ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3516/00

by Werner Langen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 November 2000)

Subject: Supply restrictions imposed on commercial vehicles by Mitsubishi-Deutschland

The firm of Mitsubishi-Deutschland (MMC Auto Deutschland GmbH in D-65488 Trebur) is endeavouring to compel its business partners to sign the following undertakings: The firm mldr hereby undertakes not to supply Mitsubishi commercial vehicles for competition purposes to unauthorised resellers. Commercial vehicles also means vehicles that have been registered for only one or a few days without having been used on the roads as intended. A contract penalty of DEM 10 001 is payable where this condition is breached.

1. Is the Commission of the opinion that such supply restrictions are compatible with the EC Treaty?

2. How does it view this specific case?

3. What action does it intend to take on this issue?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2000)

Under the Block Exemption Regulation (Commission Regulation (EC) No 1475/95 of 28 June 1995 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to certain categories of motor vehicle distribution and servicing agreements(1)), manufacturers or importers may refuse to allow their dealers to sell new vehicles to resellers outside the distribution network. Resellers include (apparent) final consumers who purchase new vehicles with the intention of reselling them, i.e. for the purposes of trade(2). The ban is intended to safeguard the manufacturer's or importer's choice of distribution system.

The undertaking demanded by Mitsubishi Germany serves to implement the ban preventing official Mitsubishi dealers from supplying resellers, which is in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1475/95. The wording of the undertaking referred to is therefore admissible under Regulation (EC) No 1475/95.

(1) OJ L 145, 29.6.1995.

(2) See also the Commission notice (OJ C 17, 18.1.1995) regarding the (former) Regulation (EEC) No 123 of 12 December 1984 (OJ L 15, 18.1.1985) which was replaced in 1995 by Regulation (EC) No 1475/95 (see footnote 1). This notice still applies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3430/00

by Marielle De Sarnez (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 November 2000)

Subject: Town-twinning

In order to promote a Citizens' Europe, appropriations are allocated to French local authorities wishing to organise exchange programmes and town-twinning schemes with other local authorities in Europe.

However, the budget allocated to that type of programme was apparently exhausted in September. I should therefore like to know, in detail, how many French local authorities were able to benefit from that subsidy between 1 January and 15 September 2000 (final date for applications set out in a Commission communication dated 10 February 2000) and the amount involved.

I should also like to know what changes will be made to the procedure in order to make it more selective.

Finally, I should like to know whether the Commission is intending to give priority in 2001 to those authorities which forwarded duly completed application forms but which were rejected in 2000 for lack of funds.

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(7 December 2000)

To date the Commission has accepted 320 applications submitted by French local authorities for exchanges organised in 2000 between citizens from twinned towns. The total amount awarded to these host towns is 1,2 million.

In addition, 445 local authorities in France submitted applications which were approved as guest towns. The total amount awarded in transport expenses is 1,3 million.

Furthermore, the Commission is in fact introducing a new procedure which should help to increase effectiveness. An information meeting on this new call for proposals procedure was held on 23 October 2000; representatives of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR), the national associations of the 15 Member States, the central and eastern European countries, Malta, Cyprus and Turkey, the United Towns Organisation (UTO) and the Assembly of European Regions were invited so that all points of view could be examined. The new call for proposals and the relevant forms can be found on the Europa site at the following address:

http//europa.eu.int/comm/dg10/towntwin/index_

Finally, for procedural reasons and due to the annual nature of the budget, projects for which applications submitted in 2000 were rejected cannot be taken into consideration for 2001. For twinning projects to take place in 2001, the interested parties must submit applications in accordance with the new procedures in force for 2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4151/00

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(16 January 2001)

Subject: Women's rights in Saudi Arabia

At the 56th session of the UN Commission of Human Rights, the EU voiced grave concern about the serious violations of human rights of women in Saudi Arabia and called again for the improvement of human rights of women in law and in practice.

What new initiatives has the Council promoted to improve the human rights situation of women in Saudi Arabia since this statement was made at the 56th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights?

