ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1277/98

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Convention on the protection of financial interests

The finances of the European Community are increasingly being targeted by criminals and particularly organised gangs. In July 1995 the Convention on the protection of the financial interests of the Community was signed in order to improve cooperation between the Member States in investigating crimes of this nature.

1. Which Member States have so far ratified this Convention?

2. Which follow-up measures have so far been taken by the Member States?

3. When does the Commission expect this Convention to be fully ratified by all Member States?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 1998)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to Written Questions E-3349/97 by Mrs Torres Marques(1) and P-3615/97 by Mrs Kjer Hansen(2). The situation has not changed greatly since these answers were made. No Member State has up to now ratified the Convention on the protection of the financial interests of the Communities. The Member States should do so at the latest by mid 1998 (target date introduced by the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 28 April 1997 in the action plan to combat organised crime(3)).

Some Member States have started procedures in order to adapt their national law. As far as Austria is concerned, the Commission is aware that the ministry of Justice has prepared an initiative in order to amend the Austrian penal Code. In Germany the legal committee of the Bundestag has recommended ratification. Some other Member States have also kept the Commission informed of the internal procedures which have been launched to prepare ratification.

In addition, the Commission would like to point out that so far, it has received no communication on the basis of Article 10 of the Convention. The Commission will, once it has received these communications, evaluate the provisions transposing into domestic law the obligations imposed on Member States under the provisions of the Convention.

(1) OJ C 117, 16.4.1998.

(2) OJ C 134, 30.4.1998.

(3) OJ C 251, 15.8.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1105/98

by Panayotis Lambrias (PPE) to the Commission

(8 April 1998)

Subject: Electronic commerce and Member States' tax systems

Given the increasingly important role played by electronic commerce in the Union's economy and the rapidity with which it is developing, will the Commission say what immediate measures it will take to provide for effective and harmonized regulation of the Member States's tax systems and to avoid operational problems in the future in keeping with the views set out in the communication concerning "A European Initiative in Electronic Commerce".

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(12 June 1998)

The Commission has drawn the attention of the international community to the global dimension of a range of issues related to electronic commerce, including taxation, and to the need to strengthen international co-ordination, notably in the communication on "Globalisation and the information society"(1).

The Commission has been working since March 1997 to examine the interaction between the new phenomenon of electronic commerce and indirect taxation, a task for which the directors general of Member States' administrations have pledged their support.

In the statement by the Community and the United States on electronic commerce of December 1997 the parties commit themselves to work towards not imposing any new sort of duties on the import of services provided across border by electronic means. This has also been reflected in the communication on electronic commerce(2) presented by the Community and its Member States to the World trade organisation (WTO) on 23 April 1998. However, there is general agreement that the basic principles of VAT should apply to electronic commerce, to tax consumption within the Community, using procedures that should be as clear and simple as possible to avoid hindering the growth of this new trading medium. The Commission is therefore reviewing customs and VAT legislation and procedures in the light of electronic commerce development and closely following and studying the evolution of network protocols and business practices so that suitable tax solutions can be developed in detail and implemented as the need arises.

The Commission is actively participating in work in other international fora, in particular within the Organisation for economic cooperation and development (OECD) to ensure provision of the necessary international framework for taxation. Indeed work is on-going to prepare "framework conditions" for taxation which could be presented to the OECD ministerial conference in Ottawa.

(1) COM(98) 50 final.

(2) COM(97) 157 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0974/98

by Gerardo Fernández-Albor (PPE) to the Commission

(30 March 1998)

Subject: Community action on behalf of the homeless under budget heading B-4103

In its detailed reply to my written question E-1169/97(1) the Commission informed me that due to the United Kingdom's appeal contesting the legality of funding projects in 1995 and 1996 from budget heading B-4103, no subsidies under that heading were paid.

It is not apparent from the September 1996 order by the President of the Court of Justice whether this budget heading will be maintained, leaving the position of the homeless dependent on the Court of Justice's ruling on the United Kingdom's appeal.

