ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0589/00

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(29 February 2000)

Subject: European sustainable transport policy

In terms of identifying the major cities along the T-TEN priority project routes, can the Commission say how such decisions were made and who was involved in this decision-making process? What criteria were used and who were the winners and losers in such decisions?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(13 April 2000)

The Trans-European Network-transport (TEN-T) guidelines identify the key routes of trans-European importance, which include those routes covered by the TEN-T priority projects. The guidelines contain a set of maps, outlining all these key routes. Where cities are named on these maps, they are included only as reference points, and many cities have access to the TEN-T network, without appearing on the maps.

Over 1990-1992, the Commission set up a number of working parties, with representatives from each Member State, which developed a set of outline plans. These plans identified the routes of trans-European importance, taking account of traffic flows and the need to link peripheral regions with the centre of the Community. The working parties did not specifically identify cities along the TEN-T routes. These outline plans were then incorporated into the TEN-T guidelines, adopted by the Council and Parliament under the co-decision procedure in 1996(1).

The Commission is currently considering how best to take forward these issues in its report on the revision of the TEN-T guidelines that will be submitted to the Council and Parliament this summer.

(1) OJ C 17, 22.1.1996.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0882/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 March 2000)

Subject: Fraud investigation at the Stockholm office

What is happening in the investigation into the allegations of fraud at the European Parliament information office in Stockholm? How is the investigation progressing? Will the case or the evidence be handed over to the Swedish police and the Public Prosecutor's Office for further proceedings within the Swedish judicial system?

Answer given by Ms Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(16 May 2000)

The Honourable Member is referred to the answer which the Commission gave to Oral Question H-712/99 by Mr Schori during question time at Parliament's part session in December 1999(1).

With regard to the Commission Office in Stockholm (Sweden), the Commission does not yet have a report, drawn up in accordance with Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 concerning investigations conducted by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF)(2), on the action to be taken within the meaning of Article 9(4) of the Regulation.

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (December 1999).

(2) OJ L 136, 31.5.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1106/00

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

(7 April 2000)

Subject: The Spanish Government's failure to comply with Law No 31 of 8 November 1995 on the prevention of hazards at work

Council Directive 89/391/EEC(1) on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work was transposed by the Spanish Government in Law No 31/95 of 8 November 1995 on the prevention of hazards at work.

One of the obligations laid down in the law is that the health committee of any firm with more than 100 employees should consist of four members appointed by the trade union and four others appointed by the authorities. However, the prison of A Lama, in Pontevedra, Galicia, which has more than 100 employees, does not comply with this requirement, since the health committee does not have any members appointed by the authorities, which adversely affects its efficiency. As a result the officials appointed by the trade union complained to the Director of the prison, the Director-General for Prisons, the Ministry for the Civil Service and the Ombudsman, without managing to obtain a solution to the problem.

In view of this failure to fulfil obligations, what steps will the Commission take to ensure Spanish central government's compliance with laws such as the aforementioned Directive and remedy this current form of discrimination?

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(17 May 2000)

Articles 10 and 11 of Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work(1) (Framework Directive) lay down rules on information, consultation and balanced participation of workers and/or their representatives in the field of safety and health at work in accordance with national laws and/practices.

In accordance with Article 4 of Directive 89/391/EEC, it is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure adequate controls and supervision of the national provisions implementing this Directive.

Consequently, any possible infringements of the national provisions implementing the Directive must be brought to the attention of the relevant Spanish authorities, i.e. the labour and social security inspectorate, which must organise and carry out the necessary inspections and checks to ensure proper application of these provisions.

Should the Commission receive specific information suggesting that the Spanish authorities have failed to monitor the application of the national provisions implementing Directive 89/391/EEC, it will take the necessary action.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0649/00

by Carlos Ripoll y Martínez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 March 2000)

Subject: Air transport liberalisation

Considerable progress has now been made on liberalising air transport. Airlines, however, still maintain practices which are against consumers' interests.

Does the Commission intend to draw up a directive on consumer protection with regard to airlines?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2000)

Air passengers already benefit from certain protection under Community legislation involving, for example, compensation and fair treatment in case of denied boarding, compensation for accidents and the obligations of organisers of package holidays.

