ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4090/00

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

(10 January 2001)

Subject: Improving the EU's trade relations with Mercosur and Chile

The recent holding in Madrid of the First European Union, Latin America and Caribbean Business Summit, which was attended by 19 European and Latin American businessmen, was an appropriate occasion for discussing practical measures intended to improve the European Union's trade relations with Mercosur and Chile.

During their courtesy visit to the leader of the Spanish Government the summit participants called for Spain to take on the job of improving those relations by means of practical, effective measures, in view of the special role played by Spain as an intermediary between the two economic blocs.

In response to a request made at the abovementioned summit should the Commission not propose that a monitoring centre be set up in Madrid, the role of which would be to put forward initiatives and proposals designed to enable business circles in the European Union and in Mercosur and Chile to improve trade relations between the two economic blocs?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(27 February 2001)

1. At present there are many ongoing initiatives which aim at improving trade relations between the two economic blocs.

2. Firstly, the European Commission works closely with the Mercosur EU Business Forum (MEBF), which is an association of business representatives and associations from both regions that wishes to enhance commercial relations between the EU and Mercosur and facilitate trade and investment flows. The MEBF has been able to establish itself as the main representative of the business communities of the EU and Mercosur and the European Commission has continued to support the MEBF initiative from its inception in 1998. The recent EU-Latin America/Caribbean business summit in Madrid declared its support for the MEBF's activities and specifically invited the MEBF to participate in a prominent way in the summit meeting. Thus, within the business community there already exists a forum aimed at improving trade relations between the EU and Mercosur.

3. Secondly, the European Commission has undertaken practical measures in support of EU-Latin American business relations, among others through a number of business-related economic co-operation programmes, such as AL-INVEST, ALURE and ECIP. These types of successful programmes, in particular AL-INVEST, will continue into the future with the aim of supporting the European business community in its contacts with Mercosur.

4. Taking into account the above, the European Commission considers there is no need at present for a monitoring centre in Madrid which would put forward initiatives and proposals designed to enable business circles in the EU and Mercosur-Chile to improve trade relations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3752/00

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 December 2000)

Subject: Ivory trade

Given that the imports into the European Union of commercial ivory for non-personal use have been prohibited since 1990, can the Commission confirm what information it has on stocks of ivory currently held in the Member States of the European Union? If it has no such information, can it state how it monitors the sale of ivory in the EU and, ensures that only ivory with exemption certificates under Article 10 of Regulation 338/97(1) may be sold?

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 January 2001)

The Commission does not possess information on stocks of ivory currently held in the Member States. Under Council Regulation (EC) 338/97 of 9 December 1996(1) and Commission Regulation 939/97 of 26 May 1997 laying down detailed rules concerning the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein(2), there are no controls on the sale of worked ivory acquired before 1 June 1947. Raw ivory and worked ivory of more recent origin can only be sold under an exemption granted on a case-by-case basis by the competent authority of the Member State in which the specimen is located.

The monitoring of compliance with the provisions of these Regulations is a responsibility of the Member States, although the Commission can and does draw the attention of the authorities of the Member States to circumstances and situations whose investigation appears necessary.

(1) OJ C 61, 3.3.1997.

(2) OJ C 140, 30.5.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3540/00

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 November 2000)

Subject: The euro crisis revising the date for replacing national currencies and reducing the staff of the European Central Bank

Aware that:

- the independence of the European Central Bank (ECB) means that its directors should be responsible for the results of efforts to preserve the purchasing power of the euro,

- the value of the euro is falling against not only the dollar but also the other major currencies,

- the transition from the virtual to the cash euro is a delicate process,

- the launching of the final stage may be seriously compromised by the crisis of faith currently affecting public opinion, and

- a strong signal must be given to the markets in order to bring about a reversal of the trend.

1. In view of all this, does the Commission not consider that it should ask the Governing Council, the Executive Board and the General Council to submit to the European Parliament a detailed report on the state of the euro, in particular indicating whether it might be appropriate to revise the dates envisaged for replacing national currencies with the euro?

2. Does it consider that the staff of the ECB should be reduced from 770 to 300 people, which would be enough to carry out the work required?

