ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2014/00

by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 June 2000)

Subject: Tourism and European small businesses charter

The European Council meeting in Lisbon called on the Council of Ministers and the Commission to draw up a European small businesses charter and ensure that their needs are met, recognising that their contribution, in terms of job creation, is the most important.

Will the Commission take account of the specific situation with regard to tour companies, given the seasonal nature of their work and their particular importance in stimulating employment and the development of less-favoured areas of Europe?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(20 July 2000)

At the Feira European Council on 19 and 20 June 2000 heads of state and government welcomed the European charter for small enterprises. This highlights the commitment at the highest level to the specific needs of small enterprises as the backbone of the European economy. Europe looks to small enterprises, including tour companies, as an engine of growth and a source of employment in all sectors. The charter points to conditions favourable for their development and growth, including in less-favoured areas of Europe. The charter covers therefore all SMEs, in all sectors, in all regions, and this includes certainly the tourism sector as a whole as well.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1430/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 May 2000)

Subject: Powers to audit the European Investment Bank

Can the Commission explain the background to its decision to take the EIB to the European Court of Justice earlier this year and does it believe that treaty changes should be introduced at the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference to allow the Court of Auditors power to oversee all of the EIB's activities?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(8 June 2000)

Concerning the background to the action brought by the Commission against the European Investment Bank (EIB) the Honourable Member is invited to refer to the detailed resumé which has been published(1).

The audit procedures of the EIB with respect to operations financed on own resources are defined by its statute in particular its Article 14 and Article 9. Article 14 describes the tasks of the EIB audit committee and Article 9 stipulates that the annual report and balance sheet and profit and loss account are approved by the board of governors. It would require a change of the EC Treaty if the statutory rules (the Statute is a protocol annexed to the EC Treaty) should be adapted in order to allow the Court of auditors to audit the EIB.

The decision whether or not the EIB should be subject to the full audit activity of the Court of auditors and whether the EC Treaty should be changed is ultimately to be taken by the Member States.

EIB operations made under mandate are audited by the Court of auditors on the basis of the tripartite agreement which was renewed last year.

(1) OJ C 122, 29.4.2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1815/00

by Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(8 June 2000)

Subject: Labelling of turron

Some doubts have arisen in Spain with regard to the interpretation of the provisions of Directives 97/4(1) and 1990/10(2) on the labelling of food products and their transposition into Spanish law. More specifically, manufacturers of turron do not know whether the indication of the quantities of ingredients (almonds, honey and egg white) should refer to the quantities as used in the manufacturing process or to the final product since the manufacturing process itself results in a certain wastage, particularly of almonds.

Pursuant to the said Directives, what should the indication of the quantities of ingredients of turron refer to, to the quantities used or to the quantities in the final product?

(1) OJ L 43, 14.2.1997, p. 21.

(2) OJ L 69, 16.3.1999, p. 22.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2000)

Article 7(4)of Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs(1) (which includes the provisions set out in Directive 97/4/EC) states that the quantity of an ingredient or category of ingredients used in the manufacturing or preparation of a food product shall correspond to the quantity of the ingredient or ingredients at the time of its/their use.

The derogations provided for in Commission Directive 1999/10/EC of 8 March 1999 apply to specific cases such as volatile ingredients, ingredients used in concentrated or dehydrated form and reconstituted during manufacturing, or food products which have lost a considerable amount of water during manufacturing. As regards all other ingredients, the quantity used in the manufacturing process should, in principle, be the same as or very similar to the quantity in the final product, expressed as a percentage of the total weight of the product.

The Commission has no information about the technical reasons regarding the wastage of almonds during the manufacturing of turron, nor estimates regarding this wastage. Therefore, the Commission believes that the quantity of almonds indicated on the label of turron should be more or less the same as the quantity actually contained in the product, unless specific technical considerations justify the application of the derogations provided for by Directive 1999/10/EC.

(1) OJ L 109, 6.5.2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1848/00

by Linda McAvan (PSE) to the Commission

(9 June 2000)

Subject: Welfare of chickens kept for meat production

The EU's Scientific Committee on Animal Health and Animal Welfare (Scahaw) recently published a report expressing concern about the health and welfare of broiler chickens being kept for meat production. The report highlighted how the broiler industry's drive for ever faster growth rates has led to painful leg disorders and sudden death syndrome in birds reared for meat.