The EU is currently strengthening relations with the countries of the Gulf. How is the Council using this opportunity to work for the protection of human rights in Saudi Arabia? Is it encouraging the training of law enforcement officers providing for the protection of women under interrogation and in detention, as well as for women reporting abuses, in accordance with international human rights standards?

What pressure is the Council exerting on Saudi Arabia to ensure that its draft law on female labour will comply with ILO Conventions 100 and 111 which they have ratified?

Reply

(24 April 2001)

The European Union raises the issue of human rights, including the rights of women, at all appropriate occasions to do so, for example at the 10th Joint Council and Ministerial meeting with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on 22 May 2000 and at an EU Troika meeting at Ministerial level with the GCC in the margins of the United Nations General Assembly. Saudi Arabia had the Presidency in the GCC during the year 2000. At the meeting on 22 May 2000, the European Union proposed the establishment of a human rights dialogue. The EU will, in the framework of the EC-GCC Cooperation Agreement(1) and the political dialogue, continue to press on the members of the GCC the need to improve the human rights situation in their countries and to cooperate with the UN and international human rights organisations. It will also pursue the question of an enhanced dialogue on human rights.

The EU and the GCC are currently negotiating a Free Trade Agreement. In accordance with the EU's policy on human rights in its agreements with third countries, respect for human rights would constitute an essential element in any such agreement.

(1) OJ L 54, 25.2.1989, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3164/00

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

(10 October 2000)

Subject: Rural development programmes

The Commission has approved rural development programmes for the period 2000-2006 which concern the Balearic Islands.

Will it make available a copy of the rural development programmes approved for the Balearic Islands?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2000)

Three separate documents deal with rural development programming in the Balearic Islands for the period 2000-06: the horizontal plan for the improvement of production structures, the horizontal plan of accompanying measures and the rural development plan for the Balearic Islands.

The horizontal plan for the improvement of production structures has a budget of 397 million and includes measures relating to investments on agricultural holdings, the installation of young farmers and the improvement of water resources. The Commission adopted the plan on 15 September 2000(1).

The horizontal plan of accompanying measures includes measures for the early retirement of farmers and measures to benefit less-favoured areas, with environmental conditions attached. Lastly, the rural development plan for the Balearic Islands complements the above two plans. Having already been approved by the Committee on Agricultural Structures and Rural Development on 24 October 2000, these last two plans are now in the process of being adopted by the Commission.

The rural development plans, once adopted, become public property. A copy of the approved plan is accordingly being sent to Parliament under the terms of the Gil Robles-Santer agreement of 6 May 1999, where it can be consulted by the Honourable Member.

(1) COM(2000) 2682 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3949/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Subject: Environmental impact assessment

With reference to the answer to the questioner's previous Question (E-2683/00)(1) on high-speed trains in the Roman orbital link area given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission, the reply to point 2 is unconvincing, since paragraph 6(2) of Directive 85/337/EEC(2) states that Member States must ascertain that the public concerned is given the opportunity to express an opinion before the project is initiated.

Monitoring the application of the directive is clearly the task of each Member State of the European Union, but if a Member State does not carry out the relevant checks this constitutes unequal treatment of the public owing to a lack of due transparency of information and the fact that people cannot gain access to information and take part in decision-making processes.

Can the Commission therefore say:

1. which institution is competent to take action;

2. what happens at European level;

3. what directives deal with this subject;

4. what its general opinion is on the issue?

(1) OJ C 113 E, 18.4.2001, p. 149.

(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2001)

The Commission is responsible for ensuring that Community law is properly applied within all Member States.

The Commission's powers are limited to those conferred on it by the EC Treaty. On the basis of Arti-cle 211 (ex Article 155) of the EC Treaty, in order to ensure the proper functioning and development of the common market, the Commission shall ensure that the provisions of this Treaty and the measures taken by the institutions pursuant thereto are applied. On the basis of Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty if the Commission considers that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under this Treaty, it shall deliver a reasoned opinion on the matter after giving the State concerned the opportunity to submit its observations. If the State concerned does not comply with the opinion within the period laid down by the Commission, the latter may bring the matter before the Court of Justice.

