ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1969/99

by Piia-Noora Kauppi (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 November 1999)

Subject: Co-incineration of waste

In its proposal for a Council directive on the incineration of waste (COM(98) 558)(1), the Commission proposes that the same requirements be imposed on fuel from combustible municipal waste sorted at the place of origin which is co-incinerated at local district heating plants as on fuels from waste incineration plants.

In Finnish conditions, for example, this would mean in practice a sharp drop in the number of waste incineration plants and the concentration of waste incineration into large units. As a consequence, emissions from transport alone would increase considerably in the Nordic countries, where distances are

considerable. In Finland, particularly in recent years, collection, processing and quality control systems have been developed for combustible waste, which in turn are based on local waste incineration units.

Does the Commission propose, in its directive, to take account of the specific conditions in the Nordic countries? How does it intend to ensure that the new directive continues to encourage the development of waste collection and treatment systems in Northern Europe?

(1) OJ C 372, 2.12.1998, p. 11.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1999)

The Commission proposal on the incineration of waste(1) was adopted on 7 October 1998. The Parliament gave its first reading on 14 April 1999. The Council adopted a common position on 25 November 1999.

When preparing the proposal the Commission carried out intensive discussions with experts from all Member States as well as with all others concerned. These discussions as well as the negotiations in the Council have lead to a common position which takes into account the specific requirements of the Scandinavian Member States.

The common position seeks to establish the same requirements for the co-incineration of waste as for the incineration of waste. For combustion plants co-incinerating waste more stringent emission limit values generally apply compared to plants not using waste. However, the problem is not always compliance with tighter emission limit values, but the costs for the measurement requirements of the directive. In order to deal with this the future directive provides for the possibility of obtaining an authorisation from the authority to reduce the frequency of the measurements, which should reduce the costs for operators.

The Commission is therefore of the opinion that the future directive will not discourage Member States from establishing waste collection and pre-treatment systems.

(1) COM(98) 558 final modified by COM(1999) 330 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1511/99

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Creation of a landfill site at Komotini

The Rodopi Regional Council has decided to cede an area of woodland in the Gratini-Stilario-Siderades region to the municipality of Komotini to create a landfill site. Many of the local residents are protesting against the decision on the grounds that the site is located among fields in which farmers grow tobacco and because there are plans to build a reservoir in the area intended to boost the development of agriculture and fish farming which would be jeopardised by the site. The project is also to receive funding from Community resources and protesting residents have been told that the work must be completed quickly if those resources are not to be lost.

The Commission:

- is it aware of these facts and is it actually funding this project?

- what is its view of the inconsistency between this project and the present and future development of the region, which is, moreover, to be achieved by other projects funded by the Commission?

- can it take practical steps to help find a more realistic solution to the present problem of waste in the region, including recycling, which is a priority of Community policy?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(19 October 1999)

There are no specific Community provisions on the siting of a landfill or, more generally, of a waste treatment or disposal facility. The recently adopted Directive 1999/31/EC(1) on landfills provides for some aspects to be taken into consideration as regards the siting of a landfill (Annex I). However, these provisions do not provide for any minimum distance from residential areas or any other similar requirements.

Where a landfill is to contain hazardous waste, an environmental impact assessment is mandatory before planning permission is granted (Directive 85/337/EEC(2), Annex I, No 9). In other cases, the Member States may decide on such an environmental impact assessment.

The siting of landfills should be in accordance with the waste management plans, which Member States are obliged to prepare under Article 7 of Directive 75/442/EEC on waste(3). So far, though, the Commission has not yet been informed that a waste management plan for the Department of Rhodope has been drawn up.

The project at issue, on which work has apparently already begun, is not currently covered by joint financing under the European Regional Development Fund. Certain preparatory studies for that project have, however, been jointly financed under the operational Environment programme for Greece covering the period from 1994 to 1999.

As this is a matter for the Cohesion Fund the national authorities have officially lodged a request for joint funding, which is currently under examination by the Commission.

(1) OJ L 182, 16.7.1999.

