ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0819/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Coalition governments incorporating extreme right-wing parties

If the leader of Forza Italia and PPE Member of the European Parliament Silvio Berlusconi is elected as the new prime minister of Italy, it will become clear whether the European Union is consistent in its attitude towards Member States. The European Union is in danger of adopting double standards. It is beginning to look as if there is one rule for the big Member States and another for the small ones. In the next few months we shall discover whether this is indeed the case.

Forza Italia can only come to power in alliance with two coalition partners, both of which have important elements in common with Jörg Haider's FPÖ in Austria. One of them is Umberto Bossi's Lega Nord. On the margins of the NATO summit on Wednesday, 28 February, the Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs referred to the Lega Nord's leader as a fascist.

Thus Europe will shortly face a political dilemma: is the Union prepared to apply the same standards to medium-sized and large Member States? Last year the Austrian FPÖ formed a coalition with the conservative ÖVP. The other 14 Member States were shocked to see a populist party with a reputation for xenophobia come to power in an EU Member State. Austria was subjected to a political sanctions regime which involved suspending bilateral diplomatic contacts.

Will the Council apply the same standards if a party whose leader has been described by the Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs as a fascist, namely the Lega Nord, forms part of the Italian Government after the forthcoming elections, by analogy with the measures adopted upon the formation of the ÖVP-FPÖ coalition in Austria? If not, why is the Council applying double standards to the formation of coalition governments which include a party of the extreme right in Austria (FPÖ) on the one hand and Italy (Lega Nord) on the other?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0780/01 and E-0819/01

(13 July 2001)

The Council reminds the Honourable Member that the measures concerning Austria to which he refers were decided by the governments of 14 Member States and not by the Council.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0011/01

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(17 January 2001)

Subject: Metrication

EU legislation regarding the use of metric units came into force in the UK in 2000.

However, many major supermarkets in the UK have either ignored using metric weights on their labels or display the price per pound (lb) much more prominently than the price per kg, which contradicts the Directive's requirements.

What plans does the Commission have to ensure that this Directive is fully implemented in the UK?

Answer by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2001)

The matter to which the honourable Member refers is the subject of a complaint that has just been made to the Commission. An investigation is currently under way with regard to the Member State involved in order to obtain the necessary facts concerning the matter that has been reported. If necessary, the Commission will not hesitate to take appropriate action in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 226 of the Treaty.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0273/01

by Niels Busk (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 February 2001)

Subject: Transport of live animals by sea

In February 2000, Commissioner Byrne announced to Parliament's Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy a number of measures for improving animal welfare. The promised measures included a proposal for a directive on standards for certain vessels used for the transport of live animals. The Commission is required to submit such a proposal pursuant to Article 13 of Directive 91/628(1).

Ensuring that vessels meet certain minimum standards must be regarded as an important step towards improving the welfare of animals transported by sea.

A draft proposal was reportedly the subject of consultations with the interest groups concerned as far back as 1999. Will the Commissioner therefore say whether the Commission intends to submit the proposal to the Council and the European Parliament?

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991, p. 17.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 2001)

The Commission adopted on 6 December 2000 a report on the protection of animals during transport(1). The report aims at analyzing the level of implementation by Member States of the Community legislation in this field and recommends future actions. In this report the Commission considers further legislative proposals essential in order to improve the current situation.

For detailed information on its future initiatives in this field the Commission refers the Honourable Member to its reply to Written Question P-0117/01 by Mrs Paulsen(2).

As far as specific means of transport are concerned, the Commission report indicates that transportation by road over long distance is the most critical area which needs immediate action.

The Commission report also points out that the enforcement of the current Community rules and the development of a better system of information between the authorities of the Member States should be undertaken as a matter of priority during the forthcoming months.

As a consequence the Commission intends to put forward a proposal on sea-vessels as soon as the different priorities set up in the Commission report have been achieved.

(1) COM(2000) 809 final.

(2) OJ C 187 E, 3.7.2001, p. 189.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0400/01

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(15 February 2001)

Subject: Routing of the Atlantic highway through Porriño

In its answer to my Written Question P-1736/00(1), the Commission stated on 22 June 2000 that it had decided to launch an investigation into the decision taken by the Spanish Ministry of Public Works and the concessionaire enterprise to route the Atlantic highway through the district of Porriño (Pontevedra, Spain) close to the Gándaras de Budiño lagoon, an area proposed for inclusion in the Natura 2000 network and already included in the register of natural habitats in Galicia.