3. Does the Commission not feel that the nations in the euro zone, who are the victims of inappropriate policies, might be able to demonstrate their dissatisfaction by means of referenda?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 2000)

1. The regular reporting of the European Central Bank (ECB) vis-à-vis the Parliament provides, in the Commission's view, an adequate framework for addressing questions related to the euro on which the ECB is competent. The Commission considers that the appropriateness of the date for the introduction of euro banknotes and coins cannot be put in doubt.

2. The Commission does not intend to express a view on the number of staff members of the ECB.

3. The Commission considers that the euro has brought significant economic benefits to the participating Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3504/00

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 November 2000)

Subject: Independence of Commission's services from tobacco industry

1. Can the Commission confirm that there are staff regulations regarding employees of the legal services taking up a position upon retirement which has a link with their former duties?

2. Can the Commission confirm that a member of its legal services, responsible for internal market issues, immediately upon retirement took up employment with the tobacco industry campaign to stop adoption of the tobacco advertising directive, using his former employment as a credential?

3. If so, can the Commission explain why the staff regulations were not applied in this case?

4. With a view to the above questions, can the Commission guarantee that the independence of its services from the tobacco industry is guaranteed, particularly as regards its legal services, its customs and tax department and its agriculture department and what measures if any were taken to ensure this independence?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2001)

The Commission refers the Honourable Member to Articles 16 and 17 of the Staff Regulations which cover all former officials of the Community and not just those from its legal services. Article 16 in particular provides that, after termination of service, the official must respect obligations of honesty and discretion in relation to the acceptance of certain duties or functions.

The Commission can confirm that it was aware that one of the former members of its legal service has been working for the tobacco industry in connection with the industry's opposition to the ban on tobacco advertisements.

The case has been examined by the Commission to make sure that the person concerned has complied with the relevant rules of the Staff Regulations (Articles 16 and 17). In considering such cases the Commission expects its officials to refrain from accepting employment if this could lead to a conflict of interest with their former post in the Commission. Such a conflict arises if the new activity is related to a dossier for which the official was responsible in the Commission, and if it involves him/her in intervening against the position of the Commission with regard to this dossier.

The same situation occurs where the official might profit from confidential information gained during his/her previous functions.

In the case referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission concluded that, since the official did not deal with matters linked to tobacco or the single market whilst working in the Commission, there is no breach of the rules of the Staff Regulations.

All services are independent from the tobacco industry (and from all other industries). Where the Commission suspects a violation of its professional rules, it acts immediately to check the matter and, if necessary, takes measures to penalise such a violation.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3933/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(7 December 2000)

Subject: Common Foreign Policy and Kosovo

The former president of Finland, Martti Ahtissari, has published a book called Mission to Belgrade in which he describes how, as the former EU peace emissary, he and the Russian emissary Viktor Chernomyrdin went to Belgrade on 2 June 1999 to present the international community's peace plan to the Yugoslav president, Slobodan Milosevic. Ahtissari says that at first Milosevic resolutely refused to negotiate the peace plan but that the following morning he suddenly agreed to accept it. Ahtissari says that the logical explanation for this volte-face was that Milosevic had concluded a secret deal with the Russian generals to make northern Kosovo a Serbian zone.

1. Can the Council confirm Ahtissari's hypothesis? If not, why not?

2. If so, how does the Council explain the fact that the region of Kosovo north of Mitrovica has now become de facto a Serbia enclave despite the fact that the Russian army has not been able to enforce the pact on its own and despite the presence of KFOR?

3. Is the Council prepared to do everything in its power to put an end to the creation of a Serbian enclave in northern Kosovo as soon as possible and to return this area to its inhabitants? If not, why not?

4. If so, when will the ethnic Albanian inhabitants be able to return to their homes in northern Mitrovica? And when will the hospital and university of Mitrovica be accessible once again to the ethnic Albanians?

Reply

(12 March 2001)

President Ahtisaari went to Belgrade on 2 June 1999 at the initiative of the European Union. At its meeting on 31 May 1999 the Council had expressly supported his efforts and invited him to speak at the Cologne European Council so that he could contribute to the discussions on the Western Balkans.

The Honourable Member will quite understand that the Council does not intend to comment on a publication by a well-known figure such as President Martti Ahtisaari, but the Council can state that it has no information on any supposed secret pact between Mr Milosevic and the Russian generals with a view to making Kosovo a Serbian zone.

