ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0219/00

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(4 February 2000)

Subject: EU aid to France for the Route Forestière du Port des Moines in Morvan, Burgundy

On 18 November 1998, Maartje van Putten, MEP, tabled Written Question E-3743/98(1) to the Commission. In its reply of 2 February 1999, the Commission said that it needed more information before it could answer the question. The required supplementary information was subsequently supplied to the relevant directorate of the Commission. However, the Commission has still not answered the question.

The text of the written question (including the supplementary information requested by the Commission) was as follows:

1. Is the Commission aware of the deforestation taking place in various parts of the Route Forestière du Port des Moines regional natural park and particularly the forêt domanial de Saint Prix in the commune of Saint Prix, which forms part of the Morvan natural park, and that any reforestation which is taking place is being carried out using tree species (conifers) which damage water resources in the area, with the result that natural assets in the area are being impaired and a drought is occurring?

2. What are the Commission's views of the impact on natural assets in the regional natural park in the light of the fact that the region received European financing via the Structural Funds for the period 1994-1999 (SPD Burgundy, Objective 5b regions, EAGGF money)?

(1) OJ C 207, 21.7.1999, p. 121.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 2000)

Following the clarifications that Mrs Van Putten provided by telephone to the Commission, supplementary information to the answer given to her Written Question E-3743/98 was sent to her on 9 June 1999.

In its letter, the Commission stated that it had contacted the French authorities concerning the deforestation to which she referred. The French authorities had replied that the Saint-Prix national forest where the Route Forestière du Port des Moines is located formed part of the state's private property and was managed by the national forestry office according to a plan approved by the Ministry of Agriculture, which ensured its on-going management. More specifically, the stands located on each side of the forest road are mature softwoods (spruces) which are at the stage of natural regeneration. There is therefore neither deforestation nor reafforestation involving softwoods. In any case, this is one of the highest points in Burgundy (903 metres) with an annual rainfall of at least 1 000 to 1 200 mm, which excludes any risk of drought.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0208/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(4 February 2000)

Subject: Human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo

Is the Commission aware of the recent Amnesty report on human rights abuses in the Democratic Republic of Congo? The report catalogues evidence of the often brutal targeting of opposition politicians, journalists and other government officials. What action does the Commission intend to take and will it press for the reinforcement of UN human rights field monitors in the Great Lakes region, including in the Democratic Republic of Congo?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(8 March 2000)

The Commission is following very closely the human rights situation in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and is aware of the recent report of Amnesty International on the subject.

The Commission is engaged in initiatives to give direct assistance in support of the human rights situation in the DRC, in order to prepare a programme aimed at improving the judicial system and at contributing to the establishment of the rule of law in the DRC. A specialist funded by the Commission has been working in Kinshasa for a year now in close contact with the delegation of the Commission, the ministries of Human Rights and Justice, the United Nations (UN) High Commissioner for human rights, representatives of the local civil society and other donors.

The programme to be funded will deal with aspects such as the support to local human rights organisations, the rehabilitation of the judicial system, and assistance in the publication of a national register.

The Commission is also ready to examine and, where appropriate, give support to, any valid initiative intended to promote the respect for human rights in the region.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0809/00

by Harlem Désir (PSE) to the Commission

(10 March 2000)

Subject: Condemnation by the WTO's body of appeal of the tax treatment of foreign sales corporations (FSCs) in the USA

On 24 February 2000 the WTO's body of appeal published its report on the tax treatment of foreign sales corporations (FSCs) in the USA. This report upholds the condemnation of the tax arrangements under which some 50 % of American exports benefit from a tax refund which is tantamount to an export subsidy totalling some $ US 4 billion annually. Although European companies are not the only ones affected, they are among those hardest hit.

