ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2406/99

by John McCartin (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Senior EURO Pass

Can the Commission provide information on the current status of its consideration of the introduction of a Senior EURO Pass or EURO Card for senior citizens which would grant a range of concessions (including transport) across the European Union following the study completed by AGE Concern with Commission support?

Is the Commission considering making proposals with a view to the introduction of such a scheme of concessions in the Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-1054/99 by Mrs Billingham(1), to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-1023/98 by Robert Evans during question time at Parliament's November 1998 part-session(2) and to the reply it gave to Oral Question H-1148/98 by Niall Andrews during question time at Parliament's December 1998 part-session(3).

The non-governmental organisation (NGO) members of the liaison group for older people have not come forward in support of the suggestions in the final report of the study, for example in the context of the preparation of the United Nations international year of older persons.

In this light, the Commission has no present intention to come forward with any proposals for a senior EURO pass or over sixties card.

(1) OJ C 348, 3.12.1999.

(2) Debates of the European Parliament (November 1998).

(3) Debates of the European Parliament (December 1998).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2341/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Reopening of the oncological hospital in Kifisia

As a result of earthquake damage to the Agioi Anagyroi hospital, 2 500 cancer patients currently undergoing treatment which can be neither delayed nor interrupted, are now unable to obtain their treatment, while at the same time there are waiting lists for admission to other oncological hospitals.

The solution proposed by the Greek Government involving the transfer of individual hospital wards or the closure and dispersal of hospital wards and laboratories to non-hospital premises will not, in the opinion of the hospital's Scientific Committee, enable patients to continue their treatment effectively. It therefore proposed that the hospital be redeployed to suitable available premises belonging to named hospitals which have agreed to this solution.

Can the Commission indicate whether funding can be provided for the temporary redeployment of the hospital in accordance with the recommendations of the Scientific Committee, pending completion of the new hospital building?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2000)

The Commission could consider part-financing the dispersal or provisional relocation of the Kifisia cancer hospital if the Greek authorities so request and on the basis of detailed information on the type of expenditure. The choice of the solution to be proposed is the sole responsibility of the national authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2627/99

by Francesco Speroni (TDI) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: Seat belts in cars

The benefits of car seat belts are all too often rendered meaningless by the failure to comply with the statutory obligation to fasten them.

Does the Commission not believe that the time has come for it to issue rules obliging car manufacturers to install mechanisms to prevent cars from being driven if the seat belts are not fastened?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2000)

The technical standards for safety belts with which motor vehicles must comply are contained in Council Directive 77/541/EEC of 28 June 1977 on the approximately of the laws of the Member States relating to safety belts and restraint systems of motor vehicles(1) and the successive amendments.

The use of safety belts, in particular their compulsory use, are governed by Council Directive 91/671/EEC of 16 December 1991 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to compulsory use of seat belts in vehicles of less than 3,5 tonnes(2), which stipulates that Member States shall ensure that the driver and passengers occupying the seats of vehicles on the road do wear safety belts.

The Commission shares the Honourable Member's view that failure to wear a belt makes it impossible to derive the full benefits from the additional road safety provided by such retention systems. Recent studies carried out in the Member States have shown that, even with a rate of use of seat belts close to 85 % in the front seats, half of accident victims are among the 15 % who did not fasten their belt.

However, the solution proposed by the Honourable Member is likely to be difficult to implement at the moment. It would require a system which is able to detect which seats are occupied, which could not be bypassed, e.g. by fastening the belt without passing it around the body, and which did not in itself pose a serious accident risk, e.g. by causing the engine to switch off automatically if the belt is unfastened while the vehicle is in motion.

Manufacturers are studying other ways of increasing seat belt use, notably through the use of particularly irksome visual and audible warning systems, which could be widely introduced within a relatively short period of time.

The Commission does, however, believe that, as Directive 91/671/EEC indicates, the Member States already have the legislative instruments necessary to ensure stricter control of the wearing of seat belts throughout their territory.