Will the Commission state whether it will consider proposing a directive designed to address the serious health and welfare problems highlighted in the Scahaw report?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1809/00 and E-1848/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2000)

The Commission has asked its scientific committee on animal health and animal welfare (Scahaw) to prepare a report on the welfare of chickens bred and kept for meat production (broilers). The Scahaw adopted a report on 21 March 2000.

In relation to the welfare of broilers a recommendation on domestic fowl adopted on 28 November 1995 by the standing committee of the European Convention for the protection of animals kept for farming purposes is in force. The Member States and the Community are contracting parties to this Convention and participate in the work of the committee.

In the Community, Council Directive 98/58/EC(1) provides the main principles for the protection of all species of animals kept for farming purposes. It addresses the welfare requirements to be applied for the protection of animals kept for the different types of production, including the keeping of chickens for meat production. The Directive also imposes a responsibility on the owner or keeper of the animals to ensure that their welfare respects the minimum requirements provided.

The Directive also provides a legal base under which proposals for Community measures in relation to the Convention or recommendations made under it are prepared if this is necessary for its uniform application within the Community.

Following the conclusion of the report from the Scahaw and in the light of the above mentioned Directive, the Commission is working on a proposal to establish the welfare requirements for keeping broilers in the Community.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1383/00

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Subject: Drawing-up of statistics with a view to a better understanding of the situation of women and developments concerning women

Statistics have a very important role to play in achieving a better understanding of the real situation of women compared to men. They also clearly indicate both positive and negative developments in the framework of women's policy and make it possible to devise appropriate measures. However, the fact is that so far statistics showing gender-specific differences have been inadequate.

Does the Commission intend to take measures to make such gender-specific data available in future so as to shed light on the present situation and developments in women's policy in all sectors?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(26 June 2000)

The Commission has for many years disseminated data disaggregated by sex. Virtually all of its publications in the social field present some statistics and indicators for both women and men. Furthermore, Eurostat's reference database (NewCronos) contains a vast array of social statistics and indicators broken down by sex.

Admittedly, the last decade or so has seen a significant increase in the demand for comparative information on the social situation of women and men. As a result, Eurostat produced two reports: the first in 1992, specifically on women, entitled Women in the European Community(1), the second in 1995 Women and men in the European Union(2). The latter was presented at the United Nations fourth world conference on women in Beijing. Furthermore, the forthcoming Commission report on the social situation in the European Union 2000 will also contain a significant amount of comparative data on women and men.

As stated above, almost all social statistics published by the Commission should be available for both women and men either on paper or in the reference database. Eurostat welcomes any suggestions with regard to specific fields or indicators for which no information is available by sex but for which there is deemed to be a need.

Furthermore, the Commission recognises the importance of statistics disagregated by sex as an indispensable tool for gender mainstreaming of all Community policies. The design, the implementation and the follow-up of policy can be improved by using harmonised, comparable and better focused statistical data divided by sex.

(1) ISBN 92-826-3137-0.

(2) ISBN 95-826-9619-7.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1321/00

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(3 May 2000)

Subject: Hunger relief in Ethiopia and other African countries

The Cairo summit bringing together the EU and the countries of Africa coincided with an outbreak of hunger that is currently affecting millions of people in the neighbouring continent, especially in Ethiopia. This dramatic state of affairs has already been denounced by the UN and by NGOs and the media.

In Ethiopia, the lives of 2 m people are in jeopardy thanks to the drought and the war with Eritrea. What action is the EU taking to relieve this tragic situation, as a matter of urgency? Will the EU in fact be willing to agree on a humanitarian action, without flinching from the necessary intervention, and pressing Ethiopia and Eritrea to accept means of food distribution that use the most effective channels of communication available?

Reply

(26 September 2000)

The Council has repeatedly condemned the senseless outbreak of renewed fighting between Ethiopia and Eritrea. Recalling the responsibility of any government for the welfare of its people, it deplores the fact that against a background of severe food crisis in the region precious resources are being diverted for the conflict. The Council accordingly welcomes the arms embargo on the two countries which was adopted unanimously by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1298 and would recall its own decision on an arms embargo which has been in force since 15 March 1999.

