ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/205

(2004/C 88 E/0213)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0686/04

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 2004)

Subject: European hydrogen platform

The creation of the European Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technology Platform is to be welcomed, but surprisingly not one of the 35 members of the platform's Advisory Council is Portuguese.

The Commission may recall that the University of the Azores' marine environment and technologies laboratory is a pioneering centre for the development of technologies linked to the exploitation of hydrogen.

Does the Commission perhaps consider that research carried out in one of the outermost regions is less valuable than that carried out by the large countries represented on the Advisory Council?

Does it not consider that all the relevant partners should be included in an initiative of this kind, irrespective of their size?

Will the Commission consider expanding the Advisory Council to include, for example, the University of the Azores' marine environment and technologies laboratory?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(21 April 2004)

The Technology Platform for Hydrogen and Fuel Cells, recently launched in January 2004, is an initiative that intends to include all actors and activities in Europe, working in advancing the technologies which may lead to a future Hydrogen Economy. The Advisory Council (AC) is one of the key bodies of the Platform since it will steer and guide its various components and actors.

The first Advisory Council has been elected for an initial period of 18 months and is composed by high level personalities representing different players of the economy and society in Europe, including the research community and main industrial sectors actively involved in the development of the relevant technologies.

Although none of the present members of the AC is Portuguese, other Portuguese stakeholders will certainly be in the various bodies and structures of the Platform, such as the Member States Mirror Group, Steering Panels and Initiative Groups and more importantly the Platform operations, where all relevant ongoing activities expressing an interest in being involved are welcome. The Commission takes note of the possible interest of the ‘Laboratorio de Ambiente Marínho e Tecnologias, da Universidade dos Açores’.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/411

(2004/C 84 E/0478)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0538/04

by Kathalijne Buitenweg (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(24 February 2004)

Subject: Language discrimination in notices of vacancy — ‘English mother tongue’ or ‘native speaker’

In reply to question E-2226/03 (1), the Commission states that all Commission services have been made aware of possible discriminatory job advertisements and asked to take the necessary steps as regards their contractors. The Commission also states in its reply that it tries to avoid cooperation with organisations which publish job advertisements with a ‘native speaker’ criterion. The Commission goes on to stress that it intends to use its legal powers to fight against the use of a ‘native speaker’ criterion in job advertisements.

The European Esperanto Union states that, despite previous warnings from the Commission, discriminatory notices of vacancy are still being published which require candidates to meet such criteria as ‘English mother tongue’ or ‘native English speakers’. Copies of the discriminatory notices of vacancy can be found at www.lingvo.org/eo/2/15.

1. Is the Commission aware of the advertising of these vacancies? If so, has the Commission used its legal powers to combat this discriminatory requirement? If so, how? If not, why not?

2. What steps will the Commission take to prevent vacancies from being advertised with such requirements as ‘English mother tongue’ or ‘native speaker’ in future?

(1) OJ C 33 E, 6.2.2004, p. 236.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3775/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: The threat to ethical and social values from the commercialisation of death and human cadavers

1. Would the Commission state its views on the legality (setting aside the ethical aspect) of testators bequeathing their bodies to private plastic surgery clinics? Is it not fair to assume that, as in the case of organs "donated" by people from very poor countries, this form of "donation" is forced upon people by extreme poverty and harsh social conditions (see question 4)?

2. Does the Commission agree that it is against the ethics of the medical profession to "carve up" human cadavers for cosmetic purposes or for use as a commodity?

3. Does the Commission further agree that the exhibition for commercial purposes and sale of whole-body anatomical specimens at so-called "art" exhibitions, on videos or on CD-roms is an affront to the rights and values enshrined in the European Community?

4. Were licences issued for the import of at least three corpses imported into Germany from China, Russia and Kirghizia?

5. Is it consistent with the European Community's position on the universal status of human rights for the corpses of people convicted and executed in China - in circumstances of highly questionable legality - to be used in Europe as a source of body parts, whole-body anatomical specimens or "art" gallery exhibits?

6. How is it possible that, although usually it is prohibited for private individuals to be given charge of human cadavers, in this case no problems seem to have been raised?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 1999)

The Commission deems that Community law does not offer an adequate legal base to treat this matter. Therefore, the institutions of the European Union are devoid of competence to act in this field. However, the possibility of bringing a case before the European Court of Human Rights cannot be ruled out.

