ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2542/01

by Ioannis Souladakis (PSE) to the Council

(20 September 2001)

Subject: Restoration of links between Greek and EU electricity networks

It is well known that, because of the fighting in former Yugoslavia, the Adriatic supply line for the electricity network was destroyed in Mostar, while the corresponding line passing through Croatia was destroyed in Ernestinovo.

Since these lines are of vital importance in connecting Greece to the rest of the European electrical power network:

- has the Council taken any specific action to date to ensure restoration of the network?

- Has it included restoration of the destroyed lines as a priority in the reconstruction programmes for Bosnia-Herzegovina?

- Are there any estimates of the cost of restoring the network?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-2540/01 and E-2542/01

(12 February 2002)

On several occasions in recent years the Council has stressed the importance of the European Union taking a regional approach to the Balkan region. The need for efficient regional infrastructure, especially in terms of transport and the supply of electricity, has been noted several times in the context of the Council and the Stability Pact, in which the European Union plays a leading role.

As regards the restoration of road and rail networks, and more specifically the network linking Greece to Central Europe (Corridor X), and the possibility of contributing to any priority projects put forward by the States concerned, the Honourable Member is invited to address his questions direct to the Commission.

On the issue of electricity supply networks, the Council would remind the Honourable Member that the strengthening of electricity links between Greece and, respectively, Albania, Bulgaria and the former Yugoslavia, including the reconstruction of links with the northern part of the former Yugoslavia and the UCPTE network, forms part of the projects of common interest as designated in Decision 1254/96/EC (amended by Decision 1741/1999/EC) laying down a series of guidelines for trans-European energy networks.

Also, Regulation (EC) No 2236/95, as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1655/1999, lays down general rules for the granting of Community financial aid in the field of trans-European networks. Article 15(2) stipulates that the Commission and the Member States concerned shall systematically monitor progress with projects, where appropriate with the cooperation of the European Investment Bank or other appropriate bodies.

The Honourable Member is invited to contact the participants mentioned above in order to ascertain the current situation.

The Council would stress that it has no competence to answer the point raised in the last part of the Honourable Member's question.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3361/01

by Michael Cashman (PSE) to the Commission

(6 December 2001)

Subject: Food allergies

Is the Commission aware of the risk that gluten and lactose may pose for many people? Can the Commission detail what steps it is taking to ensure that processed products and restaurant menus identify whether they contain either of these two ingredients?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(21 January 2002)

The Commission is aware that gluten causes intolerance in certain people and that dairy products, including lactose, are one of the most common allergens.

For persons suffering from allergies or intolerance to one or more substances, it is indeed essential to be able to check whether this substance or these substances are present in foods.

That is why, in keeping with its intention announced in the White Paper on food safety(1), the Commission presented Parliament and Council with a proposal(2) amending Directive 2000/13/EC on the labelling of foods.

This proposal includes a list of ingredients or substances that cause allergies or forms of intolerance, and stipulates that the ingredients or substances concerned, or products derived therefrom, must be mentioned on the labelling of foods in which they are present, with no possibility of exemptions.

Cereals containing gluten and dairy products are included in this list.

As far as foodstuffs sold in a non-pre-packaged form are concerned, which includes foods offered by restaurants, Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000(3) stipulates that the requisite information must be communicated to consumers in a way to be decided by the Member States. These rules will continue to apply following the adoption of the proposal referred to above.

(1) COM(1999) 719 final.

(2) OJ C 332 E, 27.11.2001.

(3) OJ L 109, 6.5.2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3045/01

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Provision of lifeguards

Is the Commission aware of a recent UK study into the number of children who drown in pools and in the sea in Member States of the EU every year?

In the light of this study, would the Commission consider initiating a systematic recording of figures in all Member States in the EU?