Will the Commission say why, having condemned these practices, the WTO has not fixed the amount of compensation due to the European Union and why the Commission itself which is responsible for protecting the Union's commercial interests has failed to take any action vis-à-vis the United States to obtain compensation, bearing in mind that the latter is continuing to take retaliatory measures against the European Union over bananas and beef treated with hormones and the WTO itself has acknowledged that the commercial losses incurred by the EU are far higher?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2000)

Under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) ruling on Foreign Sales Corporations (FSC), the United States have until 1 October 2000 to bring their legislation into line with the conclusions of the panel and the appelate body. If, at that date, the United States have not abolished the FSC status or amended it so as to bring it into line with WTO regulations, the Community will be able to exercise its rights as laid down in article 22 of the memorandum on dispute settlement, and either obtain compensation from the United States, or suspend equivalent concessions, as the United States themselves have done in the cases of hormone-treated beef and bananas.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0970/00

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(31 March 2000)

Subject: Construction of an incinerator at Meia Serra

Plans are afoot to construct an incinerator at Meia Serra in the parish of Camacha in the municipality of Santa Cruz, in the Autonomous Region of Madeira, as part of a project to develop and restructure the Meia Serra solid urban waste treatment centre.

The chosen site is very close to a built-up area and is located in an area which contains agricultural land and a number of springs; the project therefore poses an environmental and public health threat.

Will the Commission say:

1. Has any Community funding already been authorised for the construction of the Meia Serra incinerator on the island of Madeira?

2. Has it already taken steps to ensure that all the necessary measures will be taken to protect the environment and the health of the local population?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(16 May 2000)

By its decision of 22 November 1999, the Commission granted aid from the Cohesion Fund for the first phase of the project concerning the Unidade de Valorizacão de Resíduos Sólidos da Ilha da Madeira (Madeira solid waste treatment centre).

This project includes the construction of an incinerator to replace the obsolete plant currently operating at Meia Serra, which does not comply with Community environmental legislation.

The decision to grant this aid includes specific clauses to ensure full compliance with the environmental standards associated with this type of infrastructure. The project in question was also the subject of an environmental impact assessment.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1185/00

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(12 April 2000)

Subject: Tax burden on single persons

The tax rates to which single persons are subject vary from one European Union country to another. A recent OECD study shows that the tax levied on single persons in some countries exceeds 50 % of

income, while in other countries it is at least 10 % lower. In view of the low birth rate in several EU countries and the advisability of ensuring that similar conditions apply to all citizens in this category, does the Commission agree that it it is necessary to propose harmonising in a downwards direction the tax levied on the incomes of single persons throughout the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(24 May 2000)

The Commission would point out that, as Community law currently stands, personal direct taxation is essentially a matter for the Member States, which are free to lay down the system of taxation applicable to their residents on the sole condition that they adhere to the fundamental principles of the EC Treaty, such as the prohibition of any discrimination based on nationality.

It is true that certain initiatives are currently being considered with a view to introducing a degree of coordination of national legislation concerning the most mobile tax bases, particularly situations involving transnational factors, which are more likely to affect the proper operation of the single market.

In keeping with the principle of subsidiarity, however, the Commission does not regard a Community initiative aimed at harmonisation or even coordination of the progressiveness of personal taxation, whether for single persons or families, as a political priority for the moment. Moreover, the solutions which individual Member States have devised on this issue are intimately linked to local political and social traditions, which deserve to be respected.

The Commission can only hope that the budgetary discipline imposed on the Member States by their participation in the single currency will bring about a general reduction in the tax burden which may benefit single persons along with other categories of taxpayers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council. Staff dismissals and wage costs.



Official Journal 330 E , 21/11/2000 P. 0187 - 0187



WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council (2 March 2000) Subject: Staff dismissals and wage costs How many members of the Council's staff have been dismissed in each of the last five years, and what proportion does this represent of the total staff establishment in each year? What was the total wage bill for the institution, and what was the average amount paid to each employee in each year? Reply (2 May 2000) The Council would inform the Honourable Member that over the last five-year period, out of a total average staff complement of 2 400 officials, one person in the General Secretariat was removed from his post under Article 86(2)(f) of the Staff Regulations and one person was not established at the end of his probationary period pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 34(2) of the Staff Regulations.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1370/00

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 April 2000)

Subject: Tobacco Community Fund for Research and Information

1. Can the Commission confirm that, each year, 2 % of the amount earmarked for tobacco premiums (Chapter B1-17 of the budget), i.e. some 20 million, is placed in the Community Fund for Research and Information relating to tobacco (B1-175), as announced by the Council?