(2) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(3) OJ L 194, 25.7.1975.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1817/99

by Heidi Hautala (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 October 1999)

Subject: Entry into force of European scientific diving standard

The European Scientific Diving Committee (ESDC) was established in May 1998 after preparatory work by Marco Weydert (DG XII D/3) and the working party of the seminar which met on the Italian island of Elba from 1 to 11 May 1997. This seminar was funded by Commission grant MAS3-CT96-6351. The objective of the ESDC is to create a training standard for European scientific diving and thus to promote the movement of diving experts from one country to another throughout the European Union and third countries. What is the present situation and timetable as regards ratification of the European scientific diving standard and the statutes of the ESDC?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 1999)

A couple of workshops and a seminar supported by the Commission in 1995-1997 have permitted to develop a draft agreed European standard for the training of scientific divers using scuba (self contained underwater breathing apparatus i.e. air tanks). Two degrees, called European Scientific Diver (ESD) and Advanced European Scientific Diver (AESD) have been considered in the standard. The lower degree (ESD) is for scientific divers who are still undergoing further training.

According to the draft agreed standard, and after the Commission involvement, a provisional European Scientific Diving Supervisory Committee (ESDSC) has been created and placed under the management of EMaPS (European Maríne and Polar Secretariat, now the Maríne Board) at the European Science Foundation in Strasbourg. At this moment, ESDSC is still an informal committee which has still to establish its own rules. In addition corresponding national committees have been created or are in the process of being created in several Member States. ESDSC is expected to establish and to maintain a list of certificates which fulfil the terms of the draft agreed standard. ESDSC is also liaising with the national authorities to promote recognition of the training of scientific divers under the scheme of Council Directive 92/51/EEC of 18 June 1992 on a second general system for the recognition of professional education and training to supplement Directive 89/48/EEC(1). If the conditions of Council Directive 92/51/EEC can be fulfilled, Member States will be required to recognise the qualifications given by the higher of the two degrees (AESD).

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1451/99

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Financing of projects in Ischia (Italy)

Three projects on Ischia two in the port of Ischia and one to do with the untapped medicinal spring of Nitrodi outside the town of Ischia are to be supported by the European Union.

Construction has not yet started.

1. In what form are these projects being supported by the European Union?

2. How is the overfall financing being planned and what system will be used for the breakdown of funding between the EU and the region?

3. What is the timescale envisaged for completion of these projects?

Supplementary answer by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1999)

According to information from the Italian authorities, these projects are being part-financed by the European Regional Development Fund under the operational programme Development of sustainable tourism in the Objective 1 regions for the current programming period 1994-1999. Implementation of the programme is the responsibility of the department of Tourism, which reports to the Prime Minister's Office.

The Community is contributing 50 % of the total cost of the works for each project, the final date for the commitment of resources is 31 December 1999 and the final date for payments is 31 December 2001.

Part-financing for the four projects concerning the port of Ischia totals EUR 2,5 million (ITL 4 882 million) and that for development of the spa at Nitrodi totals EUR 691 000 (ITL 1 337 million).

Work on these projects should be complete by December 2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2048/99

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(3 November 1999)

Subject: Net contribution/net subsidy from/to the European Union

Can the Commission list the net contribution to or net subsidy from the European Union paid by or to each of the 15 nation states of the European Union during the past three years for which figures are available?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1999)

The Honourable Member will find the information he requested in Allocation of 1998 EU operating expenditure by Member State. This document, dating from June 1999, covers the period from 1992 to 1998.

It is available on the Internet at http://europa.eu.int/comm/dg19/pdf/agenda2000/statdepenses98.pdf
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1939/99

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(4 November 1999)

Subject: Marketing agricultural sectors and products

Is the Commission prepared to help fund marketing schemes to promote certain sectors and niche products within European farming outside the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 November 1999)

The Commission would recall that it submitted in January 1999 a proposal for a Council regulation on measures to promote and provide information on agricultural products in third countries(1).

This proposal covers all the agricultural products, in particular typical or quality products displaying high added value.

The Commission proposes, following the management committee procedure, to draw up every two years a list of the products and markets concerned by promotional activities.