What plans does the Commission have to introduce a Regulation on the provision of lifeguards at public pools and beaches?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2001)

The Commission is not aware of the study referred to by the Honourable Member but is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3259/01

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(23 November 2001)

Subject: Use of the Occitan language at the Winter Olympic Games Turin 2006

Formulating its request in line with Law 482/99 concerning regulations on the protection of historic linguistic minorities, the Chambra Economica Europèa Dels Paìses Occitans Chambra d'Oc has asked the Organising Committee of the XX Winter Olympic Games Turin 2006 (TOROC) to implement this law on the occasion of the Games through the use of the Occitan language on all official occasions, and especially during the inaugural ceremony of the Games. It has also launched an appeal to the relevant institutional bodies asking them to support this request.

The Occitan language, the expression of one of the great European peoples, extends over the territories of three European countries Italy (Padania), France and Spain and is the language spoken in the Occitan Valleys which are to host the 2006 Winter Games.

What steps does the Commission intend to take, including action under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages, to ensure that TOROC grants the Occitans' valid request? Would the granting of this request be of great symbolic value in relation to Europe's recognition and practical protection of all European linguistic minorities?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 2001)

The Commission congratulates Piedmont on its hosting of the 2006 Winter Olympic Games and is confident that it will exploit this unique opportunity to make the whole world aware of the cultural attractions and special features of this area situated in the heart of Europe.

The European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages is a Council of Europe document that has been put to the organisation's member countries for ratification. Although Italy has not yet signed it, the Charter has served as inspiration for Italian Law No 482/99 on the protection of historical linguistic minorities.

The European Union does not have the specific competence, either in this field or with regard to sport, to take action in the direction suggested by the Honourable Member.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1594/01

by Luckas Vander Taelen (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(21 May 2001)

Subject: Gare du Luxembourg, Brussels, and the free movement of services

The Société Nationale des Chemins de Fer Belge (SNCB) has awarded a contract to the AEL-GROUP T-Tractabel consortium to draw up designs relating to the Gare du Luxembourg in Brussels in connection with construction of the projected D4 and D5 buildings in the Place du Luxembourg. The SNCB, acting in its capacity as owner, has applied to the Region of Brussels Capital (municipality of Ixelles) for a planning certificate authorising the station renovation works (application registered on 28 April 1998) for which it is the contracting authority.

Council Directive 92/50/EEC(1) of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts must be respected by all contracting authorities within the meaning of Directive 71/305/EEC(2) and any obstacles to the free movement of services must be avoided.

Can the Commission establish whether the SNCB issued an invitation to tender for the provision of services concering design and renovation work for the Gare du Luxembourg in accordance with the provisions of Directive 92/50/EEC?

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 185, 16.8.1971, p. 5.

Supplementary answergiven by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2002)

According to the information transmitted by the Belgian authorities and the parties involved, the SNCB was not one of the signatories of the design contract for renovation work at the Gare de Luxembourg in Brussels, as this was concluded between the SA Forum Leopold

(private developer) and Tractabel. Whilst it is true that the SNCB was present when this agreement was concluded, it was acting in its capacity as the owner of the land involved in order to provide those producing the designs with certain technical information concerning access to the station. The SNCB's involvement was not therefore that of either a contracting authority or a client. Nor will it be involved in financing the designs in question.

Since therefore this was an agreement concluded between two legal persons under private law, to which the SNCB was not party, Council Directive 92/50/EEC of 18 June 1992 relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts(1) was not applicable in this case.

(1) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2632/01

by Hans Karlsson (PSE) to the Commission

(27 September 2001)

Subject: Employees' right to information

It is most important for workers to be given information in good time on planned changes to the undertaking where they work. Efforts to improve the right to information date back a long way, and were a live issue most recently during the Swedish Presidency this year.

There is now a clear trend for employers not to meet their obligation to inform workers of changes in the undertaking's activities. There are grounds for suspecting that employers are deliberately withholding important information. The most recent case was when Avesta Polarit decided to close the Degerfors foundry and Carrier decided to move its production from Arvika to Hungary.

Is the Commission aware of this trend?

What action can the Commission take to ensure that employees are given information on planned changes at a workplace?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 2001)

The Commission shares the concerns of the Honourable Member that workers be given information in good time on planned changes in the undertaking where they work. It is to ensure that this happens that the Commission, in 1998, made a proposal for a Council Directive establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the Community(1).

