ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/481

(2004/C 84 E/0558)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2154/03

by Herbert Bösch (PSE) to the Commission

(24 June 2003)

Subject: Delays in the disbursement of funding for SMU projects

One of the aims of the 5th and 6th Framework Programmes for Research is to encourage innovation. Against this background, the Commission asked interested parties to submit by 15 March 2002 proposals for innovative projects under the reference number INN/01/02. Following the assessment process, in June 2002 31 projects were approved. However, by late December 2002 only four contracts had been concluded.

Can the Commission state why, more than one year following the award of funding, contracts have not been drawn up for 27 of the 31 projects and when it intends to conclude those contracts?

Does the Commission share my view that delays of this kind pose a serious threat to individual projects? If so, what measures is the Commission taking in order to minimise the problems which these delays may cause?

In respect of how many projects under the 5th and 6th Framework Programmes for Research have contracts not yet been signed, even though the assessment of those projects was completed one year, or even longer, ago?

As of late May 2003 the backlog of payments under the budget title covering research and technological development totals some EUR 7 billion. Can the Commission state how quickly it intends to reduce that backlog, what measures it is taking in order to achieve that aim and whether there is a danger that some of the appropriations will be cancelled? In that connection, are delays also occurring in the disbursement of funding for projects already under way and in respect of which invoices are regularly submitted? If so, in how many cases (absolute and relative proportion of all current projects) and for what reasons?

Supplementary answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2003)

In answer to the third part of his question, the Honourable Member will find below a list of unsigned research contracts the assessment of which was completed over a year ago

This list only relates to the 5th framework programme (RTD). The question cannot apply to the 6th framework programme, for which implementation did not begin until the end of 2002.

— ten individual grants in the ‘Human factor and mobility’ field;

— twenty CRAFT projects in the Industrial Technologies field;

— two projects in the Environment field;

— four projects in the ‘Knowledge-based society and economy’ field.

In most cases, the delays are attributable to the contractors (contractor in liquidation, withdrawal, change of details requiring a new entry in the third party ledger, etc.) or to the instability of partners within the consortia (bankruptcy, change of priorities, change of partners or coordinator, etc.).
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/641

(2004/C 78 E/0679)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3756/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the 2000 City Twinning Programme by the municipality of Perugia

In its answer to question E-1023/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Perugia had submitted projects and secured funding under the 2000 City Twinning Programme, the Commission stated that no funding had been granted for the year 2000.

Can the Commission say whether the municipality has submitted any projects and obtained and used any funding in the budget years since then?

(1) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 208.
2.

Satellite navigation systems transmit signals which are open to all users (known as the Open Service in the case of Galileo) and secure signals (the Public Regulated Service in the case of Galileo). It is technically possible to scramble all the navigation signals, whatever their frequency, or to scramble only the open signals whilst maintaining access to the secure signals, as they use a different frequency. Regarding the performance of the Galileo open signals, discussions are under way with the United States to determine what the most effective standard would be for the open signals of both Galileo and the future GPS III with a view to providing the best service to users. These discussions are intended to ensure full interoperability between the two systems and will, de facto, lead to a global standard for satellite navigation. The willingness of the United States to use the same frequencies as Galileo for open and commercial signals is to be welcomed, as it will give a decisive boost to the European programme being used worldwide.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/623

(2004/C 78 E/0658)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3651/03

by Cees Bremmer (PPE-DE) and Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Poor working conditions for au pairs in the Netherlands

Is the Commission aware of the poor working conditions which apply to 70 % of au pairs in the Netherlands, who are compelled to perform too much, and excessively heavy, domestic work and to care for children for more than the permitted 30 hours per week, as revealed by a report by the Netherlands Ministry of Justice which is as yet unpublished but will be published shortly (according to the Volkskrant newspaper of 25 November 2003)?

Is the Commission further aware that the proliferation of agencies on the Internet, the lack of any quality certification system for such agencies, the protracted visa procedures and the high costs, due to which many au pairs are employed illegally, lead to a situation in which au pairs' rights are insufficiently respected?

Is the Commission aware that these circumstances do not accord with its own recommendation to the Member States to sign and ratify at the earliest opportunity the Council of Europe's European Agreement on au pair placement of 24 November 1969, which lays down rules, inter alia, on working conditions and the setting-up of national consultative and information bodies?

