ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0345/00

by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 February 2000)

Subject: Sanidad, European Agency for Food Safety

On 12 January the Commission proposed the creation of a European Agency for Food Safety, to be set up in the next two years, in view of the situation in the food sector in the Union in the last year and general public distrust of the sector because of cases such as those involving mad cow disease or dioxin.

How will the Commission ensure that this independent committee is operational if its powers are reduced to those of a mere consultative body?

What mechanisms does the Commission envisage to ensure consumer safety during the next two years?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 March 2000)

As regards the first part of the question, the Commission invites the Honourable Member to refer to its answer to written question E-0231/00 by Mrs Thomas-Mauro(1).

Concerning the second part of the question, the Commission would recall that since 1997, the system for the provision of scientific advice has been completely reorganised. Strong emphasis is placed on the excellence, the independence and the transparency of scientific advice. These principles continue to be applied and ensure that consumer health is well protected. The Commission has indicated in the white paper on food safety(2) that over the next two years, having regard to availability of adequate resources, it will evaluate the possibility of further reinforcing the existing scientific support and advice structures as a lead-in to the establishment of the authority.

(1) See page 164.

(2) COM(1999) 719 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0253/00

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(7 February 2000)

Subject: Regulations

What is the total number of regulations the Commission estimates were agreed in 1998, broken down by (a) Commission Directives, (b) Commission Decisions, (c) Council Directives, (d) Council/European Parliament Directives, (e) instruments not published in the Official Journal, (f) routine management instruments valid for a limited time? How does this vary with previous years and the latest estimate for 1999?

Reply given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(3 March 2000)

The numbers of Regulations, Directives and Decisions adopted by Parliament and the Council or by the Council alone or by the Commission from 1995 to 1999, excluding management instruments with a limited life, have been sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat. The data are taken from the interinstitional data base, Celex. Since 1997, they have been included in the General Report on the Activities of the European Union (tables 28 (1997 and 1998) and 29 (1999)). To keep track of the trend in the number of legislative instruments in force, the number repealed or having expired during the year in question is also shown.

Routine management instruments with a limited life (sometimes a few days or a few months) published in the Official Journal (L series) with the title in light type are all Commission regulations and mainly concern agricultural policy. Their number is as follows (source: Celex): 1831 in 1999, 1809 in 1998, 1603 in 1997, 1402 in 1996 and 1877 in 1995.

Instruments not published in the Official Journal have no legal force. They vary widely (for example, they may include grants of financial assistance to Member States, groups or enterprises, or decisions concerning the appointment of officials and the application of the Staff Regulations), and a consolidated statement would be of no significance.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0050/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(20 January 2000)

Subject: Cologne process: revision of the Poseima programme and aid for the supply of breeding animals

Article 4 of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92(1) established aid for the importing of pure-bred breeding animals of the bovine species, but Commission bans on movement of this species within the European Union has rendered such aid meaningless.

Furthermore, on the larger islands of the Azores, there has been considerable genetic improvement of the bovine species, while artificial insemination has become general practice.

Would it not therefore be possible for the revised regulation to provide aid for transporting breeding animals of the bovine species within the territory of the Azores Autonomous Region?

(1) OJ L 173, 27.6.1992, p. 1.

Joint answer to Written Questions E-0038/00, E-0043/00, E-0044/00, E-0045/00, E-0046/00, E-0047/00, E-0048/00, E-0049/00, E-0050/00, E-0051/00 and E-0052/00 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2000)

The Honourable Member has put a whole series of questions regarding the Poseima Programme for the Azores.

The Commission is currently drafting a report on the measures to implement Article 299(2) (ex Article 227) of the EC Treaty.

At this stage, before the Commission has adopted that report, it is not able to reply to the Honourable Member's questions concerning its content.

Lastly, the Commission's Work Programme for 2000 provides for a report to be presented to the Council and Parliament on the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 of 15 June 1992 concerning specific measures for the Azores and Madeira relating to certain agricultural products(1) (Poseima), together where appropriate with proposals for any adjustments that prove necessary to achieve the programme's goals. The set of measures relating to agriculture in the Azores will be considered in that connection.

