ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 65/92

(2004/C 65 E/104)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1794/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(28 May 2003)

Subject: Software patents

In recent research undertaken on the subject (1), it has been argued that a patent system may interfere with competition and innovation. This argument relies on the notion that innovation is both ‘sequential’ (i.e. each invention builds upon its predecessor) and ‘complementary’ (i.e. a diversity of innovators raises the chances of discovery). This argument therefore goes against the traditional reasoning for a patent system.

Does the Commission in any way agree with the argument? How does the Commission respond to it in relation to the Community patent?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(19 June 2003)

The Commission is aware of the research referred to by James Bessen and Eric Maskin. The authors of the paper argue that sequentiality and complementarity are characteristics of industries such as those for computer software and hardware. This may indeed be the case, but in no way does it go ‘against the traditional reasoning’ behind patent systems. In fact, sequentiality and complementarity are, to a greater or lesser extent, characteristics of all innovation, although the degree of interdependence between inventions varies considerably between sectors.

The Commission welcomes all research which contributes to the debate on the scope and utility of patent protection, particularly in high technology sectors. The work by Bessen and Maskin in this field is indeed highly interesting and the model that the authors develop in their paper is undoubtedly elegant and sophisticated. However, like all models of this kind, there are simplifications involved, and caution has to be exercised in applying the results of such work to the real world.

Following an extended period of consultation and reflection, the Commission came to the conclusion that in the field of software inventions, insufficient grounds had been shown to justify either a significant extension, or restriction, of the scope of what should be regarded as patentable. In particular, there was little hard evidence of the interfering effect which patents are alleged by some to have on innovation. This is why the proposal for a directive on computer-implemented inventions involves harmonisation and clarification of certain aspects of the law, but is based substantially on current practice. The proposed directive does, however, include a provision for the Commission to report on any effects the directive may have on innovation, competition and business.

As regards the Community Patent, the objective of this initiative is to create a Community-wide unitary right granted by the European Patent Office and enforced within a single Community jurisdiction. It is however not the intention in this context to modify the substantive conditions for patentability as they are currently expressed in the European Patent Convention and the national patent laws of the Member States.

(1) Sequential Innovation, Patents, and Imitation, by James Bessen and Eric Maskin, July 2002, Harvard University and MIT.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/191

(2004/C 33 E/194)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1938/03

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject: Illegal employment in the fisheries sector

It has recently been reported that up to 50 per cent of workers employed in UK fish processing plants are employed illegally. Many endure deplorable working conditions, working double shifts and seven-day weeks, and are paid less than the minimum wage. During recent raids, the UK Department of Work and Pensions and the police found that half of the workers gutting, filleting and packing fish were foreign and that a third of them had entered the country illegally.

What measures does the Commission propose to protect such workers? Does the Commission have any plans to regulate the labour agencies known as ‘gangmasters’ which are responsible for checking the status of the workers in law and which are now shown to have exploited some of the most vulnerable people?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2003)

The Commission does not have any information concerning the facts described by the Honourable Member. Although it regrets that such situations can occur, it can intervene only where a principle or provision of Community law is contravened.

Fishing was excluded from the scope of Directive 93/104/EC (1) concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, but is now covered by Directive 2000/34/EC (2), which has to be incorporated into the national legislation of Member States no later than 1 August 2003 (1 August 2004 in the case of doctors in training).

In any event, it is the task of the competent national authorities (judicial or other authorities), to ensure the correct application of the provisions of national or Community law, also with regard to the fight against undeclared work. In its Communication of 3 June 2003 (3) the Commission notes that undeclared work seems to be on the increase in many Member States. However, since 2000, and especially in 2003, the employment policy guidelines have included a commitment to combat this phenomenon. Furthermore, one of the essential aspects of the common immigration policy is to combat illegal immigration, as set out in the recent conclusions of the Thessaloniki European Council.

(1) Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.