Given the high sensitivity of the issues raised by the Honourable Member, the Commission has decided to forward the matter to the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4026/98

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 January 1999)

Subject: Skhinias and the 2004 Olympic Games

As work progresses on completing the facilities for the 2004 Olympic Games in Athens, the threats to the environment and potential breaches of Community environmental legislation are becoming more apparent. In reply to a previous question, E-3097/97(1), the Commission gave assurances that it would monitor the relevant matters so that such problems did not arise.

Will the Commission now consider the issue of the protected wetland at Skhinias, where there are plans to set up a rowing course with facilities for spectators etc. for the 2004 Games? Reliable sources of information claim that Skhinias is to be designated a "natural park" which will coincidentally(?) also incorporate these facilities. Is it possible to effect such a change without infringing Community legislation?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 1999)

The Schinias wetland has not been classified as a special protection area under Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds(2), nor as an important bird area. The site is not included either in the list of sites of Community importance communicated by the Hellenic authorities to the Commission under the provisions of the Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(3), for future inclusion in the Natura 2000 network. Although Schinias is listed in the relevant scientific inventory, hosting in particular several priority habitat types, no evidence exists at the moment of insufficient representation of those habitat types in the Greek national list which could justify the future addition of that site in the list of sites of Community importance.

In the light of the above, Community nature protection legislation is not involved in this case. In any event, the Commission can only confirm the obligation for Member States to correctly implement all related Community legislation, including Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment(4).

(1) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998, p. 151.

(2) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.

(3) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(4) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3736/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Osteoporosis

Recent scientific studies show that fractures attributable to osteoporosis pose a growing threat to the health of the elderly, and that the incidence of such fractures will rise dramatically over the next few years.

Given that diet is an important factor in ensuring healthy bones, does the Commission plan to arrange for a study to draw up public information policies and lay down systems to monitor the rate at which fractures recur, both nationally and Community-wide?

With a view to Community measures directed towards preventing osteoporosis and increasing awareness about it among the public and the health authorities of individual Member States, with the aim of safeguarding the health of citizens and contributing to the training of appropriate health workers, can the Commission launch a campaign to increase awareness about the fight against osteoporosis?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1952/01

by Johannes Swoboda (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2001)

Subject: Mrs Wallström's position on the Alpine Convention

What is the position of the EU's Commissioner responsible for environmental matters on the subject of the Alpine Convention?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1951/01 and E-1952/01 given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2001)

The Commission recognises the importance of the role the Alpine Convention can play in the promotion of sustainable development in the Alpine region. The Alpine Convention is in fact an important international instrument aimed at protecting the alpine ecosystem and ensuring the integration of environmental and social concerns in a number of different sectors of economic life.

The Commission understands the concern of the Honourable Member with respect to the lack of participation of the Commission at the last meetings of the Standing Committee and at the Ministerial Meeting in October 2000. However, resource constraints currently prevent the Commission from considering active involvement in the work of the Alpine Convention a priority.

This has to be seen together with the fact that the subsidiarity principle plays a major role as far as the implementation of the Alpine Convention and its Protocols is concerned. In fact, in a regional context, action by national and local governments can be more effective than action at Community level. Furthermore, a number of Protocols to the Alpine Convention cover areas where Community competence is limited, in particular those of tourism, soil protection and mountain forests.

By no means however should this be interpreted as a lack of interest in or appreciation of the work being done under the Alpine Convention. It should be underlined that the objectives to which the Community is committed as a Contracting Party to this Convention are being fulfilled in the different areas covered by the Convention through Community action and legislation, such as the Habitats and Birds Directives, the Natura 2000 network, as well as the 6th Environmental Action Programme.

The submission, on 16 January 2001, of a proposal on the signature of the Transport Protocol to the Council(1) is also a sign of the interest the Commission maintains with respect to the Alpine Convention.

(1) COM(2001) 18 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2098/01

by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Erasmus students in Connaught, Ulster

Can the Commission provide information regarding the number of students from Connaught, Ulster who have benefited from the EU-backed Erasmus scheme?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(10 September 2001)

The Community student mobility scheme, Erasmus, offers students studying for a degree in one of the Member States the possibility to spend from three months to a year studying abroad in another participating country (Member State or Associated Country).