Under its work programme for 2000, the Commission will present a communication on strengthening air passengers' rights, to be ready in June 2000. To prepare this, the Commission has sent out a consultative document, to which there has been a strong response from the many different bodies with an interest in air transport. The document covers contracts and conditions of carriage, business practices, cabin conditions and health questions and information and transparency.

The communication will cover passengers' rights and treatment in a wide sense. It will consider not only legislation but also voluntary commitments taken by airlines, after discussion with the Commission and passengers' representatives which may sometimes be the most effective course of action.

This is clearly a policy for the medium term. In addition it is essential to raise passengers' awareness of their existing rights under Community law, so that they can insist on their respect. The Commission plans an immediate initiative to do this, involving the publication and display of a charter of air passengers' rights in airports and in the offices of airlines and travel agents.

It follows that the Commission has ambitious plans to protect passengers' rights and improve the service that they receive, with both immediate and medium-term action.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0847/00

by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission

(21 March 2000)

Subject: Installation of a delegation to Havana and cooperation with Cuba

Recently Cuba officially requested its accession to the ACP-EU agreements. At a time when this partnership is starting up again on a new basis, we must open the door to Cuba to encourage its own opening.

Currently, Cuba is the only country in Latin America and the Caribbean not to have concluded a cooperation framework agreement with the European Union.

With a rapid accession to the new ACP-EU agreement it should be possible to proceed to a cooperation framework agreement with a view to formalising and redefining the cooperative ties between Cuba and the European Union.

The early installation of a Commission Delegation to Havana would open the way to intensifying the dialogue with the authorities and all sectors of Cuban society to define future cooperation between the European Union and Cuba.

Is such a plan being considered by the Commission? If so, how soon?

How does the Commission propose to strengthen and formalise cooperation with Cuba?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(12 May 2000)

For the Honourable Member's first question concerning the opening of a Commission delegation in Cuba, pleas see the reply to Written Question E-0615/00 from Mr Miranda(1).

In response to the second question on the formalising and strengthening cooperation with Cuba, we should point out that Cuba sent a letter to the ACP-EC Council of Ministers on 10 March confirming its wish to be come a signatory to the new ACP-EC Partnership Agreement.

This request is currently being studied by the Commission and the Council.

In the shorter term, and independently of the talks on the new Partnership Agreement, the Commission is evaluating its cooperation with Cuba in order to identify, in the EU common position, the best way of using the various cooperation instruments, especially the idea of humanitarian aid. The aim of such a change in the structure of aid is to make our cooperation more effective.

(1) See page 118.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1442/00

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Council

(12 May 2000)

Subject: Human rights situation in Equatorial Guinea

Recent UN reports on the human rights situation in Equatorial Guinea have clearly highlighted an utter lack of respect for human rights in that country.

According to the UN reports, the lack of respect for human rights is most apparent in the legal uncertainty facing citizens in that country, in that at any time they may be deprived of their freedom without the need for a court order or legal grounds for issuing such an order.

The Republic of Guinea has formally announced that the trial of Mr Alpha Condé, who has been in detention since 1998, will commence on 12 April next.

In view of the aforementioned facts, what guarantees are there that this will be a fair trial?

Does the Council intend to send observers in order to guarantee a fair trial?

Reply

(29 September 2000)

The Honourable Member adresses in fact two distinct situations, concerning two different countries, in her written question.

1. The human rights situation in Equatorial Guinea to which the Honourable Member refers to in the first place, was examined at the 56th session of the Commission on Human Rights which met during last March and April in Geneva. On that occasion, the European Union Member States joined in the consensus on the resolution relating to this country which adresses the problems mentioned by the Honourable Member, and includes a number of recommendations and appeals to the Government of Equatorial Guinea to take urgent steps to remedy the deficiencies and conditions that lead to violations and abuses of human rights.