The proposal is intended to fill the gaps and counter the shortcomings of national legislation in the field of information and consultation to ensure that workers are informed and consulted before decisions affecting them are taken. To address concerns regarding the failure of employers to meet their obligations to inform and consult, such as the concerns expressed by the Honourable Member, the Commission proposed that certain decisions taken by employers in serious breach of the Directive's provisions would not have legal effect.

The Commission very much welcomes the fact that the Council finally adopted a common position on the proposal under the Swedish Presidency(2). Parliament is now undertaking its second reading and the Commission will offer every assistance to enable Council and Parliament to reach final agreement on the Directive before the end of 2001.

(1) OJ C 2, 5.1.1999.

(2) P. R. No 9397/01.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2706/01

by Harlem Désir (PSE) to the Commission

(26 September 2001)

Subject: Lack of progress in the negotiations on the trade and cooperation agreement between the EU and South Africa

What proposals will the Commission make for breaking the stalemate and completing the negotiations with South Africa on the trade and cooperation agreement with the European Union? Is it not damaging to delay the entry into force of this agreement, which could substantially benefit the development of Africa, purely on account of the fisheries aspect?

Cannot the Commission accept South Africa's desire to preserve its fish stocks as legitimate and well-founded, and likewise its intention not to consent to further exploitation agreements of the kind which the previous Apartheid regime concluded with Korea and Japan which it does not intend to renew but rather, in advance of any agreement, to implement a programme of scientific cooperation and monitoring of fish stocks?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2001)

The negotiations for the Trade Development and Cooperation Agreement (TDCA) with South Africa were successfully concluded in 1999. Council Decision 1999/753/EC of 29 July 1999, concerning the provisional application of the Agreement on Trade, Development and Cooperation between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of South Africa, of the other part(1) establishes provisional and partial application of the TDCA as of 1 January 2000, pending ratification by the parties to the Agreement.

Negotiations for the conclusion of a separate Fisheries Agreement were suspended earlier in 2001, as it became clear that the Commission mandate was for the conclusion of an agreement that would include access to South African fishery resources for European vessels, in addition to cooperation in a number of fishery-related areas. The South African delegation was mandated only to negotiate an agreement that would not include such access.

The Commission does not rule out the possibility that parties will return to the negotiation table at a later stage. It feels that this state of affairs does not affect the provisional application nor the full entry into force of the TDCA.

In the opinion of the Commission this does not hold true for the ongoing Wine and Spirits negotiations. At the South Africa-Community Cooperation Council on 26 June 2001 it was agreed that a group of six high level officials would meet in order to work out a solution. The group met on 25 July 2001 and agreed on a Memorandum of Understanding on outstanding issues, which is to be the basis for the conclusion of the Wine and Spirits Agreement.

(1) OJ L 311, 4.12.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3022/01

by Anne Van Lancker (PSE) to the Commission

(30 October 2001)

Subject: Commission's equal opportunities policy

In relation to the Commission's equal opportunities policy,

- could the Commission explain why a man without any relevant professional experience was appointed as head of the TAXUD-A3 unit, responsible for infringement proceedings and requiring a knowledge of the management of infringements and proceedings, despite the fact that there were three women candidates with the necessary qualifications?

- could the Commission also say how many male officials are employed in the Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union in grades A2 and A3 and how many women there are in these grades?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Nine officials applied for the post Head of Unit TAXUD-A-3, COM/224/00, of which three were women. One of the three female applicants withdrew her application.

The applications were assessed by:

- a selection panel, which concluded that three candidates, one of them being a woman, could be taken into consideration at that level;

- the Consultative Committee on Appointments (CCA), which concluded that two candidates possessed the required qualification; the female candidate was not one of the two (nevertheless the Committee noted her good general qualifications);

- the relevant Director General, who appointed one of the two candidates identified by the CCA (naturally, in agreement with the Member of the Commission in charge).

In view of the above, the Commission fails to understand on what basis the Honourable Member states that there were three woman candidates with the necessary qualifications and that the candidate finally chosen did not possess the necessary qualifications.