It is worth recalling that the Council has on several occasions expressed its confidence in and full support for the initiatives of UNMIK/KFOR in Kosovo, and more specifically the town of Mitrovica, aiming at the full application of Resolution 1244 of the United Nations Security Council and in particular at normalisation of inter-ethnic relations, including the free movement of persons and the return of refugees.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3196/00

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 October 2000)

Subject: EU funding for NGOs

The Commission is able to support a number of NGOs' activities in various countries within the limits of the EU's annual budget. Since this aid should be public and transparent, can the Commission state to which organisations the Commission or its Finnish office directed EU budget appropriations in 1999, and what amounts were involved?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2001)

The Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3042/00

by André Brie (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 September 2000)

Subject: Information on the amount of EU subsidies flowing to the German Land of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in 1999

What level of appropriations, through which projects and funds, flowed to Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania in 1999 from:

1. the European Regional Development Fund,

2. the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), Guarantee and Guidance Sections,

3. the European Social Fund,

4. the Community's research programmes,

5. the Community's programmes in the field of energy,

6. the Community's programmes in the field of the environment,

7. the Community's programmes in the field of transport,

8. the Community's programmes in the field of education and youth,

9. the Community's programmes in the field of health,

10. the Community's programmes in the field of social security,

11. NGO programmes,

12. cultural programmes,

13. programmes in the context of cooperation with third countries (CEECs, CIS),

14. town twinning programmes,

15. other Community programmes?

What is the Commission's assessment of the success of these measures?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2001)

Further to its answer of 06/10/2000(1), the Commission is sending the information requested direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

(1) OJ C 81 E, 13.3.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3777/00

by Marie-Noëlle Lienemann (PSE) to the Commission

(4 December 2000)

Subject: Scrapie

Can the Commission indicate what action it is taking to control scrapie?

What practical measures has the Commission set up to study the transmission of BSE to sheep?

What results are available at present with regard to the risks of transmission of BSE from one sheep to another through blood transfusion and what measures does the Commission intend to take in this respect?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2001)

Scrapie belongs to a group of fatal progressive neurodegenerative diseases collectively known as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). Unlike bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), which is considered transmissible to man causing variant Creutzfeld Jacob Disease (vCJD) in humans, scrapie has been recognised for centuries in sheep and goats without indications that it could affect humans.

However, the presence of scrapie in the Community is a serious concern to the Commission, as scrapie and BSE in sheep are indistinguishable under field conditions and sheep have been demonstrated to be susceptible to infection with the BSE agent under experimental conditions. While there is currently no evidence that BSE has been transmitted to sheep, other than experimentally, the Commission has chosen to take a precautionary approach. A range of Community measures have been introduced, such as the removal of specified risk materials from sheep, a ban on the feeding of meat-and-bone meal to sheep and active surveillance for the presence of scrapie. It has also co-financed scrapie control programmes for several years in a number of Member States. Furthermore, there are extensive provisions on scrapie surveillance and eradication and for contingency plans in the event that BSE is ever discovered in sheep in the Commission proposal for a regulation on TSEs(1), which recently was agreed in the Council.

Different aspects of scrapie and BSE in sheep are currently addressed in seven different research projects supported by the Community in the framework of the Commission's Research Action Plan on TSE. A summary of these projects can be found on the Community web-site(2). Following the request of the Research Council in November 2000, a group of experts has now been established to help co-ordinate TSE research work in Europe. Finally, the Commission is currently evaluating a number of new tests for BSE which include tests that might help distinguish between BSE and scrapie.

The Scientific Steering Committee considered the implications of a scientific publication on the transmission of BSE by blood transfusion in sheep in its opinion of 26/27 October 2000. In that opinion, it was considered that, as regards the safety of ovine blood, existing scientific opinions already anticipated the risks resulting from the possible presence of low levels of TSE infectivity in blood.

(1) OJ C 45, 19.2.1999.

(2) http://www.jrc.cec.eu.int.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3820/00

by Generoso Andria (PPE-DE), Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE), Stefano Zappalà (PPE-DE), Francesco Fiori (PPE-DE), Luigi Cesaro (PPE-DE), Francesco Musotto (PPE-DE) and Guido Viceconte (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Subject: Flooding in Cervinara

There are tragedies that have been completely forgotten, but which were actually as dramatic as those in Soverato and Piedmont. No one now remembers Cervinara, with its five deaths, houses swept away and human negligence. After that tragedy, Rosa Russo Iervolino, the Home Affairs Minister at the time, issued a decree designed to tackle the floods and hydrological problems experienced in Avellino, Benevento, Caserta and Salerno on 14, 15 and 16 December 1999.