Neither the Commission nor the National Agencies, which manage the Erasmus mobility action at national level, register information on the origin of the Erasmus students, except for information on nationality, which is a prerequisite for participation. The Commission therefore regrets that it is not possible to provide the Honourable Member with the requested information on the number of students from Connaught (Ulster) who have benefited from the scheme.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2492/02

by Jean-Maurice Dehousse (PSE) to the Commission

(2 September 2002)

Subject: Purchase of items of immovable property in Denmark

On Saturday, 29 June 2002 the ARTE programme Forum des Européens (Forum for Europeans) focused on Denmark and the Danish Presidency which was then about to start. During the programme, it was explained that Danish law prohibits the purchase of some types of immovable property by people who are not Danish citizens, including Union citizens.

If that information is correct, what is the legal basis for this provision and does the Commission regard such a ban as being compatible with the principles underpinning the Community (including equality between citizens) and the common market?

Moreover, was a ban on this type of restrictive law not regarded as part of the acquis communautaire during the ongoing negotiations with the applicant countries?

If so, what progress has been made in the negotiations on this matter with the various applicant countries?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(26 September 2002)

The acquisition of real estate in another Member State is a capital movement. As such it is governed by Article 56 of the EC Treaty which provides for a prohibition of all restrictions on capital movements. But this provision is also subject to the exceptions expressly provided for in the EC Treaty.

As far as Denmark is concerned, a special protocol exists in the EC Treaty on the acquisition of property in that Member State. This provides that Notwithstanding the provisions of this Treaty, Denmark may maintain the existing legislation on the acquisition of second homes. The existing legislation in question requires that, to acquire a second home in Denmark, the purchaser must have been a resident of Denmark for a period of five years regardless of nationality.

While the freedom of capital movements is part of the Community acquis, so also is the particular provision concerning second homes in Denmark.

In the case of most candidate countries, negotiations on capital movements have been provisionally closed for all negotiating countries but Romania. For real estate operations, transitional periods are foreseen for certain countries for the adoption of the full freedom in the case of the acquisition of second homes and/or agricultural and forest land. A summary of the transitional and other arrangements envisaged for individual candidate countries is to be found at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/enlargement/negotiations/chapters/chap4/index.htm.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/523

(2004/C 78 E/0544)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3329/03

by Antonio Tajani (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 November 2003)

Subject: Eurobarometer poll according to which Israel is the greatest threat to world peace

According to the Eurobarometer poll commissioned by the Commission, EU citizens consider Israel to be the country that presents the greatest threat to world peace.

Does the Commission know what the criteria were for the wording of the questions?

Is the Commission aware of the fact that in the answers offered to those questioned two democratic countries, the United States and Israel, were put on the same level as dictatorships and theocratic regimes that deny freedom?

What steps will the Commission and its President Romano Prodi take to prevent the European institutions from legitimising thoughtless initiatives which may aggravate tension in Europe and the Middle East?

What steps will the Commission take to prevent leaks of information on such sensitive subjects, as in the case of the findings of the Eurobarometer poll published in ‘EL País’?

Does the Commission not consider that Europe, mindful of the tragedy of the Holocaust, should take on greater responsibility for the quest for peace in the Middle East?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 2003)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer it gave to Written Question P-3334/03 by Ms Muscardini (1).

(1) See page 263.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2867/95 by Lissy Gröner (PSE) to the Council (26 October 1995)

Subject: Situation at the Brussels II European School in Woluwe

When the safety inspectorate of the Woluwe St Lambert fire brigade inspected the Brussels II (Woluwe) European School on 4 July 1995, it found that safety standards in the secondary and primary buildings were inadequate, for example ocupancy rates of up to twice the permitted levels (as many as 420 persons per floor in the secondary building and 120 persons per floor in the primary building).

1. Which body in the EU is responsible for and takes decisions on occupancy rates at the school (number of pupils, number of classes, language sections) and which institution is legally responsible for ensuring that safety standards are maintained?

2. To what extent are policy decisions taken by European bodies (e.g. the Board of Governors) in consultation with the relevant authorities responsible for maintaining safety standards at the school, and are there legal requirements in respect of such safety standards? If so, what are they?

3. Who is legally responsible in the event of a fatality occurring as the result of inadequate safety measures at the European School?

4. To which organ of democratic political control is the Board of Governors, as the decision-making body for the European Schools, answerable?

Reply (20 May 1996)

The Convention adopting the Statute of the European School, which was signed on 12 April 1957 by the original Member States of the Community, and the Protocols established by reference to that Statute, are applied by the Board of Governors of the European Schools.