Can the Commission therefore tell me what stage has been reached with regard to the problems raised by the appeal? Has there been a ruling on the matter? What other potential sources of funding could be found within the framework of Community initiatives such as Emploi and the new Integra programme within it, URBAN or Leonardo? What form does the Commission's continuing support for Feantsa and the associated Monitoring Centre actually take?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(4 June 1998)

Concerning the use of budget heading B-4103, the Commission must wait for the relevant judgments of the Court of Justice and then act accordingly.

The final judgment in Case C-106/96 on the use of the budget heading in 1995 was delivered on 12 May 1998. The Court set aside the decision taken by the Commission in its communiqué of 23 January 1996 announcing grants for European projects to tackle social exclusion, though it did not call into question the payments made and commitments entered into under the 86 contracts that had been signed. The Court has not yet set a hearing date for Case C-240/96 concerning 1996.

The homeless, particularly from the point of view of eventually reintegrating them into the labour market, have been included among the most vulnerable people, targeted by measures co-financed under the Integra strand of the Community's "Employment" initiative.

The promotion of social integration and equal opportunities for all as regards access to the labour market constitutes one of the priority action areas in the proposal for a Regulation on the European Social Fund(2) recently submitted to the Council and Parliament.

The activities of the European network "Feantsa" are currently co-financed under budget heading B-4116 "Cooperation with non-governmental organisations and associations formed by the socially excluded and the elderly".

Help for the homeless is not specifically mentioned in the definition of the criteria for the Community's "Urban" initiative, but this does not rule out measures to assist them as part of the integrated approach proposed by the authorities responsible for a specific district.

(1) OJ C 319, 18.10.1997, p. 241.

(2) COM(98) 131 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1334/98

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Final report of the international MOX assessment

With reference to the findings of the final report of the international MOX assessment - "Comprehensive social impact assessment of MOX in light water reactors", can the Commission say what action is to be taken to account for these findings?

Answer given by Mr Papoutsis on behalf of the Commission

(24 June 1998)

The Commission has taken note of the report published in November 1997 by a non-governmental organization (NGO) to which the Honourable Member appears to refer. The assessments presented in this report differ from those of the G8 experts. Whatever comments the Commission might make with regard thereto, it would remind the Honourable Member that the decision whether or not to use mixed oxide fuel (MOX) rests with each Member State which produces nuclear electricity. These Member States must therefore assess the possible consequences of their choice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1324/98

by Jean-Antoine Giansily (UPE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Establishment of a European climate agency

Following the position adopted by the European Parliament on the Commission's strategy paper on reducing methane emissions, what is the Commission's response to the suggestion from the Environment Committee that a European climate agency should be set up and when is such an agency likely to see the light of day?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 1998)

The question of creating a European climate agency was raised in the Parliament's resolution on the Commission's communication "A strategy for reducing methane"(1).

In reply to this specific question during the debate on the above communication, the Commission said that the idea of creating a European climate agency was an interesting idea and deserved consideration. However, before the Commission could take a position, such a step would require further careful examination since it raises a large number of practical and institutional questions concerning the role of such an agency. The Commission is not at the moment pursuing this issue as it is concentrating its efforts on following up the Kyoto conference which is a top priority.

(1) COM(96) 557 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1216/98

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: Competitiveness

In Parliament's report (A-0113/97) on the Commission Communication to the Council on benchmarking the competitiveness of European industry (COM(96) 0463 - C-0622/96) and the Commission staff working paper concerning European quality promotion policy for improving European competitiveness (SEC(96) 2000), the Commission is asked to submit conclusions explaining why certain European sectors, such as furniture, outperform their US and Japanese counterparts in terms of industrial added value.

When is it intending to submit these conclusions?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1207/98, E-1208/98, E-1209/98, E-1210/98, E-1211/98,E-1212/98, E-1213/98, E-1214/98, E-1215/98 and E-1216/98 given by Mr Bangemann on behalf of the Commission

(14 May 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1211/98

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE) to the Commission

(24 April 1998)

Subject: Competitiveness

Parliament's report (A-0113/97) on the Commission Communication to the Council on benchmarking the competitiveness of European industry (COM(96) 0463 - C-0622/96) and the Commission staff working paper concerning European quality promotion policy for improving European competitiveness (SEC(96) 2000) makes the point that prices for key services are higher in Europe than in Japan and the USA and that, despite the progress made since the establishment of the single market, there are still sectors, such as public procurement, to which access is restricted.