Article 5 of the decree stipulated that, after the Campania region and the civil protection department had conducted enquires into the events, a plan for emergency infrastructure measures to reduce risks should be drawn up within 30 days. About a year after this strict deadline, there is not the slightest sign of any measures!

Could Enzo Bianco, Home Affairs Minister, therefore be questioned as to why he has not approved and funded (to the tune of 100 billion lira) the plan duly submitted some time ago by the Campania region?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(25 January 2001)

The Commission deeply regrets the loss of human lives and the damage caused by the recent flooding and landslides in Italy.

The Honourable Member's question is not, however, within the competence of the Commission. It is a matter to be dealt with exclusively by the Italian authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0521/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: Scandals in the former security service

In the autumn of 1997, the then Commission President took action on the scandals which had come to light in the Commission's security service. Group 4/Securitas, which was responsible for the contract on internal and external security at the Commission, had acted incorrectly on a large number of points.

The case was referred to the Belgian public prosecutor who, according to Swedish media reports, requested in Autumn 1998 that the diplomatic immunity of eight officials be lifted.

Has the Commission followed the Belgian public prosecutor's investigation and have the officials whose immunity was lifted received any sentence from the Belgian legal authorities?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(10 April 2001)

In 1998, the Commission transmitted UCLAF's investigative report to the Belgian authorities so that further action could eventually be taken on the suspected irregularities in the Group 4/Securitas case.

In the course of the investigations carried out by the Belgian judicial authorities in this matter, and upon their request, the Commission waived the immunity from legal proceedings of eight officials or (where that was the action requested by the judicial authorites) authorised them to disclose relevant information in reply to any questions put by those national authorities. The national authorities have also been granted access to Commission buildings and documents.

At present, the judicial procedure is still at the investigation stage. According to Belgian penal procedural law, the decision whether or not to prosecute the persons involved is taken only when the initial investigative stage is finished. Such a decision would naturally be entirely at the discretion of the Belgian authorities.

The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) is closely following the national proceedings in this case.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0484/01

by Niels Busk (ELDR) and Elspeth Attwooll (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 February 2001)

Subject: State aid to support the fishing industry

Following the Commission's recent decision to consult a formal investigation into state aid schemes in France and Spain, which are providing support to the fishing industry following increases in fuel prices, can the Commission indicate what forms of state aid to the fishing industry would be compatible with the competition rules of the single market?

Has the Commission been notified of state aid schemes in other Member States aimed at structural assistance in the fisheries sector?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(21 March 2001)

State aid schemes for the fisheries sector are examined in the light of the Guidelines for the examination of State aid to fisheries and aquaculture, whatever the grounds on which those schemes are justified. When the fuel crisis arose last year, the Guidelines in force were those adopted by the Commission in 1997(1) and the Guidelines applying at the present time were adopted on 29 November 2000(2).

These new Guidelines were drawn up in order, among other things, to take into account the new rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector, adopted by the Council on 17 December 1999, Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999(3). As provided for by Article 19(1) of that Regulation, Member States have to notify the Commission of the aid schemes entering within the framework of this structural assistance and therefore co-financed by the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG).

Most of the Member States have, at the present time, begun to notify such co-financed aid schemes. Some of them have already been adopted by the Commission.

For more details on the forms of State aid compatible with the common market, the attention of the Honourable Member is drawn to the Guidelines referred to above. Structural assistance available under FIFG to address the problems highlighted by the rise in fuel prices includes, for example, aid for decommissioning fishing vessels, aid for temporary cessation of fishing or pilot projects for the reduction of fuel consumption in fishing operations.

As indicated in section 1.2. of the Guidelines, State aid which is granted without imposing any obligation on the part of recipients and which is intended to improve the situation of undertakings and increase their business liquidity is, as operating aid, incompatible with the common market.

(1) OJ C 100, 27.3.1997.

(2) OJ C 19, 20.1.2001.

(3) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999.