(1) OJ L 173, 27.6.1992.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0787/00

by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission

(9 March 2000)

Subject: Socrates funding for minority language projects

Could the Commission state what European funding is available, and under which budget lines and programmes, to support the production of Irish language subtitles for television programmes?

The production of these subtitles is in particular aimed at assisting the deaf.

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(7 April 2000)

The Socrates programme does not include a budget heading specifically for Irish-language subtitling for television programmes.

However, the MEDIA II programme (1996-2000) to promote and develop the European audiovisual industry places particular emphasis on supporting multilingual works and the quality dubbing and subtitling of European programmes, in minority languages too, so that they can be broadcast to a wide audience.

This support for dubbing and subtitling is granted in the form of a subsidy (as opposed to most of the other funding in the programme, which takes the form of loans repayable on certain conditions), as part of the existing support systems, in particular those concerned with distribution.

The action lines of the MEDIA programme, as defined by Council Decisions 95/563/EC and 95/564/EC(1), do not provide for financial support to be granted directly to television stations for the dubbing or subtitling of European programmes.

However, one action line of the programme is support for the coproduction by several European partners of independent works (fiction, documentaries, animation) for broadcasting by a number of European television stations. Several projects involving Irish partners (producers or broadcasters) have been supported under this action line, e.g. the series Ros Na Run, produced by the production company EO Teilifís, the TV film Le Dernier Mot, a French-Irish coproduction by Cinétévé, and two documentary series produced by Concordia Cyf: Celtic Radicals and The Glory Game Football's conquering Celts. As part of these projects, some of the funding granted was for producing dubbed or subtitled versions in the Irish language, to be broadcast by TnaG.

(1) OJ L 321, 30.1.1995.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0231/00

by Nicole Thomas-Mauro (UEN) to the Commission

(4 February 2000)

Subject: White Paper on Food Safety

The White Paper on Food Safety contains plans to establish a network of contacts between the European Food Authority and similar agencies, namely national agencies and institutions with responsibility for food safety. What form will such cooperation take, however? To what extent will divergent opinions expressed by national agencies be heeded?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2000)

The white paper on food safety(1) adopted by the Commission on 12 January 2000 contains an outline for the structure and functioning of the future European food authority. The Commission has called for comments before the end of April 2000. In the meantime, reflections continue in order to refine the concepts contained in the white paper. In any event, the European food authority will need to work in close co-operation with other scientific bodies in the Member States and elsewhere. By implementing the principles of independence, excellence and transparency, the Authority should progressively command trust and respect and to achieve recognition as the most authoritative source of advice and information.

(1) COM(1999) 719 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0171/00

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(31 January 2000)

Subject: Night charges imposed by pharmacies

In some Community countries customers of pharmacies have been required to pay a special charge when purchasing medicines at pharmacies on duty at night.

Clearly, this entails serious discrimination against those who, in a medical emergency and for reasons beyond their control, need to purchase the medicines they require immediately.

Does the Commission not agree that it has a duty to ensure that there is no discrimination against customers of pharmacies, whether they purchase medicines by day or by night?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2000)

The Commission does not feel that the situation to which the Honourable Member refers raises a problem of Community law.

The national measures establishing the tax in question do not, in fact, appear to be either directly or indirectly discriminatory on grounds of nationality. This tax applies to the objective situation of citizens purchasing medicines at duty pharmacies at night, irrespective of any other subjective considerations relating to the purchaser.

In addition, the Commission notes that these measures do not affect the freedom of movement of pharmaceutical products, the freedom of establishment or the freedom to provide services.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1336/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(4 May 2000)

Subject: Measures to combat high unemployment in the Prefecture of Pieria

In the Prefecture of Pieria in Greece, the unemployment rate is soaring towards 35 %. The main groups affected are young people, women and first-time job-seekers. The main factors contributing to this development are the severe blow to tourism in the region caused by the war in Kosovo the largest number of tourists to the area come from Central and Eastern Europe by road through Yugoslavia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) the fall in income from farming and the closure of many small, piece-rate based clothing manufacturers who mainly employed women.