(1) OJ L 220, 29.8.1977.

(2) OJ L 373, 31.12.1991.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2143/99

by Guido Viceconte (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: Serious damage to chestnut groves in various parts of Calabria

The sharp drop in night-time temperatures in early October caused considerable damage to chestnut groves, seriously jeopardising the entire harvest in various parts of Calabria, particularly in the municipalities of Cicala, Sorbo San Basile, Gimigliano, Carlopoli, Sersale, Petronà, Petilia, Mesorarca, San Pietro Apostolo, Serrastretta, Decollatura, Soveria Mannelli, Conflenti, Platania, Fossato Serralta, Pentone, Pedivigliano, Colosomini, Bianchi, Panettieri, Taverna and many others.

Can the Commission take action to support the areas stricken by this disaster, given that a large portion of the local population earns a living primarily from the harvesting, processing and marketing of chestnuts?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2000)

Community legislation does not authorise the Commission to intervene to provide compensation for losses of income caused by natural disasters.

Council Regulation (EEC) No 2085/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 4256/88 laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) Guidance Section(1) (for the period 19941999) and Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain Regulations(2) (for the period 2000-2006) provide only for the possibility of assistance from the EAGGF for the reconstitution of agricultural production potential damaged by natural disasters and the introduction of appropriate means of prevention.

Measures will be selected and proposed by the national or regional authorities, as appropriate. In the case of the natural disaster in question it is therefore for the regional government of Calabria to determine whether the nature of the damage is such that it is possible for the EAGGF to provide part-financing under the abovementioned legislation.

The Member States are currently drawing up the programmes for 2000-2006 and according to the information available there are no plans for EAGGF aid to be granted in the case referred to.

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993.

(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1824/99

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

(12 October 1999)

Subject: Breaches of environmental and safety legislation by the river Umia dam scheme in Galicia

On an initial pretext of needing to provide water for the Salnés district in Galicia, the Galician Fovernment claim that there was an urgent need to build a dam on the river Umia, which was in fact quite fraudulently intended to supply hydro electric power. The obligatory study of the impact of the scheme both on the environment and on the safety of the local population was not carried out, although the scheme could destroy a substantial part of the area's cultural and natural heritage and its tourist potential. The scheme was rejected by an overwhelming majority of those affected (who were even subject to police violence during peaceful demonstrations), and negative assessments were returned by the Galician ombudsman; the scheme was condemned by the Galician High Court, which ordered building operations to cease forthwith and for the land concerned to be returned to its owners. The Galician government quite illegally ignored this ruling.

Is the Commission going to take the requisite and economic steps to ensure that the Galician Government ceases its building work on the Umia dam and restores the status quo ante, so as to prevent the grave prejudice which will otherwise be caused to the local population?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(10 December 1999)

The Honourable Member's question concerns a dam project on the River Umia close to the village of Caldas de Reis in Galicia. The Honourable Member has already lodged a petition regarding the project (No 79/98).

In its examination of the petition, the Commission is attempting to clarify the situation as reported, including the alleged misapplication of Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment(1), as amended by Directive 97/11/EC, and of Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(2).

This detailed examination particularly necessary inasmuch as the project is part of the Autonomous Community of Galicia's operational programme, which receives funding from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is not yet complete.

The Commission will not fail to keep the Honourable Member informed of further developments in this matter within Parliament's Committee on Petitions.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2360/99

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Salary, allowance, retirement and tax arrangements in the EU institutions

At the beginning of its term of office the Commission announced that it intended to carry out a thorough reform of the EU institutions in order to increase the efficiency and the transparency thereof.

In so far as they lay down salary and other conditions, the Staff Regulations play an essential role in the functioning of the EU institutions, for which reason I believe they should be made available to the public.

In order to provide more concise and intelligible information, data relating to officials at one or other end of their career should be given: a new-recruited graduate official, a senior judge at the Court of Justice and a Commissioner.