What results have been achieved by the abovementioned investigations?

What questions has the Commission asked the Spanish Government, further to its answer to the abovementioned question, and what replies has it received?

Is Community law being observed, in particular Council Directive 92/43/EEC(2) on the conservation of natural habitats?

(1) OJ C 53 E, 20.2.2001, p. 183.

(2) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992, p. 7.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(5 April 2001)

In answer to the Written Question P-1736/00 by the Honourable Member,(1) the Commission reported that it was not informed of the matters raised by the Honourable Member. Given that the area in question, Gandaras de Budiño, was proposed as an area of Community interest (ES 1140011) by the Spanish authorities, the Commission had decided to launch an own-initiative investigation of these matters, requesting confirmation from the Spanish authorities that Community law is being observed in this particular case. It has to be said, though, that, the Commission's launching of an its own-initiative investigation in this instance does not in any way mean that there has been a breach of Community law. Thus, in this case, the Commission cannot reach a decision until it receives more information about this project from the Spanish authorities.

On the basis of information given by the Honourable Member on the pre-mentioned Written Question, the Commission has asked the Spanish authorities to comment on the matters raised; it has also asked them for a copy of the environmental impact assessment on this project as well as a detailed description of the types of habitats present in the area concerned.

The Commission has received a reply from the Spanish authorities regarding the project in question, which is currently being examined.

However, it should be noted here and now that in their reply, the Spanish authorities point out that the project has been subjected to an environmental impact assessment which declared it to be viable. They also stress that even if the project does affect part of the area, the site itself is badly damaged and there are no species and habitats on the site where the project is due to be carried out.

The Commission will ensure, no matter what happens, that the Community law applicable in this case is observed.

(1) OJ C 53 E, 20.2.2001, p. 183.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1348/01

by Ioannis Marínos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 May 2001)

Subject: Influx of gypsies from occupied Cyprus into the non-occupied areas

From the beginning of March, dozens of gypsies have moved from the part of the Republic of Cyprus occupied by Turkish troops into non-occupied areas. These people belong to a community of 1500 gypsies who had decided to remain in the occupied area following the Turkish military invasion of 1974.

Now, 27 years later, dozens of gypsies are applying to live in the non-occupied areas. This is being approved by the official government of the Republic of Cyprus which is taking immediate measures to provide them with assistance and accommodation, given that these people are Cypriot citizens. This exodus by the gypsies clearly demonstrates the critical decline of the Turkish occupied northern section of the island and gives rise to suspicion of ill-treatment of gypsies by the occupying authorities, which appear to be seeking to complete the ethnic cleansing commenced in 1974 when 200 000 Greek Cpriots were driven from the north.

Reports from the occupied areas would appear to indicate that the cross-border movement of dozens of people has made the occupying authorities nervous. Given their policy of opening fire on anyone sighted along the Green Line between the occupied and on-occupied areas of Cyprus, as was the case with the Berlin Wall, this will further endanger the lives of those concerned.

What view does the Commission take of this exodus of gypsies from the Cypriot pseudo-state administered by Mr P. Denktash (calling to mind other periods when the wall of shame still ran through the heart of Europe) and does it have any information concerning the treatment and living conditions of non-Turkish nationals living in the occupied part of Cyprus?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(3 July 2001)

The Commission is aware of the recent exodus of Roma people from the north of Cyprus to the government controlled areas. A total of 154 persons crossed in March 2001 of which 23 returned to the northern part. The Commissioner responsible for Enlargement has also recently drawn attention to the importance the Commission attaches to the position of the Roma in a number of candidate countries.

On the living conditions of non-Turkish and non-Turkish Cypriots living in the north, the Commission Regular Report for Cyprus of November 2000(1) states:

access by the United Nations Peacekeeping Force (Unficyp) to Greek Cypriots and Maronites living in the north remains limited. Obligations under the Vienna III agreement of 1975, concerning the treatment of Greek Cypriots and Maronites, are still not fully implemented both Greek Cypriots and Maronites living in the north continue to be unable to change their housing at will. They can only bequeath their properties to close family members who are also resident in the north.

