aware of the information to which the Honourable Member refers.

The vineyard restructuring and conversion policy is part of a wine production potential management strategy.

This is why, to prevent the qualitative restructuring of vineyards from having a quantitative impact on the volume of production, the Community rules include a number of safeguards, such as restrictions on vine yields, rules on the transfer of replanting rights between holdings, and the specific problem of vine irrigation. These provisions are applied by the Member States concerned and are verified and checked by the Commission.

(1) See article in the magazine Perswijn, volume 16, issue 4 July 2003.

(2) OJ L 179, 14.7.1999.

(3) OJ L 143, 16.6.2000.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/585

(2004/C 78 E/0619)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3553/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(1 December 2003)

Subject: Missing Cypriots

A group of my constituents, the Organisation of Relatives of Missing Cypriots (UK), wish to know what the situation is in resolving the case of the missing persons in Cyprus.

Does the Commission believe the Government of Turkey could exert more pressure on the Turkish Cypriot leadership to uphold its duties and responsibilities to human rights? If so, could the Commission please state whether this issue will form part of Turkey's accession negotiations?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2004)

Mr Clerides and Mr Denktash met in June and July 2002 to exchange proposals on the issue of missing persons. The basis for this exchange was their agreement of 31 July 1997. The Greek Cypriot side proceeded with its programme of exhumations and identifications in areas under its control. Investigations are carried out by the United States (US) funded bi-communal Institute for Neurology and Genetics. The Turkish Cypriot side has not yet designated scientists who would work with the Institute.

In its set of measures vis-à-vis the Turkish Cypriots of 30 April 2003 the Government of the Republic announced several measures regarding relatives of missing and killed Turkish Cypriots. The measures provide ‘inter alia’ for access to information, meetings between relatives of missing persons and Government officials, exploratory excavations of burial places, and arrangements for the establishment of a DNA Bank. A list of 500 Turkish Cypriots whose cases have been submitted to the Committee of Missing Persons (CMP) was published by the Government of the Republic in Turkish Cypriot newspapers on 14 June 2003. The Commission has also learned that information concerning the fate of 201 missing Turkish Cypriots was officially conveyed to the International Committee of the Red Cross by Government authorities.

In letter of 3 December 2003 to Mr Papadopoulos and Mr Denktash, United Nations Secretary-General Annan urged the two leaders to invite their respective members of the CMP to resume formal meeting in order to reactivate the work of the Committee.

As for Turkey, the Commission has repeatedly indicated to Turkey the need to use its influence over the Turkish Cypriot leadership to find a comprehensive settlement. After the formation of a new ‘government’ in the north under opposition leader Mr Talat there is a window of opportunity to reach a settlement on the basis of the Annan plan in the coming months. In the event of a settlement based on the Annan plan, the question mentioned by the Honourable Member will be solved on the basis of the relevant provisions.