What action is the Commission intending to take in order to eliminate such restrictions?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1377/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Aid for air transport to small and remote communities in Greece

Air transport is often the only link between small and sparsely-populated islands in remote parts of Greece and the outside world. However, owing to falling passenger numbers these services are very expensive and are at risk due to problems faced by Olympic Airways.

Given the need to continue these services, will the Commission say whether Community funds can be made available to maintain scheduled flights to small and remote Greek islands? Under which programmes could funds be made available?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 1998)

The Community support framework (1994-1999) for Greece does not provide for any aid measure concerning the operational cost of air transport in Greece (including domestic flights to the islands). However, in recognition of the type of problem raised by the Honourable Member, the Community is presently co-financing the construction and upgrading of airport and port infrastructures located in many parts of Greece, including in the islands.

Operational aid granted by the Greek authorities to air carriers is considered to be incompatible with the common market on the basis of Article 92 of the EC Treaty. However, there are two exceptions to this principle:

- social aid benefiting consumers which is granted without discrimination as to the origin of the services can be exempted on the basis of Article 92.3.a of the EC Treaty;

- financial compensation granted for the operation of air routes on which public service obligations have been imposed in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) 2408/92(1) on access by Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes.

To date, Greece has not requested any exemption on the basis of Article 92.3.a, nor has it applied Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) 2408/92.

(1) OJ L 240, 24.8.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1077/98

by Patricia McKenna (V) to the Commission

(7 April 1998)

Subject: Carrying bicycles on trains

The European Cyclists' Federation (ECF) has recently asked the European Commission to undertake a study on the feasibility of introducing a profitable system for carrying bicycles on trains throughout Europe.

ECF is campaigning for spaces to be allocated on long-distance trains where bicycles can be stored. Some inter-city trains in Germany have already taken up this idea.

ECF points out that it is easy for motorists to carry bicycles on their roof racks. But more ecologically conscious long-distance travellers - who wish to travel by rail instead of road - can encounter many difficulties in bringing their bikes on trains.

ECF believes that the Commission study should cover market potential, technical measures and the impact on tourism and regional economies.

Will the Commission look favourably on the ECF proposal and carry out such a study? If so, when would it expect to have such a study completed?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 1998)

Two of the issues highlighted in the European cyclist's federation (ECF) position paper on bicycle transport on international trains are market potential and impacts on tourism and regional economies. The Commission is contributing to an analysis of these issues through its grant-aid for the planning phase of the EuroVelo international cycle routes project, managed by ECF, which will require an assessment of the market potential for long distance cycle routes and their impact on tourism and regional economies. The planning phase of the EuroVelo project is due to finish at the end of 1998.

The Commission is also currently managing a research cooperation project on passenger accessibility of heavy rail systems (COST 335) with a view to developing European standards for the design and operation of trains, stations and information services. While the focus of the project is the needs of people with reduced mobility and not the needs of cyclists, it is likely that some of the train design features examined will also benefit people with bicycles. This project is due to finish in late 1999.

The Commission does not consider, however, that a study of the profitability of a system of carrying bicycles on long distance trains should be carried out in the near future, since this is a matter primarily for the railway undertakings and the limited funds at the Commission's disposal are needed primarily for projects having a higher priority.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1169/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: General aviation

Within the Single Market, there are considerable economic advantages for centres of population in having their own aerodrome which caters for business aircraft.

What action will the Commission take to encourage and facilitate the emergence of new satellite airports, especially in the United Kingdom where there are only 143 licensed airports while France has four times as many?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(18 June 1998)

The Commission recognises the economic potential offered by general aviation (GA) aerodrome facilities, including accessibility, employment, and the initial training of future pilots. Activities to facilitate the development of GA facilities are, however, a matter for national and local authorities who are in the best position to assess need for and implications of such provision.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0982/98

by Luis Campoy Zueco (PPE) to the Commission

(23 March 1998)

Subject: State aids

What state aids does the Commission intend to authorize for SMEs and large undertakings which will, after the year 2000, no longer be located in regions covered by Objectives 1, 2 or 5b?