Would the Commission therefore supply the following information as applicable to the above categories of official:

1. Salary scheme;

2. Expatriation allowance;

3. Financial assistance in respect of official travel;

4. Conditions for retirement, including retirement on health grounds;

5. Tax arrangements.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2000)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat examples of remuneration (including allowances, taxes and charges) and daily travel allowances for a newly recruited graduate official (A8-1) and a member of the Commission, the conditions for retirement and invalidity of officials and the conditions for retirement of Commission Members.

In addition the Commission draws the attention of the Honourable Member to Council Regulation No 422/67/EEC, 5/67/Euratom of the Council of 25 July 1967 determining the emoluments of the President and

members of the Commission and of the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of justice(1) last amended by Council Regulation (EC, ECSC, Euratom) No 2778/98 of 17 December 1998 determining the emoluments of the President and Members of the Commission, of the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of justice and of the President, Members and Registrar of the Court of First Instance(2) (system of remuneration for the members of the European institutions); the Commission report to the Council and the Parliament on the system of remuneration(3).

The question relating to the remuneration of a judge at the Court of Justice should be addressed to the Institution concerned.

(1) OJ 187, 8.8.1967.

(2) OJ L 347, 23.12.1998.

(3) COM(1999) 650 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2105/99

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 November 1999)

Subject: New methods for finding persons trapped inside the wreckage of buildings

The recent earthquakes in Turkey, Greece and other countries around the world have drawn attention to the extremely serious issue of persons trapped inside the wreckage of buildings and the need for effective search and rescue methods.

Up to now rescue teams have been using accounts and information given by survivors, sound detection (acoustic method) and micro-cameras (visual method), as well as trained dogs.

According to experts, other methods of finding trapped persons could be developed and used, based on the detection of chemicals emitted by the human body in various situations, and especially in difficult circumstances such as being trapped in buildings which have collapsed.

It appears that methods like these have been tested for military purposes.

Would the Commission be willing to aid the development and use of similar methods for use by rescue teams dealing with earthquakes and trapped victims?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2000)

The Commission has in the past financed at least one pilot project to build an appliance which uses microwave radar to detect persons trapped in rubble. The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission's Internet site at the following address: http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/environment/civil/prote/cpactiv/cpact08e.htm, where further information on the project is available.

Under the Community action programme in the field of civil protection, it falls to the national authorities to determine the content and scope of any pilot projects in this area with a view to incorporating the results into rescue team practice. On this basis, the Commission will be prepared to examine the funding of a project proposed in this area.

Research and development related to novel technical solutions may be granted financial Community support within the fifth framework programme for RTD(1), provided that the rules of participation as well as the contents of the workplans of the thematic programmes are respected.

(1) OJ L 26, 1.2.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2638/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 January 2000)

Subject: The health sector and the new millennium

The American representative at the World Trade Organisation, Charlene Barshefsky, referring to the Seattle Ministerial Conference, emphasised that the public sector was responsible for health services in many foreign countries and that US private firms active in the health sector therefore had difficulty in penetrating those markets.

Given that views which favour further privatisations and the facilitation of the entry of foreign capital are diametrically opposed to the welfare state approach and structure as found in most European Union countries, what position does the Commission intend to adopt on this proposal?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(10 February 2000)

Health services are already covered by the General agreement on trade in services (GATS) and will therefore be part of the forthcoming negotiations which are foreseen to start this year. The Community has undertaken very limited commitments under this sector.

The Community objective in the forthcoming GATS negotiations is not to provoke privatisation or a general deregulation of the health sector or any other sector where the interest of consumers is protected by public policy objectives and the Community will not accept anything which could undermine its public policy objectives in those service sectors covered by GATS which are exclusively or partly linked to the state, such as health services.

The Commission has no intention to support deregulation of the health sector as a result of liberalisation within the framework of GATS. The negotiations must not undermine the universal availability and high standards of health services in Member States, nor the different regulatory models adopted in Member States.