(1) COM(98) 683 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2531/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(4 January 2000)

Subject: Foundation of a centre for the promotion of classical studies and the teaching of ancient Greek and Latin at educational institutions

In 1995 a Memorandum was submitted to the Council of Education Ministers of the European Union on the foundation of a centre of studies for promoting the teaching of Latin and ancient Greek studies at educational institutions in the European Union, especially at secondary level. Representatives of the Italian, French, Greek and Spanish Governments stressed that today more than ever before classics constitute an extremely valuable educational tool with which to educate the young who could acquire through this common intellectual heritage a genuine European outlook alongside their legitimate national feelings.

However, five years have now elapsed without the European Union having taken any practical measures to achieve this objective. Moreover, classical studies cannot be allowed to disappear from secondary education in the next century: distinguished figures in classical studies such as Jacqueline de Romilly of the French Academy and Jean-Pierre Vernant, both professors at the Collège de France, have expressed their disappointment at the disappearance of classical studies from secondary education (See Le Monde of 12.11.1999). In view of this situation, will the Commission say what initiatives it intends to take to make a positive contribution towards the establishment of such a centre?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2000)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1743/99

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 October 1999)

Subject: Enforcement of CITES Regulation

On 2 June 1999 a shipment of 35 Fennec foxes and 10 Demoiselle cranes (both in Appendix II of CITES) were flown by Lufthansa Cargo from Sudan to Frankfurt and from there to Johannesburg. On arrival at Johannesburg, three foxes were dead, one was dying and the others were in distress. Owing to the condition of the animals and a lack of proper health certification, the remaining 31 foxes were sent back to the Sudan, again via Frankfurt. The suffering of the foxes would have been alleviated if the proper obligatory veterinary checks had been carried out at Frankfurt airport.

Would the Commission say what steps it has taken to ensure that the conditions of the CITES Regulation are being enforced at airports in the EU, particularly Frankfurt, through which many millions of animals pass every year?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 1999)

The Commission regrets that the terms of Article 9(5) of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein(1) appear not to have been respected in the case mentioned by the Honourable Member. The Commission intends to draw the attention of the enforcement group, as set up by Article 14 of the Regulation, to this particular incident as well as to the control of transport of live animal specimens under International air transport association (IATA) live animal regulations and the necessity of appropriate controls at airports and other places of import for transit or transhipment purposes in the Community.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1701/99

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 September 1999)

Subject: State aid and the RAI affair

Can the Commission provide an update on the proceedings against the Italian state radio and television service (RAI) for receiving allegedly unfair state aid?

Is the Commission aware that RAI TV has spent, and continues to spend, huge amounts of money on trite, uneducational entertainment programmes and on heavily biased programmes of a political and/or cultural nature?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(3 November 1999)

In February 1999 the Commission requested the Italian government to provide the information necessary to assess whether the aid granted to Radio Televisione Italiana (RAI) might be considered as existing aid in the sense of Article 88(1) (ex Article 93) of the EC Treaty.

On the basis of the information submitted by the Italian government, the Commission decided in July 1999 to initiate the formal investigation procedure with respect to some aid measures granted to RAI by the state and Istituto per la Ricostruzione Industriale (IRI) over the 1992-1994 period. The Commission takes the view that these measures can not be considered as existing aid, as they were not foreseen in any law pre-dating the entry into force of the EC Treaty. At the present stage, the Commission has doubts as to their compatibility with the common market.

The Commission informed Italy about this procedure at the end of September 1999. The Italian government should submit its observations by the end of October 1999.

As to the Honourable Member's second question, the Commission is not competent to evaluate the quality or the content of the television programmes broadcast by RAI. The Commission has the duty to assess whether the funds granted by the state to RAI, both as licence fee and as other support measures, are proportionate to the net costs incurred by the undertaking to fulfil the public service obligations imposed by the state.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1946/99

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 November 1999)

Subject: Ban on unloading EU catches in Chile

Given the problems which Community fishing fleets are experiencing because of the continued Chilean ban on offloading and transferring fish in Chilean ports a situation which constitutes a straightforward obstacle to trade violating articles V and XI.1 of the 1994 GATT can the Commission tell me what measures it has taken to persuade the Chilean authorities to lift the ban?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1999)

Following the lodging of a complaint by the Spanish long-line vessel association (ANAPA) in the framework of the Trade barriers regulation (TBR), Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of 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 Commission initiated an investigation. The report of this investigation indicates the Chilean legislation is not compatible with Chile's obligations under the WTO.