In the specific case, the issue of the correct application of Community legislation on environmental impact assessment in relation to the project mentioned by the Honourable Member has been already dealt with by the Commission in 1997/1998. Since the present Written Question does not contain any new relevant element, the Honourable Member is kindly requested to refer to previous answers by the Commission to her Written Question E-578/98(1) and Written Question E-2274/00 by Mr Tajani(2).

The second paragraph of the reply to Written Question E-2683/00(3) by the Honourable Member referred to the issue of the assessment of the monetary compensation in favour of the people possibly damaged by the project. This monetary aspect is not covered by the Community legislation on environmental impact assessment and it falls within the competence of the Member States.

(1) OJ C 386, 17.12.1998.

(2) OJ C 103 E, 3.4.2001, p. 104.

(3) OJ C 113 E, 18.4.2001, p. 149.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4013/00

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Risk of destruction of cedar forest in Greece

There is a serious risk that a thousand-year-old cedar forest in the vicinity of Ayios Ioannis on the Greek island of Milos will be destroyed owing to plans to build a new airport in the area. This particular forest, which was designated a sensitive ecosystem under the Union's Natura 2000 programme, is home to rare species of wildlife and contains an estimated 1500-2000 rare wild cedars.

1. Is the Commission aware that the cedar forest on Milos is under threat of destruction through the building of the new airport?

2. What steps will the Commission take to ensure that this particular ecosystem is not destroyed?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2001)

The airport runway on the island of Milos in the southern Aegean is too short and badly oriented in terms of the prevailing winds, resulting in frequent flight cancellations, to the detriment of economic activity.

In view of the importance of normal air links for the development of the island, the Greek authorities selected the project of the construction of a new runway near Agios Ioannis and included it under measure 2.6 of the Southern Aegean operational programme (OP) for 1994-1999.

An environmental impact study on the project was carried out in 1995. The environmental terms laid down by the Greek authorities(1) noted the presence of the trees mentioned by the Honourable Member and imposed conditions for and restrictions on their felling. It should be noted that this species (family Juniperus) is not protected by Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(2) but forms part of the description of several types of habitats in Annex I whose areas should be designated but where strict protection of the species is not provided for.

Implementation of the project has been delayed, mainly because a group of citizens opposed to the expropriations referred the matter to the Greek Council of State on environmental grounds. By its provisional decision 498/1998, the Council of State permitted continuation of preparatory work on the project, including the expropriation of land, and then, by its final decision 3271/2000, refused the complainants' application.

This meant the approximately 5,3 million in part-financing provided in 1994-1999 related only to the studies and to the costs of expropriations.

The second phase of the project, concerning construction as such, will probably be proposed by the Greek authorities for part-financing under the Community support framework in 2000-2006. Since the Southern Aegean OP has not yet been approved, no decision on the matter has so far been taken.

It should be remembered that the part-financing of this work is conditional on strict compliance with the environmental conditions and any further obligations which might be imposed by the Greek authorities on the basis of Community and national legislation.

(1) Decision of 29 April 1997, ref. KYA A11 83607.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3709/00

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(29 November 2000)

Subject: Commission mission carried out in Thailand concerning poultry meat

The Commission has published a report of a mission carried out by its Food and Veterinary Office in Thailand from 6 to 17 December 1999 concerning the production of poultry meat (DG (SANCO)/1214/1999-MR Final). Paragraph 3.6.3. states that the handling in the slaughterhouse of crates containing live birds and the unloading of the crates and the hanging of the birds on the shackle line was done carefully. However, the paragraph then states that the stunning equipment was not properly adjusted in most of the establishments and that the central competent authority did not define the electrical parameters to be used for stunning. Paragraph 5.6 states that there should be more detailed supervision of stunning.