2. With respect to the trial conducted in the Republic of Guinea against Mr Alpha Condé, the Presidency on behalf of the European Union issued a declaration on 6 April 2000 in which it expressed the hope that the trial would be conducted fairly and transparently, in full accordance with the law, thereby ensuring that Mr. Condé is in a position to defend himself on all charges brought against him. The course of this trial, which started on 12 April last, is being closely monitored by the European Union Heads of Mission in Conakry.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1946/00

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: Assessment of the costs of transition to competition in the acquisition of a Spanish electricity firm

According to information in the Spanish press, the purchase price of Hidrocantábrica by Unión Fenosa increased by Ptas 200 000 million as a result of the assessment of its CTCs.

In the Commission's opinion, is this relevant to an assessment of the compatibility of these aids with the Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(19 July 2000)

It was widely reported in the press that the acquisition of a Spanish electricity firm to which the Honourable Member refers did not go ahead in the end because the Spanish authorities were unwilling to authorise it. Under the circumstances, the Commission takes the view that the question as to the impact, if any, of the operation on the costs of transition to competition (CTCs) in the Spanish electricity market is of no relevance.

In such an operation the purchase price is freely determined by the parties involved, who value the target business in the light of their own criteria. Such criteria could in no way commit the Commission, which has not yet taken any decision on CTCs from the viewpoint of state aid.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1729/00

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE), Ulpu Iivari (PSE) and Michel Rocard (PSE) to the Commission

(31 May 2000)

Subject: Safeguarding of European music copyright in the United States

According to existing legislation in the United States, restaurants, bars and similar enterprises in the country are exempted from paying copyright fees on music played at their premises. Consequently, European music played at these enterprises loses its share of copyright payments. Recently, the WTO accused the USA of violating the international copyright standards on music. To date, no measures have been taken in the United States to correct the situation. Therefore, European music production still loses a large amount of income.

What measures will the Commission take to safeguard the rights of European music played in the aforementioned enterprises in the United States?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(6 July 2000)

The Honourable Members refer to Section 110 (5) of the Copyright Act of the United States, which permits, under certain conditions, the playing of music from radio and television stations in public places, such as bars, shops, and restaurants without the payment of a royalty fee.

Following a complaint lodged by the Irish Music Rights Organisation (IMRO) under the trade barriers regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community's rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation (WTO)(1)), the Community and its Member States initiated, in January 1999, proceedings against the United States under the dispute settlement understanding of the WTO on the basis of the incompatibility of Section 110 US Copyright Act with the provisions of the WTO agreement on trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights (TRIPs).

On 15 June 2000, the WTO Panel issued its report on this matter. It confirms that Section 110(5) is, to a large extent, incompatible with the WTO TRIPs agreement. The United States may still appeal this report. The Commission will ensure that the United States implement this report fully and in time to the benefit of Community operators.

(1) OJ L 349, 31.12.1994.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2218/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Frost damage to grapevines in the Nemea region of Corinthia

On 4 May 2000, an unseasonable frost caused severe damage to vineyards in the Nemea region of Corinthia. The damage will affect not only this year's production but also subsequent crops as the vines themselves have been attacked. The damage will also have serious repercussions for the wine industry in the region, which produces wine of exceptional quality, the name Nemea having gained recognition as a registered designation of origin. Can the region's producers receive aid to compensate for the damage to their crops and means of production, pursuant to the Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector applicable for the period 2000-2006(1)? When should aid be applied for and what procedures should be followed?

(1) OJ C 28, 1.2.2000.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

In line with point 11.3. of the Community guidelines for state aid in the agriculture sector(1), the Commission does not consider that adverse weather such as frosts (even if unusually severe) can be classed as natural disasters within the meaning of Article 87(2)(b) of the EC Treaty (formerly Article 92). However, such occurrences can be treated as on a par with natural disasters if the degree of damage reaches a stipulated threshold (20 % in the less-favoured areas and 30 % in other regions).

If the Greek Government wishes to grant such aid at national level, it must notify the relevant statutory provisions at the draft stage in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 88(3) of the Treaty (formerly Article 93). The Community rules set no deadline for notification but, without a specific justification, the Commission does not approve applications for aid schemes submitted more than three years after the causal event.