When approving the Third Community Support Framework, will the Commission take account of the special situation of the Prefecture of Pieria? What additional measures will be taken by the European Social Fund, in cooperation with the national authorities, to combat unemployment and create more jobs?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2000)

The Commission would like to clarify that according to the structural funds regulations (Regulation (EC) No 1784/1999 of the Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 1999 on the European Social Fund(1) and Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(2)), responsibility for formulating and submitting proposals lies with the Member States.

However, the Commission is aware of the specific problems mentioned by the Honourable Member and will take them into account during the negotiations of the operational programmes of the third Community support framework which are expected to start in June 2000.

(1) OJ L 213, 13.8.1999.

(2) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0576/00

by Salvador Garriga Polledo (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 February 2000)

Subject: Community promotion of the cider industry within the European Union

Cider has become the hallmark of various Community regions, especially the Spanish region of Asturias, which is widely recognised as a leader in the production of cider, the marketing and consumption of which are expanding beyond the Spanish domestic market to reach every part of Europe and North America.

However, even such a universal beverage as cider currently needs a boost to its potential sales and consumption levels, particularly within the EU market, for which reason producers would like to know whether they could be granted Commission aid for the purpose of developing programmes which would encourage consumers to choose cider over other more harmful beverages.

Could the Commission say whether it could devise programmes to increase sales and consumption of cider within the EU market, along the lines of the various campaigns which it has organised in order to increase the consumption of other agricultural products such as olive oil, wine and oranges?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 2000)

As the Honourable Member states, the Community helps finance promotional programmes for certain agricultural products originating in its territory. At present these include olive oil, milk and milk products, quality beef and veal, apples and citrus fruits, nuts, table olives, raisins, grape juice, quality products from the outermost regions, live flowers and plants and fibre flax. The legal basis for the Community part-financing of these programmes is provided by the Council Regulation on each individual product.

In order to extend the possibility of supporting such promotional programmes for agricultural products, the Commission intends soon to submit to the Council a draft regulation to harmonise and simplify the system for promoting agricultural products in the Community. To that end, the list of products included in this system will not be a closed one, and any product will then be able to seek to be the subject of a promotional campaign part-financed by the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1241/00

by Elizabeth Lynne (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 April 2000)

Subject: Provisions of the working time directive

Could the Commission explain the provisions of the Working Time Directive with regard to voluntary work. If a worker is implicitly expected to work longer hours than the 48 hours per week maximum through understaffing elsewhere, but this work is not contracted, how should this be covered by the Working Time Directive?

Could the Commission also explain how the provisions of the Working Time Directive specify the necessary measurement? If, for example, a worker has forty timetabled hours per week, but must do a large amount of work in his/her own time, how should those unmeasured hours be taken into account in the implementation of the directive?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(29 May 2000)

Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time(1) (Working Time Directive) does not recognise the notion of voluntary work. Article 6(2) of the Directive lays down that Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that, in keeping with the need to protect the safety and health of workers: the average working time for each seven-day period, including overtime, does not exceed 48 hours.

According to Articles 16(2) and 17 of the Directive, the reference period over which the average is to be calculated may vary between 4 and 12 months depending on the situation and the means by which the reference period is laid down.

These provisions must be implemented into national law by the Member States. It is for the Member States' authorities to ensure that national legislation implementing Community law is applied and enforced.

(1) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1163/00

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.

The Commission is to draw up an action plan to develop a comprehensive and coherent nutritional policy (section 106).

To what extent does the Commission seek to tailor this action plan to national and international (FAO and WHO) policy plans?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1163/00 and E-1164/00 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(23 June 2000)

In drawing up a nutritional policy, the Commission will use the results of two current projects that are financed by the Health Promotion Programme. Each of these projects mobilises numerous national experts involved in national policies and representatives of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). The first project is designed to draw up European recommendations on nutrition and the second will produce a background document for the French Presidency, which intends to promote nutritional health.

As far as health surveillance is concerned, most Member States have introduced a monitoring system, but it rarely includes monitoring of nutritional status. Although food consumption surveys are conducted, they are only the first stage in the evaluation of nutritional status. The rare data available on nutrition across the various Member States are not all of the same quality, and their comparability leaves something to be desired.