The Commission will be returning to this question in its Regular Report on Cyprus for 2001.

(1) COM(2000) 702 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0953/01

by María Ayuso González (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Packaging for fruit and vegetables

The Commission wishes to repeal Regulation (EC) No 411/97(1) laying down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96(2) (COM in fruit and vegetables) as regards operational funds and programmes and Community financial assistance. In paragraph 1 of the Annex to a subsequent amendment of that regulation it is specifically stated that, amongst other environmental measures, recyclable packaging could be eligible for funding during the period of implementation of a single operational programme. However, in Article 8(2)(b)(iii) of the new Commission regulation the term reusable packing is used.

In the light of the Green Paper on integrated products policy and since there will at some stage in the future be a new proposal for a directive on packaging, could the Commission explain the reasons which prompted the switch to a different criterion, with particular reference to the fruit and vegetable sector?

(1) OJ L 62, 4.3.1997, p. 9.

(2) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 2001)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 609/2001 of 28 March 2001, laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 as regards operational programmes, operational funds and Community financial assistance, and repealing Regulation (EC) No 411/97(1) in application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 411/97, provides that certain specific costs within approved operational programmes of producer organisations may be eligible for Community financing.

As far as packaging for fruit and vegetables is concerned, Article 8(2)(b)(iii) specifies that operational programmes may cover specific costs for environmental measures, which may include recyclable and / or re-useable packaging.

(1) OJ L 90, 30.3.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0616/01

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 March 2001)

Subject: Prices paid by supermarkets

Does the Commission consider it improper for supermarkets to purchase food products for less than the cost of production?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2001)

The Community competition rules address the matter to which the Honourable Member refers, namely that of prices that are below the cost of production, only in the specific case of a purchaser in a dominant position imposing unfair purchase prices within the meaning of indent (a) of the second paragraph of Article 82 (formerly Article 86) of the EC Treaty.

In order to determine whether the purchaser, in this case the supermarket, is a purchaser in a dominant position, the relevant product and geographic markets and their structures would have to be analysed in detail.

Given the national or even regional, rather than Community, nature of the relevant markets, such issues are primarily dealt with by national competition authorities, such as the Office of Fair Trading in the United Kingdom. In some cases, these authorities have developed specific rules on the state of economic dependence, which do not exist as such at Community level.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1659/01

by Françoise Grossetête (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 May 2001)

Subject: Community rules concerning protection of the confidentiality of company lawyers' opinions

While Belgium has recently recognised protection of the confidentiality of opinions given by company lawyers, there are as yet no Community rules governing that subject.

Following Belgium's decision, therefore, it would seem to be in the general interest if all European company lawyers were covered by common rules in this respect.

Does the Commission plan to draw up a Community text which could be applied to this profession and to the protection of opinions given by company lawyers?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(13 July 2001)

In accordance with Articles 40 and 47 (ex Articles 49 and 57) of the EC Treaty, Community directives in the area of professional law are aimed at facilitating the free movement of persons and not the harmonisation as such of the rules for exercising professions. Article 8 of Directive 98/5/EC of the European Parliament and the Council of 16 February 1998 to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than that in which the qualification was obtained(1) provides that a lawyer registered under his home-country professional title may practise

as a salaried lawyer in the employ of a public or private enterprise to the extent that the host Member State so permits for lawyers registered in that State. It was not deemed necessary to consider the question of professional secrecy of self-employed or salaried lawyers in this Directive.

The confidentiality of company lawyers' opinions does not fall within the scope of these Articles. Consequently, the Commission does not intend to draft a Community text in this area.

It also does not appear to be the case that the question of the protection of the confidentiality of company lawyers' opinions can be dealt with under Title IV of the EC Treaty, in particular on the basis of the provisions concerning cooperation on civil matters.

Nevertheless, the Commission would draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the Charter of the European Professional Associations in support of the fight against organised crime, which was drawn up in the light of the Council Recommendations to combat organised crime and signed on 27 July 1999 by a number of European professional associations, which included professionals such as lawyers.