Can the Commission establish to what extent au pairs are similarly exploited in other Member States?

How will the Commission tackle this practice, bearing in mind, inter alia, the growing uncertainty about the safeguarding of au pairs' rights — irrespective of their own responsibility — and in view of the Commission's duty to encourage close cooperation among the Member States in the field of social policy (Article 136 in conjunction with Article 140 of the EC Treaty)?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2004)

There is no specific Community legislation aimed at au pairs. In so far as they are considered to be workers according to the definition in the country where they work, they are, in general, covered by the existing labour law directives.

The Commission has through Recommendation 85/64/EEC of 20 December 1984 (1). recommended that Member States sign and ratify the European agreement of the Council of Europe of 24 November 1969 on au pair placement. Based on the information the Commission has received so far regarding the situation of au pairs, it has not been considered necessary to take any further specific actions.

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.1985.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/135

(2004/C 84 E/0174)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4033/03

by Maurizio Turco (NI) to the Commission

(12 January 2004)

Subject: Censoring of the word ‘condom’ in the Commission's official press release to mark World Aids Day at the request of Mr Prodi's office

The 11-17 December 2003 edition of the weekly ‘European Voice’ published an article entitled ‘Prodi bans condoms’, according to which the Commission's press service was about to publish an official press release to mark World Aids Day when a telephone call came from Mr Prodi's office with orders to delete the word ‘condom’ from the statement.

In his answer of 10 December 2003 to written question E-3115/03 (1) the Commissioner Christopher Patten said ‘On the basis of research conducted during the last 15 years and partly funded by the Community, it can be claimed that condoms, when used properly, are an effective means of preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission, with an efficacy close to 100 %’.

Can the Commission say:

— whether the report published in the ‘European Voice’ is true;

— if so, what prompted President Prodi's office to remove the word ‘condom’ from the press release;

— if Mr Prodi's office does not have access to any scientific findings contradicting those quoted by the Commissioner, on the basis of what political assessment was the word ‘condom’ deleted from the press release?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2004)

The Commission did not consider it worthwhile to refute the claims of the newspaper mentioned since its position on this question has long been clear.

For example, it would refer to its answer to Written Question E-3115/03 by Mr Turco (2) and to its press release of 20 October 2003 entitled ‘HIV/AIDS: European research provides clear proof that HIV virus cannot pass through condoms’ (3). This document, which is being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat, covers the results of research projects financed by the Directorate-General for Research (RTD) over the last fifteen years. All the available data confirm that condoms are extremely effective in preventing HIV transmission.

(1) See page 50.

(2) See page 50.

(3) http://europa.eu.int/rapid/cgi/rapcgi.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/03/1410|0|AGED&lg=EN&display=
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/176

(2004/C 78 E/0182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2846/03

by Isabelle Caullery (UEN) to the Commission

(25 September 2003)

Subject: European directive on transport infrastructure charging

Regarding the draft European directive on transport infrastructure charging, can the Commission state whether airport operators in general are likely to be affected by this law and, if so, to what extent?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2003)

For the rail sector, infrastructure charging is already included in the first railway package (Directive 2001/14/EC (1)). As requested by the Copenhagen European Council of December 2002 and by the Brussels European Council of March 2003, the Commission presented on 23 July 2003 a proposal (2) amending Directive 1999/62/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999, on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructure (3). This new proposal concentrates on road transport, more precisely on heavy goods vehicles over 3,5 tonnes. The fact that these vehicles are involved, on a regular basis, in intra-community traffic justifies common rules concerning the charging for the use of infrastructure. Concerning the other means of transport, no Community framework is applicable to them at present.

More specifically for the airport sector a wide range of policy options on the Regulation of airport charges exists and the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has recently developed further its policy guidance for aeronautical charges (4). A Commission proposal from 1997, though strongly inspired by generally recognised ICAO principles, did not receive sufficient support in the Council of Ministers and therefore the Commission decided to withdraw this initiative (5).

(1) Directive 2001/14/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2001 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification, OJ L 75, 15.3.2001.

(2) OJ L 187, 20.7.1999.

(3) COM(2003) 448 final.