However, on the other hand, we should not rule out negotiating access for European providers to the market-based segment of such sectors in third countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2802/99

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Úbeda and Baeza: World Heritage

It is now ten years since the Spanish cities of Úbeda and Baeza (which are prime examples of Renaissance architecture in southern Spain) first sought to have their buildings classed as World Heritage by Unesco.

If their application is successful the two cities will receive substantial amounts of funding to help them conserve their architectural legacy and promote it as a tourist attraction.

Can the Commission say what contribution it has made towards ensuring that two such important treasures of the Renaissance can provide at least a minimum degree of conservation? How can it help to secure the above-mentioned Unesco classification, which would bring in the funding needed to maintain the wide range of outstanding buildings which are to be found in the two cities in question?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(21 February 2000)

As regards the cultural sector, the Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that, since the two cities of Ubeda and Baeza have never submitted a proposal under any Community programme, they have not received any financial support. The Commission can support cultural initiatives only in the framework of its existing programmes and in accordance with their criteria. Note that in February 2000 a call for proposals will be launched in the context of the First Framework Programme Culture 2000. Cultural operators who wish to obtain financial support will then be able to submit projects in accordance with the conditions and criteria of this Programme.

The Commission would recall that the designation of sites as part of the heritage of humanity is a matter solely for the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2708/99

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Objective 2 areas in Spain

During October and November the Commission approved the lists of Objective 2 areas for the period 2000-2006. However, the lists of 10 Member States have still not been approved.

At what stage of the process is Spain's list of Objective 2 areas? Did the Spanish government submit the list by the deadline? If not, what was the cause of the delay?

Given that the current regulation expires at the end of 1999, what action will the Commission, and those Member States whose lists have not yet been approved, take to ensure that existing programmes continue to run and new projects can be set up as from 1 January 2000?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2000)

On 1 July 1999 the Commission invited the Member States to send in their proposed list of areas eligible for Objective 2 in the 2000-2006 programming period before 31 August 1999. For those Member States which had proposed a list of eligible areas by early September 1999, an initial decision was taken in October and November 1999 in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(1).

The Commission only received the Spanish proposal on 15 September 1999. Following consultation with the Spanish authorities, the Commission took a decision in principle on the draft list of areas eligible for

Objective 2 on 22 December 1999. Under the above Regulation, the final decision is to be taken after consultation with three committees. These committees were consulted on 25, 26 and 31 January 2000. The Commission will therefore take a final decision in the course of February 2000.

With regard to the transition between the two programming periods, the Commission would remind the Honourable Member that, in respect of assistance in the 1994-99 programming period, payments may be made by the final beneficiaries in respect of measures which were the subject of binding legal and financial provisions prior to 31 December 1999 up until 31 December 2001. In addition, for the 2000-06 programming period, Article 52(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 provides for a retroactive date of eligibility of expenditure under certain conditions. Expenditure actually paid, in respect of which the Commission has received an application for assistance between 1 January and 30 April 2000 and which fulfils all the conditions laid down in the above Regulation, may be regarded as eligible from 1 January 2000.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2739/99

by Stefano Zappalà (PPE-DE) and Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 January 2000)

Subject: Latina-Goodyear affair

Since 1965 the American company Goodyear has had a factory in the district of Cisterna di Latina (Lazio region). 560 workers are employed at the factory. Over the years, in the period during which the area was covered by the Mezzogiorno Development Fund, the company may have been granted funding from the public purse. Recently, Goodyear has announced that it intends to close the factory shortly because it is not profitable.

Can the Commission say:

1. Whether it considers it appropriate to ask the Italian government to find out if Goodyear, in the past, has been the recipient of public funds and, if so, how much funding it received;

2. Whether, in view of the employment problems in the area, the Commission considers that it should take steps to prevent multinational companies from abandoning production sites, as has been seen in recent years, once public funding ceases to be available, with no regard for the welfare of employees or the protection of the environment?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2739/99 and P-0279/00 given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2000)

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