The Council hopes that the contacts with Ethiopia and Eritrea under OAU auspices which are presently being conducted will bear substantive results and declares the EU's readiness to support the peace efforts under OAU chairmanship, including through the mission of the EU special representative, Senator SERRI.

The Council confirms EU willingness to continue to provide emergency humanitarian aid carefully targeted to the people most seriously in need in order to avoid any possible diversion of the aid. Such aid is decided following the regulatory procedures in force by the Commission who could provide more detailed information on specific actions undertaken.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3062/00

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 October 2000)

Subject: Landfill at Garraf (Barcelona)

The landfill at Garraf in the district of Gavà i Begues (Barcelona) was established in 1972 and serves as a tip for large-scale urban waste. It currently contains more than 20 million tonnes of refuse.

The landfill is located in a porous limestone massif and no measures were taken to make it watertight when it was first installed. As a result, leachate infiltration has been polluting the groundwater for the last 28 years, reaching as far as the sea and phreatic level of the Delta del Llobregat, which has been designated a site of special natural interest. The landfill is located within the nature park, which has been designated an area of natural interest protected under a special plan for protection of the physical environment and landscape of Garraf (PPMFENG). Article 28 of the law in force until last year stipulated that the dumping of organic material should end on 31 December 1999.

On 6 April 2000, the biannual revision of the metropolitan municipal waste management programme (PMGRM) was adopted, providing for the Garraf landfill to be used until 31 December 2006.

Both the revision of the PMGRM and the amendment of the PPMFENG failed to take account of Council Directive 1993/31/EEC(1) on the landfill of waste, which must be transposed into the laws of the Member States by 31 July 2001 (Article 18). It is therefore clear that the Garraf landfill will not meet the conditions necessary for remaining open and will have to be closed (Annex 1, points 1, 2 and 3).

Furthermore the Garraf landfill is illegal in that is an industrial installation sited on land designated as forestry land by the general metropolitan plan. In addition, it does not have an operating licence from the Gavá local authorities.

Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 1 of Council Directive 91/561/EEC(2) of 18 March 1991 on waste are also being infringed, as are the provisions of Directive 97/11/EC(3).

What steps will the Commission take to ensure compliance with the abovementioned Community directives?

(1) OJ L 182, 16.7.1999, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 78, 26.3.1991, p. 32.

(3) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997, p. 5.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(12 October 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question E-1866/00(1).

(1) See p. 101.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1161/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 April 2000)

Subject: White Paper on Food Safety and the European Food Authority

The White Paper on Food Safety (COM(1999) 719 final) was published in January 2000. Chapter 4 is concerned with establishing a European Food Authority (EFA). Chapter 5 considers legislation on food safety.

Health claims continue to be forbidden (section 101). However, the Commission proposes considering whether functional claims and nutritional claims can be introduced. It also wants to look at whether the nutrition labelling directive needs to be modified. Functional claims refer to beneficial effects on bodily functions.

1. Does the Commission intend to draw up rules for functional claims? If so, what will be the main thrust of such measures? If not, does that not create a vacuum in respect of mentioning all claims?

2. Will the Commission resubmit its 1993 draft proposal concerning nutritional claims? If so, when? If not, is the Commission concentrating on a comprehensive set of rules for the various claims?

3. Will the Commission extend the compulsory food labelling for all foods and/or increase the number of items from four to eight? If not, what changes will be made to the labelling?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1122/00, E-1127/00, E-1128/00, E-1140/00, E-1141/00, E-1142/00, E-1143/00, E-1144/00, E-1145/00, E-1146/00, E-1147/00, E-1148/00, E-1150/00, E-1151/00, E-1152/00, E-1153/00, E-1155/00, E-1156/00, E-1157/00, E-1158/00, E-1160/00, E-1161/00 and E-1162/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(9 June 2000)

The issues raised by the Honourable Member are being studied with a view to bringing forward proposals for legislation according to the time scale set out in the white paper on food safety.

It would be inappropriate at this stage to anticipate the details of each proposal.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1933/00

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 June 2000)

Subject: Budget Item A-3036

250 000 is allocated to the Jean Monnet House from Item A-3036. Could the Commission indicate what work is carried out by the Jean Monnet House and how this money is used?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2000)

The Jean Monnet House was bought and restored by Parliament in 1982 and given to the Jean Monnet Association to manage.