(4) ICAO's policies on charges for airports and Air Navigation Charges — document 9082, sixth edition 2001.

(5) OJ C 257, 22.8.1997 and COM(2001)763 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/820

(2004/C 78 E/0872)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3488/03

by Albert Maat (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Statements by individual Commissioners against Commission policy

The Netherlands' Commissioner recently spoke out in the Dutch press against European agriculture policy, recently reformed on the basis of a Commission proposal.

Is it possible for serving Commissioners to oppose Commission policy in public?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 2004)

As the Commission has frequently recalled in replies to written and oral questions by Members of Parliament (1), the Members of the Commission are politicians carrying out a political function who, while honouring the obligations imposed by this function, remain free to express their personal opinions quite independently and on their own responsibility.

As regards outside activities, the Code of Conduct for Commissioners states that ‘Commissioners may be active members of political parties or trade unions, provided that this does not compromise their availability for service in the Commission.’

In the case referred to by the Honourable Member, the comments of the Commissioner responsible for the internal market should be regarded as falling within the above definition and should not therefore be interpreted as impairing the principle of collegiate responsibility.

(1) See for example, the answers given by the Commission to Questions 2459/99, 2600/99 and 2628/99, OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000 and the answer to Question 2629/99, OJ C 46 E, 13.2.2001.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/322

(2004/C 78 E/0333)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3800/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(11 December 2003)

Subject: Update on use of funding from the Culture 2000 programme by the municipality of Pistoia

In its answer to question E-0987/03 (1), which asked whether the municipality of Pistoia had submitted projects or secured funding under the Culture 2000 programme, the Commission stated, on 30 July 2003, that the municipality had not submitted any projects by 2002. Can the Commission say if this has been the case subsequently and up to the present?

(1) OJ C 242 E, 9.10.2003, p. 200.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/782

(2004/C 78 E/0832)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3120/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 October 2003)

Subject: Noise pollution

Does the Commission intend to make available funding opportunities for local projects that will tackle the adverse effects of noise pollution in rural areas, for example, noise reduction barriers on motorways that run close to residential areas?

Can the Commission state how the Environmental Noise Directive will assist people living in rural areas but who suffer from the adverse effects (a reduced quality of life, stress) of persistent noise from nearby motorways?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2003)

The Commission is not planning to establish an EU funding instrument specifically for tackling noise pollution. However, projects in this field could be given financial support under existing mechanisms, including the financial instrument for the environment (LIFE).

Under Directive 2002/49/CE (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise, which entered into force on 18 July 2002, the authorities in the Member States are required to draw up strategic noise maps in the vicinity of major transport infrastructure, including roads, and within the major conglomerations, on the basis of common indicators, to inform the public about exposure to noise and its effects, and to develop action plans to reduce noise, where necessary, and to preserve the quality of the acoustic environment where it is good.

With regard more especially to road infrastructure, noise maps and action plans have to be drawn up in 2007 and 2008, respectively, for major routes which have more than six million passenger vehicles a year. As a second stage, in 2012 and 2013, maps and action plans will have to be drawn up for major roads with more than three million passenger vehicles a year.

These maps and action plans will concern noise pollution generated by road infrastructure in urban areas as well as in rural areas.

(1) OJ L 189, 18.7.2002.
1.

The Commission has taken action in this direction from many fronts. First within Union Research and Technology Development Programmes, several projects have been addressing the issue during the last years in order to contribute to the availability of technical solutions to provide access of digital communication and services to blind and partially sighted persons. Examples of those projects were dealing with access to electronic documents, web accessibility, access to mathematics in electronic form, access to music files, access to electronic school material for children and many more. More detailed information on these projects can be found in (http://www.cordis.lu/ist/kal/special_needs/). Second through the standardisation work. Detailed information is available at (http://www.eeurope-standards.org/activities_e-accessibility.htm). It should be noted that, in the Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) area, the ICT Standards Board has set up the Design for All and Assistive Technologies Standardisation Co-ordination Group (DATSCG), to bring together the various bodies working on relevant standardisation activities in Europe, including CEN, Cenelec and ETSI (1), together with representatives of disabled groups and other groups that are active in ICT-related standardisation. In particular, DATSCG is promoting the Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) guidelines, which aim at increasing accessibility of the web for people with disabilities. A resolution of the Parliament has recommended them for use by public web sites, Union's Institutions and Member States. More information on DATSCG is available at (http://www.ict.etsi.org/DATSCG/DATSCG_home.htm). Third, the Commission is consulting and inviting organisations of people with disabilities and in particular blind persons to participate in several working groups where new legislative measures are being developed or applied. This is the case of work in the area of accessibility of electronic Communication services, Digital Right Management, Digital Television … that are dealt with the Inclusive Communications (INCOM) working group and reported to the Communications Committee (COCOM) of the Framework Directive 2002/21/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (2).
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/290