Answer given by Mr Van Miert on behalf of the Commission

(16 April 1998)

In assessing whether regional state aid is compatible with the common market, the Commission determines the regions in which such aid can be compatible under the derogation provided for in Article 92(3)(a) of the EC Treaty and the regions in which such aid can be compatible under the derogation provided for in Article 92(3)(c) of the EC Treaty. Outside those regions, regional state aid cannot be compatible. Against this, horizontal aid (for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), environmental protection, research and employment) can be deemed compatible in so far as they comply with the relevant guidelines, irrespective of the region in which the recipient firm is located. State aid for large enterprises located in areas not covered from the year 2000 by Objective 1 or Objective 2 could be regarded as compatible, under certain conditions, provided that those areas qualified for the derogation under Article 92(3)(a) or (c).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0609/98

by Riitta Myller (PSE) to the Commission

(9 March 1998)

Subject: Comparative survey of the Union's transport costs

One of the main objectives of European integration is to increase the European Union's competitiveness on world markets, particularly in relation to the United States and Japan. In addition to production and material costs, one factor which affects competitiveness is transport costs. Transport also has an environmental aspect, which should be taken into account in all action in accordance with the principle of sustainable development.

I would ask the appropriate member of the Commission whether the Commission has carried out a survey of transport costs as a percentage of the costs of the EU's external trade and in comparison to the cost structures of the USA and Japan, and whether, on the basis of any such survey, the Commission intends to take measures to increase the share of water transport within the EU?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 1998)

The Commission naturally considers the competitiveness of European industry to be essential for Europe's future commercial success. The costs of transport - both to shippers and to society as a whole - are essential determinants of competitiveness and the Commission therefore intends to publish a Communication on benchmarking in transport at the end of 1998. A comparative cost survey has, however, not been undertaken.

The Commission's policy on promoting intra-European maritime transport as part of its sustainable mobility strategy is outlined in the Communication on "The development of short sea shipping in Europe: prospects and challenges"(1) which sets out a number of practical measures to be taken at various levels, in particular by the maritime industries themselves, to promote short sea shipping.

The promotion of short sea shipping is an integral part of other Community activities, such as the trans-European transport networks, the PACT programme for combined transport and the fourth framework programme for research and development, which contribute to the development of waterborne transport.

Another essential link in improving waterborne transport within the Community is the efficiency of its sea ports. In its green paper on "Sea ports and maritime infrastructure"(2) the Commission identified an improvement of port efficiency as a key objective of a Community ports policy. Consultations on that document are now proceeding.

(1) COM(95) 317 final.

(2) COM(97) 678 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0948/98

by Robin Teverson (ELDR) to the Commission

(30 March 1998)

Subject: Re-exportation of live animals within the EU and conditions in slaughterhouses

Is the Commission aware of allegations that UK sheep are being exported to other Member States and then re-exported to Spain where they are slaughtered under conditions which are far from acceptable under EU legislation? Can the Commission confirm that the conditions in slaughterhouses in Spain are fulfilling the requirements as set out in EU legislation? What checks are undertaking by the authorities to ensure that this legislation is being adhered to?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1998)

The Commission is not currently aware of problems involving British sheep dispatched to one Member State being reconsigned to Spain. Depending on the category of sheep concerned and the length of stay in the first Member State and the certification accompanying the animals when dispatched from that Member State, such reconsignment does not necessarily infringe the relevant Community rules.

The Commission has not received any recent complaint that the conditions in slaughterhouses in Spain are not fulfilling the animal welfare requirements as set out in Community legislation. The primary responsibility for the enforcement of the above mentioned legislation remains in the hands of the Member States. The Commission will request the Spanish authorities to indicate what checks are currently undertaken to ensure respect for this legislation.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1167/98

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(29 April 1998)

Subject: General aviation

General aviation constitutes by far the largest sector of European aviation, with more aircraft, more flyers and more operating sites than any other area.

How does general aviation fit into the Commission's air transport strategy, and what work is the Commission doing to ensure that general aviation is provided with a level playing field compared with commercial air transport?