2. Have any projects been announced since 1997 which are to be paid for by this Fund?

3. On what tobacco research and information projects was this money spent in 1997-1999, and how much was spent on them?

Joint answer to Written Questions P-1369/00 and P-1370/00 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 2000)

1. The Community Tobacco Fund (Research and Information) was set up under Article 13 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco(1). This Article was amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1636/98 of 20 July 1998(2), which widened the purposes of the Fund and raised the deduction to 2 % of the premium paid to growers for each crop. At the moment this corresponds to about 19 million.

In practice the Commission launches projects financed from the ad hoc heading Community fund for research and information (B1-185). The appropriations for this correspond to the estimate of actual costs incurred for the financial year in question. The Commission ensures that appropriations/expenditure under this heading do not exceed the product of the deduction.

2. The Fund has not financed any new projects since 1997 but the appropriations available have permitted financing of the projects in progress selected following two calls for proposals, in 1994 and in 1996. These multiannual projects are in effect financed in annual instalments.

The Commission plans to launch new projects in the coming months.

3. The projects in progress and the appropriations allotted to them for 1997-1999 are:

Research:

- 1997: 2 747 666, for projects 94/T/12, 94/T/19-24, 94/T/22, 96/T/18, 96/T/66 and 96/T/67.

- 1998: 2 690 916, for projects 94/T/12, 94/T/19-24, 94/T/22, 96/T/18, 96/T/24, 96/T/35, 96/T/55, 96/T/66 and 96/T/67.

- 1999: 2 385 727, for projects 94/T/12, 94/T/19-24, 94/T/22, 96/T/18, 96/T/24, 96/T/35, 96/T/55, 96/T/66 and 96/T/67.

Information:

- 1997: 610 719,16, for projects 96/I.T./13, 96/I.T./26, 96/I.T./28, 96/I.T./33, 96/I.T./37, 96/I.T./57 and 96/I.T./73.

- 1998: 1 311 027,30, for projects 96/I.T./13, 96/I.T./26, 96/I.T./33, 96/I.T./36, 96/I.T./44, 96/I.T./55, 96/I.T./57, 97/I.T./12 and 97/I.T./33.

- 1999: 210 748,61, for projects 96/I.T./28, 96/I.T./37, 97/I.T./3 and 97/I.T./33.

(1) OJ L 215, 30.7.1992.

(2) OJ L 210, 28.7.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2298/00

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(11 July 2000)

Subject: Community fishing boats outside the CFP

It is common knowledge that there are fishing boats from Community countries operating in international waters which circumvent the rules laid down by the common fisheries policy (with regard to the state of stocks, health and hygiene standards, working conditions and social security for crews, etc.) by using flags of convenience. There are numerous reports about the predatory activities of these boats.

However, less is known about the practices indulged in by vessels from specific EU countries. In fact, some of them, far from complying with the rules governing the CFP, prefer to fish freely, without the restrictions limiting, for example, the quantity and size of catches, by means of private agreements with third countries. This is the case for certain vessels which exploit fishing opportunities, the legality of which is not questioned, in waters under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Morocco.

How does the Commission intend, in the future reform of the CFP in 2002, to differentiate between boats flying Community flags, boats flying the flags of EU countries, but fishing on the basis of private agreements with third countries, and boats flying flags of convenience?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

With reference to the process of reforming the common fisheries policy as from 2002, it is the Commission's intention to conduct a complete review of all the components of this policy, including therefore its external aspects.

As to the Commission's plans with regard to the three fleet segments referred to by the Honourable Member i.e. vessels under Community flags fishing under agreements concluded by the Community, vessels under Community flags fishing under private agreements and vessels under flags of convenience fishing outside Community waters these will be treated in strict accord with the Community's international commitments, and the Commission will be taking into consideration the advice and opinions offered during the above discussions.