There are currently four A2 male officials and ten A3 male officials employed in the Directorate General for Taxation and Customs Union. Three posts in the DG's organization chart are occupied by female officials. There are no female officials at A2 and A3 level, but two Head of Unit posts are occupied by women.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3049/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Controls on the health and safety of workers

In its reply to my question E-0906/01(1) on controls on the improvement of the health and safety of workers the Commission provided a table showing that Greece has made the least effort to carry out inspections and had imposed penalties on 55 undertakings.

Since the issue remains a serious one and controls are still inadequate, will the Commission say:

1. What charges have been brought against the above undertakings? Have penalties actually been imposed and, if so, what kind of penalties?

2. What measures does the Commission intend to take to increase inspections in Greece and to make them more substantial?

(1) OJ C 340 E, 4.12.2001, p. 119.

Joint answerto Written Questions E-3049/01 and E-3050/01given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 December 2001)

The Commission would like to emphasise that such a complex question as the functioning of a system of adequate controls and supervision, which the Member States must implement in accordance with Article 4(2) of Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work(1), cannot be resolved without full and detailed information concerning the alleged problems in the operation of the Greek system of controls and supervision.

The Commission therefore wrote to the Greek Government asking for information concerning the implementation of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work. The Greek Government provided some information in response, but further information is needed to enable the Commission to check the functioning of the Greek authorities' system of controls and supervision. A second letter explaining this was sent to the Greek Government on 2 August 2001. The information requested included statistics on the number of legal proceedings in the area of health and safety at work and the penalties imposed, further information on the working methods of the labour inspectorate (for example how the companies to be inspected are selected, how the inspections are carried out, whether there is a follow-up system relating to inspections and measures taken following the inspections, etc.) and a detailed description of internal controls within the labour inspectorate. The Honourable Member's questions concerning the charges brought against the undertakings and the penalties imposed are included in the information requested by the Commission in this letter to the Greek authorities.

A reply dated 9 November 2001 was received, which the Commission is currently analysing. The Commission will ensure that the appropriate measures are taken in accordance with the results of this analysis.

The complainant has been informed of the developments in this matter by letter dated 1 August 2001, to which the Honourable Member refers. This letter also invited the complainant to pass on any further information available.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3189/01

by Willi Rothley (PSE) to the Commission

(13 November 2001)

Subject: Languages in the EU

On 27 September 2001 the German weekly Die Zeit reported that in notices of vacancy the Commission was requiring native English for jobs in technical support offices, ranging from the Socrates student programme to the TACIS/PHARE aid programme for Eastern Europe.

Any such discrimination against persons not having English as their mother tongue would be a flagrant breach of the Treaties.

Is this report true?

If it is, will the Commission put a stop to this practice?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(10 December 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the joint reply it gave to written questions E-2901/01 and E-2944/01 by Mr Staes(1).

(1) See page 141.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3332/01

by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Council

(3 December 2001)

Subject: Tax on the personal income of Community citizens living in Andorra

The Union and its Member States have launched a series of measures to combat money laundering and tax evasion in what are termed tax havens. These measures, whose aims

I fully support, have already achieved some significant successes but also claimed their first innocent victims, namely a number of Community citizens living and working in Andorra.

Recent changes in Spanish tax regulations regarding tax on the income of natural persons have overturned the long-established arrangement, and the Spaniards habitually resident in Andorra, where they make up the largest group of Community citizens, are consequently having to pay too much tax. The problem appears to lie in the confusion between the concepts of residence for tax purposes and habitual residence. Residents of other Member States are not affected in the same way. The end result is that some Community citizens are suffering discrimination compared with others. Is the Council aware of these facts?

When pursuing the measures referred to above and seeking to harmonise taxes, will the Council allow this distinction in tax treatment to remain unaltered? Is it taking into account the legitimate interests of the citizens concerned, who have no connection with criminal activities of any kind?

Reply

(18 March 2002)

The issue raised by the Honourable Member does not fall within the Council's competence.