That is why the Commission has called on the Council and the Parliament on several occasions to improve the collection, analysis and dissemination of data on health, and their quality and comparability.

The Commission would reassure the Honourable Member on the question of possible overlap between the measures of the Commission and those of the Member States. It has no intention of taking the place of the Member States. All the work under way in the area of nutritional health monitoring is being done together with the Member States, with the Commission initiating and coordinating such work.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0784/00

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(16 March 2000)

Subject: Compliance with environmental priorities and Sogama plan

The treatment of waste in densely populated regions such as Galicia must comply with strict safety rules, since otherwise dangers could arise for the population through the pollution of the air, water and soil.

The Galician government's Sogama plan for the treatment of solid urban waste has attracted criticism on the grounds that it is not geared to the five key objectives of Community environmental policy as regards urban waste: preventing the production of waste, reusing it as raw material, improving its disposal, strengthening rules governing the transport of waste and cleaning up polluted ground.

On the basis of what technical conditions was the subsidy granted for the Sogama plan?

Should that plan be revised to bring it more closely into line with environmental requirements, would the Commission be in a position to re-examine the funding of the improved plan?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(26 April 2000)

Through its Decision of 7 May 1998, the Commission decided to grant financial support to the Plan de Gestión de Residuos Sólidos Urbanos de Galicia(1) (plan for the management of municipal waste for the Galicia Region). This decision was taken after a thorough evaluation of the proposal and the assessment that it complied with the requirements of all the relevant Community policies, including environmental policy. The environmental impact assessment of the project shows that it represents an environmental improvement for the region of Galicia.

Regarding the hierarchy established for the management of wastes, the assessment states that all those wastes that cannot be reused or recycled after separate collection at the point of origin would be further selected for recycling in the central facility. Moreover, the non-reusable and non-recyclable portion will be subject to energy recovery through its transformation into a refuse derived fuel to be used for the production of electricity in the generation plant built in the Complexo Medioambiental de Cerceda. Furthermore, most of the wastes produced in the region will be transported by railroad from the transfer stations to the central facility.

The development of the project has been carried out in full respect of the terms of the decision of the Commission.

(1) Cohesion Fund Project No 97.11.61.047.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0489/00

by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(24 February 2000)

Subject: Implementation of the Leonardo da Vinci vocational training programme

It sometimes happens that the way in which the participation of young students in the Leonardo da Vinci programme is organised gives cause for complaint. Specifically, an exchange of architecture students taking their diploma examination (College of Higher Education) was set to begin on 1 January 2000 but was postponed until July. This obviously disrupts the career plans of those young people and causes great disappointment not only with the national partners, but also with the European Institutions.

Could the Commission therefore answer the following questions:

1. When will the programmes be cleared for publication by partners in the Member States?

2. How is it possible that candidates have already been recruited and nominated, even though the programme is still at the approval stage?

3. Will the start of the various programmes or measures be set by the Commission or by the partners in the Member States responsible for their publications?

4. Will there be compensation for the lost half-year?

5. The candidates were counting on participating in the programme. They now face a break in their career. How does the Commission plan to support those disappointed candidates whose participation is no longer possible because of the delay?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(3 April 2000)

1. Under the first phase of the Leonardo da Vinci programme (1995-1999), placement and exchange programmes for students and young graduates were selected through an annual selection procedure following a call for proposals. Programme promoters and partners can announce traineeships on receipt of confirmation from the Commission that their programme has been approved.

2. Traineeships can be announced by the potential promoter or partners before the programme has been accepted, provided it is made clear that they are subject to acceptance of the programme by the Commission.

3. Under the first phase of Leonardo da Vinci, the programmes mentioned in paragraph 1 generally began on 1 December. They usually run for two years and placements have an average duration of six months.

4. The promoter, beneficiary and the sending and host organisations enter into a binding agreement on participation in a placement or exchange programme. It is not the Commission's responsibility to provide compensation.

5. The Commission can only offer financial support to participants in a placement or exchange programme.