(1) OJ C 28, 1.2.2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2751/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Abolition of the Enterprise Programme

Can the Commission explain why it has decided to abolish the Enterprise Programme, which promotes cooperation between small and medium-sized enterprises and encourages international trade, thus causing considerable cost to the various consortia which have invested resources to prepare projects? Does the Commission intend to propose a new programme which will meet SMEs' needs in the future?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(3 October 2000)

The Commission has decided recently not to continue its participation in events such as Interprise. This decision has to be seen in the general policy line of the Commission to discontinue small financial projects.

Interprise has been favourably evaluated as meeting a real need and achieving good results in a cost-effective way. However, despite the benefits for the firms participating in these events, the Commission cannot justify continued allocation of its scarce resources to benefits only a small number of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The Commission's participation does not bring sufficient leverage in relation to the total population of enterprises in Europe.

The Commission is nevetheless reflecting on ways to continue with a Community business co-operation programme that would not make an undue claim on the Commission's resources.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1667/00

by Rosemarie Müller (PSE) to the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Subject: Transparency of youth exchange programmes

There are two levels at which transparency may be achieved. Firstly, by publicising and describing procedures. But another aspect of transparency is concern to structure the procedures themselves so that they are easy to understand.

With this in mind, does the Commission see any possibility of making its various exchange programmes for school students and young people more user-friendly, by making the various application procedures simpler, stricter and thus also more transparent?

In addition, can the Commission see any way to change the application periods, some of which are exceptionally long?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(13 July 2000)

The Commission shares the view that transparency must be achieved not only through the use of open procedures as is already the case but also through a simplification of these procedures.

Greater transparency, and thus easier access, have an important role to play in the implementation of the Youth programme in particular. It should above all be remembered that the Youth programme combines the activities of two Community action programmes (Youth for Europe III, European voluntary service scheme for young people) into a single entity. This has enabled the following aims to be achieved: reduction of the number of programme objectives from ten to three; reduction of the number of actions under the programme from eight to five; further decentralisation in the running of the programme by national agencies (around 80 % of the programme budget). This allows applicants to be given advice directly in the language of their respective country, and makes access to the programme considerably easier.

The arrangements for implementing the programme have also been simplified wherever possible: flat-rate funding for a large number of projects; new, simpler and shorter forms; user handbook available on the Internet:

http://europa.eu.int/comm/education/youth.html.

Under the new Youth programme, uniform application deadlines apply for all actions. For action I (exchange programmes for young people), for example, there are five different deadlines for projects being run by the national agencies, each of which can be launched three months later. These deadlines are laid down in an effort to ensure that the programme is run effectively, and this involves costly meetings for the selection of projects. In addition, a large number of projects are selected by the national agencies. All these measures should ensure that a financing contract is sent to all applicants before projects commence.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1128/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(11 April 2000)

Subject: White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority

The White Paper on Food Safety (COM(1999) 719 final) was published in January 2000. Chapter 4 is concerned with establishing a European Food Authority (EFA). Chapter 5 considers legislation on food safety.

The White Paper gives three reasons why risk management is not included in the Authority's mandate (section 33). There is an implicit assumption that the current decision-making process provides a high degree of accountability and transparency. This claim does not tally with reality. In most Member States there is little democratic control of decision-making in regulatory committees. In most cases no agendas, meeting documents or minutes are available of the meetings of the committees. In other words, current decision-making is not transparent.

Will the Commission take initiatives to enhance democratic control of the regulatory committees? If so, what initiatives? If not, why is it opposed to democratic control of the regulatory committees?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1122/00, E-1127/00, E-1128/00, E-1140/00, E-1141/00, E-1142/00, E-1143/00, E-1144/00, E-1145/00, E-1146/00, E-1147/00, E-1148/00, E-1150/00, E-1151/00, E-1152/00, E-1153/00, E-1155/00, E-1156/00, E-1157/00, E-1158/00, E-1160/00, E-1161/00 and E-1162/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(9 June 2000)

The issues raised by the Honourable Member are being studied with a view to bringing forward proposals for legislation according to the time scale set out in the white paper on food safety.

It would be inappropriate at this stage to anticipate the details of each proposal.