The TBR report advocated several alternative courses of action. Firstly it suggested opening bilateral negotiations with Chile in order to achieve a short term agreement on the immediate question of transit, to be followed by a long term, multilateral, agreement on the conservation and management measures for swordfish in the South East Pacific area. Secondly it suggested opening a dispute settlement procedure in the framework of the WTO, or alternatively resorting to the International tribunal in Hamburg for an interpretation of the United Nations Convention of the law of the sea provisions.

Subsequently, bilateral negotiations have been initiated with Chile, without excluding resort to the WTO/Unclos alternatives. These bilateral negotiations continue but have not yet shown any major progress. The Commission is currently assessing the overall situation.

(1) OJ L 349, 31.12.1994.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2071/99

by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE) to the Council

(15 November 1999)

Subject: Balkans Coordinator

Is it the intention to extend the mandate of the Balkans Coordinator, Bodo Hombach, beyond 31 December 1999?

Reply

(31 January 2000)

The Council adopted a Joint Action on 9 December 1999 extending the mandate of the EU special envoy, Bodo Hombach, until 31 December 2000.

The Council Joint Action containing that decision was published in Official Journal L 318 of the European Communities of 11 December 1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1988/99

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Council

(9 November 1999)

Subject: Allegations in the Mitrokhin papers about an Italian spy network working for the Soviet Union's secret services

The Mitrokhin papers forwarded by the British Government have revealed that a dense spy network used to operate in Italy employed by the secret services of a foreign State hostile to Italy and free Europe. It used to monitor and put pressure on the institutions of the Italian State and even reached the highest political and government levels.

What steps does the Council intend to take to shed light on this affair as swiftly as possible?

Will the Council bring pressure to bear on the Italian Government to ensure that all the information needed to ascertain the truth is made known and, if necessary, call on the governments of other Member States to supply any documentation connected with the revelations contained in the Mitrokhin papers?

Answer

(24 January 2000)

The Council has no competence to deal with the questions raised by the honourable Member of the European Parliament.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2312/99

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Environmental disaster in the Kymijoki river

Investigations by the Finnish Environment Centre have shown that there are between 16 and 21 kg of dioxines and furanes at the bottom of Finland's fourth largest river, the Kymijoki. The levels of PCDF compounds are at least ten times greater than the accepted limit values. Dioxines and furanes are carcinogens and represent a particular risk if they enter the food chain. Dioxines and furanes have an effect, inter alia, on the cell nucleus in which they cause changes to the genome.

Preparations are under way in Finland for the canalisation of the Kymijoki. The dredging which the canalisation requires, and the propellor turbulence caused by possible future shipping traffic, will stir up the bottom sediments so that dioxines and furanes will be carried into the Gulf of Finland, possibly threatening the ecology of the whole Baltic Sea. Is the Commission aware of this problem, and if so what can it do under the founding Treaties of the EU to prevent an environmental disaster?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 2000)

The Commission is aware that sediments in the Baltic sea contain comparatively high amounts of dioxins. Therefore it is unsurprising that sediments in the rivers feeding the Baltic sea contain higher than average amounts of dioxins as well. The particular situation of the Kymijoki River and the level of dioxins in the sediments of that river is not known to the Commission.

In order to be able to compare the detected levels in the Kymijoki with the situation in other rivers, the Commission would need more information on the way results have been calculated. It would be particularly helpful to have information on the concentrations of the different congeners, the depth at which measurements were performed, and whether results have been calculated according to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization/Centre for Coastal and Maríne Sciences (NATO/CCMS) approach.

At this stage, without the benefit of more detailed information, it is difficult to judge the situation. The Commission would therefore be grateful if the Honourable Member could provide the Commission with more details.

In principle, this event, as described in the question, is not covered by environmental Community legislation. Therefore the possibilities to react at a Community level are limited.