(2004/C 84 E/0336)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4047/03

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 January 2004)

Subject: Safe use of the Internet

The programme for safe use of the Internet and new online technologies provided for a series of actions. One of these actions aimed to promote a safe Internet environment via the creation of a network enabling information to be received from the public regarding illegal content and information to be provided to users with regard to that possibility. Can the Commission reveal which company or companies were awarded this contract and the amounts allotted to them? Does the Commission plan to evaluate the results obtained, the impact on the public and the level of publicity achieved?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2004)

Information about all projects funded by the Safer Internet Action Plan, including the funding per project and the names of the beneficiaries, can be found on the Europa Web site at (http://europa.eu.int/iap).

Hotlines take reports from the public about illegal content on the Internet and pass them on to the appropriate body (police, Internet Service Provider or another hotline).

The European network of hotlines consists of the umbrella body, the Inhope Association and 16 hotlines in 14 countries which have received funding under Safer Internet, together with associates in the United Sates, Australia and South Korea.

They receive a steadily increasing number of reports from the public (91 656 reports over a six month period of which 62 % related to child pornography), and have a number of notable successes in alerting police thus enabling them to track down criminals.

Operation Marcy, in October 2003, was the result of a tip to the German police with the co-operation of Spanish and German hotlines. It cracked one of the largest global child pornography networks involving some 26,500 Internet users in 166 countries.

An evaluation of the Safer Internet Action Plan 1999-2002 by outside contractors has been communicated to the Parliament with the Commission's reaction (1). According to this report, European networking of the hotlines was considered to be extremely important and, in terms of value for money, the hotlines are seen to have been a good investment.

A further evaluation will take place at the end of 2004.

(1) COM(2003) 653 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/125

(2004/C 78 E/0127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2546/03

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 July 2003)

Subject: Evaluation of tobacco products

Article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC (1) requires that the Commission submits by 31 December 2004 a report to the European Parliament on the application of the said directive.

More specifically Article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC states, amongst other things, that scientific and technical experts should assist in preparing the report and that the report should include an evaluation of tobacco products which may have a potential to reduce harm.

1. What measures has the Commission taken to involve scientific and technical experts in producing the report, particularly in view of the evaluation of tobacco products which may have a potential to reduce harm?

2. Will the Commission report, as required by Article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC, include an evaluation of tobacco products which may have a potential to reduce harm?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2003)

The Honourable Member asks in particular what measures the Commission has taken to involve scientific and technical experts in producing the report required by article 11 of Directive 2001/37/EC (2) on the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products, particularly ‘in view of the evaluation of tobacco products which may have a potential to reduce harm’. In addition, the Honourable Member asks if the said report will include an evaluation of tobacco products, which may have a potential to reduce harm.

The recent opinions and reports from the scientific community make it very clear that the issue (possible ‘harm reduction’ tobacco products) referred to in the written question must be very carefully analysed. The matter is complex and difficult, and the Commission intends to get a comprehensive and balanced analysis and scientific advice. To be able to achieve this, the Commission intends to involve appropriately the scientific community and the Regulatory Committee in this process while preparing the report. The Commission has already had preparatory consultations with scientific experts in the field. The first expert consultation involving all Member States will take place on 29 September 2003, after which the direction to be taken should be clear.

The report containing, as foreseen in the Directive, an evaluation of tobacco products that may have the potential to reduce harm is due by the end of 2004.

(1) OJ L 194, 18.7.2001, p. 26.

(2) Directive 2001/37/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 5 June 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products — Commission statement, OJ L 194, 18.7.2001.