Would the Commission explain in what way the stunning equipment was not properly adjusted? What steps is the Commission taking to urge the central competent authority of Thailand to remedy the deficiencies in respect of stunning referred to in the Commission's report?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2001)

Particular attention is paid to the stunning of poultry slaughtered for human consumption during the missions carried out by the Food and Veterinary Office of the Commission. Such missions have been carried out in all the Member States and a number of third countries. Deficiencies have quite often been noted, which can be categorised as follows: deficiencies in supervision; deficiencies in construction of the water stunner (too short, too wide, wrong direction of dueflow, etc.); deficiencies in adjustment (too low amperage, no indicator for the amperage, only for voltage).

As the Honourable Member quite correctly states, those deficiencies were noted during the mission to Thailand (6-17 December 1999).

The management of the different establishments have reacted immediately, sometimes overnight, in adjusting or even repairing the stunning equipment, or if that was not possible, by ordering new stunning equipment. Moreover, information was received on action taken during the period of the mission in relation to training and advice to competent staff.

The competent authority of Thailand has informed the Commission, following the mission, that the electrical parameters for stunning of the different species have now been defined officially and a more detailed supervision during the time of operation of the establishment has been implemented. It is the Commission's intention to check these assurances during a future follow up mission to Thailand.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3874/00

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(8 December 2000)

Subject: The arms trade

Thanks to oil profits Middle Eastern countries are once again investing in the military sector. This year countries such as Saudi Arabia, Israel and the Arab Emirates will devote $ 60 billion to military expenditure, 5 % more than the current budget.

As a consequence of this the United States has allocated new funding for defence, whilst Europe, with the exception of the United Kingdom, is reducing its military budget by 6 %.

Can the Commission launch a programme of measures to discourage the buying and selling of arms based on:

1. asking the oil-producing countries to comply with the measures adopted at the Caracas summit regarding the reduction in the price of oil;

2. a ban on the illegal trade in diamonds in order to prevent profits from being turned into weapons;

3. urging the EU countries to increase the funding available for military research and development, precisely in order to meet the commitment to set up a joint European army?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2001)

1. The Commission has no competence to initiate actions in this context.

2. The Commission supports the Kimberley process launched by the African diamond producers and actively participates in international efforts to find a solution to the diamonds for weapons problem (ministerial meeting of 21 September 2000 in Pretoria and international meeting of 25-26 October 2000 in London).

3. The Commission has no competence to deal with this matter.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3614/00

by Johannes Swoboda (PSE) to the Commission

(15 November 2000)

Subject: Swiss firms' refusal to supply spare parts to clockmakers and watchmakers in EU Member States

1. What might be the reason for the refusal by Swiss firms, despite having offices in certain EU Member States, to supply spare parts to clockmakers and watchmakers, even if they do not have special contracts with those firms?

2. What tangible steps does the Commission propose to take, on the basis of existing provisions, in this connection?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2000)

The Commission regrets that in the absence of more detailed information it is not able to comment on the elements to which the Honourable Member refers or to gauge whether a breach of Community law is involved.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3800/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Subject: Eco-points system in Austria

There have been repeated complaints that local authorities are not adequately monitoring implementation of the the eco-points regulation applicable in Tyrol and that there are frequent infringements. Yet in fact the Tirol gendarmerie checks lorries for up to 16 hours a day at the Kundl checkpoint alone, so that there have already been 32 810 inspections in the year to October, with prosecutions in the case of 1 046 vehicles (3,18 %).

However, the legal basis is posing major difficulties for these inspections. For instance only the lorry driver, and not the registered owner, can be fined; and tax-evading drivers recorded electronically cannot be penalised after the event, as one of the requirements for charging a fine is that the vehicle concerned actually pulls up.

Should the Commission not consider amending the relevant EU regulation, so that its legal basis permits more efficient inspection procedures?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2001)

The Commission is concerned about the number of transit journeys being made through Austria by lorries without ecopoints and is currently considering ways of amending the Community Regulations on the operation of the ecopoint system in such a way as to deter this practice, without disproportionate hindrance to the operation of the single market.

On the question of sanctions against hauliers the Honourable Member should note that this is currently a matter of national law. The Court of Justice has ruled that sanctions imposed by Member States should be effective, dissuasive and proportionate.