However, and without wishing to predetermine future discussions, the Commission would like to stress that it is committed to eradicating illegal fishing. It is already possible to identify various more effective and constraining instruments for achieving this, such as a common strategy for Community distant-water fishing, the possibility of taking legal action against Community nationals, and tighter controls on landings in Community ports from both Community vessels and those flying non-Community flags.

The Commission would also like to point out that although the CFP, including its external aspects, is an integrated Community policy, the implementation of it is the duty of the Member States, which retain full policing powers over fishing activities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1291/00

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

(19 April 2000)

Subject: Project for construction of a water purifying plant in Gondomar in the context of the integrated improvement project for the Ria de Vigo financed by the Cohesion Fund

The decision of the Commission to grant Cohesion Fund aid to the set of integrated clearance projects for the Ria de Vigo (Galicia) (Commission Decision 95/11/61/035) provides, in one of its paragraphs, for a specific action for integrated improvement for Gondomar and the river Miñor. This specific project was costed at ECU 4 836 036 in total. In the case of Gondomar, the first stage consists of the construction of a water purifying plant and a number of collectors; the construction work has terminated, but the plant is not yet officially in operation. The project has given rise to a major controversy in the local community, and has even been the subject of a complaint lodged with the regional ombudsman for Galicia: the plant has been built on privately-owned land belonging to a single proprietor, and the contract of sale was drawn up in a secret and irregular fashion. It further appears that the transaction has been highly profitable for the owner, who has now filed a request for the land to be reclassified with a view to using it for property development. In addition, the access road to the plant (linking the Ramallosa-Gondomar road to the parish of Dornas, in the municipality of Gondomar) runs through this person's land and has not yet been completed: access to the plant is thus not at present possible.

Can the Commission call for an inquiry into these circumstances, as well as for the assessment and monitoring of this project, which has been suspended for some time and which appears to exhibit operational irregularities?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2000)

According to information provided by the Spanish authorities, construction of the Gondomar sewage treatment plant has been completed since February 2000 and the testing and implementation phase is currently in hand. The site of this plant was chosen after technical studies carried out prior to its implementation. Land was made available to the independent organisation Augas de Galicias, which is responsible for the project, by the municipality of Gondomar.

The Commission is not currently planning an inquiry into this project specifically. However, it would like to remind the Honourable Member that the monitoring of projects financed by the Cohesion Fund is in the hands of a monitoring committee which meets twice a year. The Commission will therefore certainly be checking on the project in question within the framework of this committee.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1269/00

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

(19 April 2000)

Subject: Proposed new Community regulation on the system for promoting agricultural produce

The Community helps to fund various promotional programmes for some agricultural produce, including olive oil, apples, citrus fruit or raisins.

It is planning shortly to put forward a proposal for a regulation to harmonise and simplify the system for promoting agricultural produce in the Community.

Can the Commission say if there is already a specific date for presenting this proposed regulation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 2000)

No precise date has yet been fixed for the presentation of a proposition for a Council Regulation concerning the new Community arrangements for the promotion of agricultural products on the internal market.

The Commission is in the process of drawing up the draft proposal.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1294/00

by Eurig Wyn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(19 April 2000)

Subject: European aid for multiple sclerosis sufferers

Could the Commission please indicate what European aid and/or support possibilities are available in an Objective 1 deprived region such as Wales, to assist people who suffer from multiple sclerosis?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(25 May 2000)

West Wales and the Valleys has been designated as an objective 1 region for the 2000-2006 programming period. In drawing up the single programming document spending plan, the West Wales and the Valleys regional partnership has included a number of measures (e.g. Community action for social inclusion) that community organisations could access to obtain finance for groups such as multiple sclerosis sufferers. However it should be noted that funding is not available for the treatment of multiple sclerosis but could be found for training, rehabilitation, and the avoidance of discrimination at work.

The handling of the applications for the funding of projects such as these is not carried out by the Commission but has been delegated to the British authorities and specifically the National Assembly for Wales and the Wales European funding office. Consequently it is to these latter organisations that interested groups should address their requests.