The above body takes the decisions necessary for the proper functioning of the Schools and, in the case of the European Schools in Belgium, negotiates, in accordance with Article 28 of the Statute, any additional agreements necessary with the Belgian Government in order to ensure the best physical and moral conditions for the functioning of the Schools. The current talks should shortly result in a satisfactory solution for all the parties involved.

The Commission represents the Community on the Board of Governors and the Administrative Board of each School, and questions concerning the functioning of the Woluwe School should be addressed to it.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3440/95 by José Escudero (PPE) to the Commission (18 December 1995)

Subject: European aid for music

Is the Commission planning to provide aid to encourage musical activities which bring musicians together, organizing competitions, teaching courses, choirs and orchestras made up of young Europeans, other than the so-called European orchestras?

Would it be possible to allocate aid to music in such a way that it would reach local or regional level, and particularly youth orchestras?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission (6 February 1996)

Following the insertion in the EC Treaty of the new Article 128 on culture, the Commission has presented three cultural action proposals for decisions on the establishment of programmes in the field of contemporary culture (Kaleidoscope), books and reading (Ariane) and heritage (Raphael). These proposals are still being considered by the Council.

Support for music is dealt with primarily under the Kaleidoscope programme, which includes support not only for the European Community Youth Orchestra and the European Community Baroque Orchestra but also for individual projects.

In line with the principle of subsidiarity, the Kaleidoscope programme must focus on projects with a European dimension, i.e. presented by representatives of at least three Member States. For regional or local cultural projects the Commission has launched a pilot project for interregional cooperation in the field of economic development with cultural interest, based on Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0687/95 by Peter Crampton (PSE) to the Commission (10 March 1995)

Subject: Commission proposals in the field of the environment, 1994

How many proposals for legislation and regulations in the field of the environment in 1994 originated with the Commission?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0662/95, E-0663/95, E-0664/95, E-0665/95, E-0666/95 E-0667/95, E-0668/95, E-0669/95, E-0670/95, E-0671/95, E-0672/95, E-0673/95, E-0674/95, E-0675/95, E-0676/95, E-0677/95, E-0678/95, E-0679/95, E-0680/95, E-0681/95, E-0682/95, E-0683/95, E-0684/95, E-0685/95, E-0686/95, E-0687/95, E-0688/95, E-0689/95, E-0690/95 and E-0691/95 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (15 November 1996)

Further to its answer of 10 April 1995, the Commission can now give the following information.

The table below gives the number of proposals for legislation transmitted by the Commission in 1994 for adoption in the various areas to which the Honourable Member's questions relate.

Some were designed to implement new measures and others to update earlier legislation. They may also relate to the management of certain common policies (for example, commercial policy, common agricultural policy, fisheries, customs union).

Consolidation proposals are also included. Proposals amending proposals transmitted earlier are not included.

The statistics and list are taken from the Commission's APC database, to which Members of the European Parliament can have access, like the other institutions and the public.

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0676/95 by Peter Crampton (PSE) to the Commission (10 March 1995)

Subject: Commission proposals in the field of regional policies, 1994

How many proposals for legislation and regulations in the field of regional policies were put forward by the Commission in 1994?

Supplementary joint answer to Written Questions E-0662/95, E-0663/95, E-0664/95, E-0665/95, E-0666/95 E-0667/95, E-0668/95, E-0669/95, E-0670/95, E-0671/95, E-0672/95, E-0673/95, E-0674/95, E-0675/95, E-0676/95, E-0677/95, E-0678/95, E-0679/95, E-0680/95, E-0681/95, E-0682/95, E-0683/95, E-0684/95, E-0685/95, E-0686/95, E-0687/95, E-0688/95, E-0689/95, E-0690/95 and E-0691/95 given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission (15 November 1996)

Further to its answer of 10 April 1995, the Commission can now give the following information.

The table below gives the number of proposals for legislation transmitted by the Commission in 1994 for adoption in the various areas to which the Honourable Member's questions relate.

Some were designed to implement new measures and others to update earlier legislation. They may also relate to the management of certain common policies (for example, commercial policy, common agricultural policy, fisheries, customs union).

Consolidation proposals are also included. Proposals amending proposals transmitted earlier are not included.

The statistics and list are taken from the Commission's APC database, to which Members of the European Parliament can have access, like the other institutions and the public.

>TABLE>