The Jean Monnet Association chiefly organises visits to the house (16 000 visitors per year) and lectures for visitors (20 per month) on Europe and the history of Europe's construction. Most of the visitors are schoolchildren and university students. The nationalities of the visitors extend far beyond the boundaries of the European Union.

The appropriation allocated by the budgetary authority under item A-3036 is to cover the activities and programmes organised by the Jean Monnet House, which, according to the plan submitted to the Commission by the Jean Monnet Association for the year 2000, include: 250-350 lectures and seminars for teachers, heads of establishments, documentalists, school classes, apprentices, etc.; numerous seminars and lectures for university students, business schools, American summer schools (exchanges with the ESC Angers business school on 10 July and with the HEC Paris business school on 20 July), institutes of political studies etc. for students from France, Germany, Sweden, Finland, Spain, Poland, etc., as well as from America, Canada, Australia, South America and Asia; launching of a programme of seminars in the new Conference Room for groups of adults (from companies, embassies, public authorities and associations); the Association Jean Monnet Internet site; updating, development and dissemination of the information pack on the European Union; production of the Cahiers européens d'Houjarray (Houjarray European Journal) for teachers in Europe; and a video project Europe yesterday, Europe today, Europe tomorrow.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0777/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(16 March 2000)

Subject: VAT and labour in the vehicle repair industry

Under current VAT legislation within the UK an independent vehicle repair company undertaking repairs on a customer's vehicle must charge VAT on the entire bill. In recent years, however, insurance companies have been setting up their own garages to repair their customers' cars: through this method they do not have to pay VAT on labour because the garage staff are their own employees.

Does the Commission accept that by exploiting this tax loophole insurance companies are gaining an unfair advantage over independent vehicle repair companies? Will the Commission subsequently state what action it proposes to take to rectify this situation?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2000)

When an insurance company sets up its own garage in order to repair its customers' cars and these repairs are carried out by employees of this insurance company, these supplies by the employee to the insurance company are outside the scope of value added tax (VAT).

On the other hand, it is indeed the case that if a garage carries out a similar service for an insurance company, it will have to invoice VAT on the service. The garage does, however, have a right to deduct the input VAT it incurs on all its investments for equipment, spare parts, etc., which the insurance company, being a tax-exempt body, is unable to do. For the latter, this inability to deduct the input VAT amounts to an additional cost element that compensates for the fact that the insurance company does not have to charge VAT on its labour costs when it has cars repaired by its own employees.

The Commission is aware of this situation, which arises from the fact that insurance transactions are exempted from VAT under Article 13.B.(a) of the Sixth VAT Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment(1). The Commission is examining the possibility of moving from exemption to taxation in the assurance sector but has no immediate plans for action in this area.

(1) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1798/00

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(8 June 2000)

Subject: Ban on fireworks

A ban on the sale of fireworks is being discussed in Sweden. Is such a ban consistent with internal market principles concerning the free movement of goods when fireworks are allowed to be sold in other Member States?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 2000)

All goods, including fireworks, that are approved for legal use in one Member State are able to circulate freely within the Community (Article 28 (ex Article 30) of the EC Treaty). A Member State which has or introduces safety measures against a type of product may be allowed to do so if the measure is not a means of arbitrary discrimination, and is necessary and proportionate. In this case, a national measure could be based on Article 30 (ex Article 36) of the EC Treaty (public safety) provided that the measure is necessary and proportionate in relation to a well defined and clear public security interest. A measure imposing a total ban could be considered disproportionate as other measures, such as stricter storage and handling requirements may well fulfil the same purpose.

The Commission invites the Honourable Member to consult preceding replies by the Commission concerning fireworks: P-4053/97 by Mr Whitehead(1), E-3184/96 by Mrs Waddington(2), E-3644/95 by Mr Pronk(3), E-853/94 by Mr Ford(4), E-1036/93 by Mr Smith(5), E-1152/86(6) by Mr Pitt, E-3102/85 by Mr Pitt(7) and E-465/80 by Mr Walter(8).

(1) OJ C 187, 16.6.1998.

(2) OJ C 138, 5.5.1997.

(3) OJ C 161, 5.6.1996.

(4) OJ C 17, 23.1.1995.

(5) OJ C 140, 21.5.1994.

(6) OJ C 54, 2.3.1987.

(7) OJ C 249, 6.10.1986.

(8) OJ C 198, 4.8.1980.