(1) OJ L 77, 14.3.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1390/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 May 2001)

Subject: Comparative assessment of education systems

Does the Commission agree that the standard of education in the European Union is a key determinant of long-run economic performance? Will it provide a rank ordering of the Member States from first to last in terms of each of the following objectively assessed criteria, and state the figures supporting those judgements in each case? Adult literacy; proportion of workforce with vocational qualifications for skills; standards of mathematics attainment; ability to speak another language; years in full time education; minimum school-leaving age; proportion in higher education.

Will the Commission add any further objective criteria it feels may be relevant to a comparative assessment of education systems?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 2001)

The Commission believes that raising the standards of learning is essential if Europe is to become a more competitive and dynamic society and its citizens are to be better able to develop their own skills and competences and realise their potential as citizens, as members of society and as economic agents.

The Commission, however, does not believe that the objective of quality assessments is to define ranking between countries or a common concept of quality of education. Its aim is rather to identify areas within which comparisons between countries could be made in order to identify good practice, exchange experience and define main policy challenges.

In the Report of the Commission on Quality of School Education, sixteen indicators were identified. A follow up is presently being made in order to identify a limited number of indicators on quality of lifelong learning. This initiative has been taken in co-operation with experts from more than 30 European countries.

Indicators play also a central role in the open method of co-ordination and in the detailed work programme for the implementation of the Report on the Concrete Future Objectives of the Education and Training Systems, which was transmitted to the Stockholm European Council of March 2001 by the Education Council on the basis of a proposal from the Commission(1). Indicators will be integrated as appropriate in relation to all the objectives of the report and especially in relation to three priority areas: Basic skills; Mathematics, Science and Technology; and Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Following the Stockholm conclusions a Joint report from the Council and the Commission will be transmitted to the Barcelona Summit, at the beginning of 2002. In this report a choice of indicators to monitor developments and support the exchange of experiences between the Member States will be made.

(1) COM(2001) 59 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1875/01

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 June 2001)

Subject: Premiums for arable crops (Greece)

With regard to animal premiums, the European Commission is planning to introduce a ceiling for subsidised animals per holding and per age category. Would it not be sensible to introduce a similar ceiling for arable crops subsidies, for example 50 hectares, so that holdings would receive support only in respect of that maximum area?

Can the Commission indicate:

- how many agricultural holdings in Greece have an area of more than 50 hectares;

- how many agricultural holdings in Greece have an area of less than 50 hectares;

- if such a measure were introduced, what savings would be made expressed in absolute figures and as a percentage in the budget devoted to arable crops?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1870/01, E-1871/01, E-1872/01, E-1873/01, E-1874/01, E-1875/01, E-1876/01, E-1877/01, E-1878/01, E-1879/01, E-1880/01, E-1881/01, E-1882/01, E-1883/01 and E-1884/01 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2001)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1287/01

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 May 2001)

Subject: Taxation Policy Group

1. Could the Commission please state what was discussed at the meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 16 March 2001, and what was discussed at any meetings held between 2 March 2000 and 16 March 2001?

2. What future meetings of the Taxation Policy Group have been scheduled, and what matters are due to be discussed at upcoming meetings?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(7 June 2001)

1. The Eleventh meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 5 May 2000 was mainly devoted to a discussion on the review of the provisions of the Code of Conduct for business taxation and an exchange of views on possible issues for further meetings of the Taxation Policy Group in 2000.

The Twelfth meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 18 July 2000 was mainly devoted to a presentation by the German representatives of the German business tax reform, followed by a discussion, and to an exchange of views concerning one issue of the (ongoing) Commission company tax study (company tax obstacles to cross-border economic activity in the Single Market).

The Thirteenth meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 6 October 2000 was mainly devoted to a discussion of the taxation of supplementary pensions and an exchange of views concerning one issue of the (ongoing) Commission company tax study (the effective levels of company taxation in the Community).

The Fourteenth meeting of the Taxation Policy Group on 16 March 2001 was mainly devoted to an exchange of views on future priorities of Community tax policy and a brief evaluation of the progress made concerning the new strategy to improve the operation of the VAT System within the context of the Internal Market.

2. The date and agenda of the next meeting of the Taxation Policy Group has not been fixed yet.