(2) Directive 2000/34/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 2000 amending Council Directive 93/104/EC concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time to cover sectors and activities excluded from that Directive, OJ L 195, 1.8.2000.

(3) Communication on the development of a common policy on illegal immigration, smuggling and trafficking of human beings, external borders and the return of illegal residents, COM(2003) 323 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 65/253

(2004/C 65 E/268)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2981/03

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 October 2003)

Subject: Breach of Directive 89/48/EEC

Can the Commission list the law diplomas awarded in the Member States on completion of higher-education studies of at least three years' duration (or those awarded by any other university college, higher-education establishment or other establishment with the same level of training) which are covered by the provisions of Directive 89/48/EEC (1) and which, in accordance with that Directive, grant access to the profession of lawyer in a Member State other than that in which the diplomas were acquired?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 2003)

The Commission does not have a list of the diplomas which give access to the profession of lawyer in the different Member States and can be recognised in accordance with Directive 89/48/EEC (2). This Directive leaves Member States free to regulate professions within their territories and to establish the level and type of qualifications required for a given profession. To the Commission's knowledge, some Member States grant access to the profession of lawyer by their nationals conditional not only on possession of a law degree but also on completing a period of supervised practice and on passing an additional examination. Information on the diploma required in each Member State, can be obtained from the national ‘contact points’ for diplomas and professional recognition: the list of these contact points is published on the Commission's website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/en/qualifications/index.htm. Lastly, Directive 98/5/EC (3), although it does not list the diplomas required for access to the profession of lawyer, contains a list of the titles of lawyer existing in all Member States.

(1) OJ L 19, 24.1.1989, p. 16.

(2) Council Directive 89/48/EEC of 21 December 1988 on a general system for the recognition of higher-education diplomas awarded on completion of professional education and training of at least three years' duration.

(3) Directive 98/5/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 to facilitate practice of the profession of lawyer on a permanent basis in a Member State other than that in which the qualification was obtained, OJ L 77, 14.3.1998.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/187

(2004/C 33 E/189)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1901/03

by Carlos Ripoll y Martinez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 June 2003)

Subject: Processed tomatoes

I have been informed that the Greek Government used national funds to support producers of processed tomatoes, in the village of Gastouni in the Ilias Prefecture, during 2001, despite the EU decision not to grant any subsidies.

Is the Commission aware of such payment of subsidies?

Did the Greek Government officially apply to the Commission for a derogation?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2003)

The Greek authorities have not formally notified the Commission any State aid as regards the question raised by the Honourable Member.

Community subsidies for tomatoes intended for processing are provided for by Council Regulation (EC) No 2201/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the markets in processed fruit and vegetable products (1), introducing an aid scheme for producer organisations which deliver tomatoes harvested in the Community to approved processors. This aid scheme is based on contracts between, on the one hand, producers organised in Producer Organisations recognised under Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1) and, on the other hand, processors approved by the competent authorities. Aid is granted to producer organisations which, in turn, pay it to their members. The recognition of producer organisations is the competence of the Member States, which, in accordance with the regulations referred to above, establish a series of criteria to be satisfied by producer organisations, in order to be entitled to receive Community aid.

The producer organisation referred to in the question raised by the Honourable Member (A.S. Gastounis) was recognised by the Greek authorities in the first place but, at a later stage, the Greek authorities informed the Commission that the producer organisation did not comply with the minimum criteria for recognition. It is, in the first instance, for the Greek authorities to draw the necessary consequences from that fact.

At the Community level, the financial consequences for the Member State of the non-respect of the conditions have to be examined, in particular in as far as the reimbursement by the European Agriculture Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) to the Greece State is concerned, in the context of the clearance of accounts procedure.

The Commission is much obliged to the Honourable Member for the information provided. Following his question, the Commission has already contacted the Greek authorities in order to ascertain whether any national State aid is being granted to the producer organisation concerned. The Commission will keep the Honourable Member informed about the outcome of this issue.

(1) OJ L 297, 21.11.1996.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 65/81

(2004/C 65 E/090)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1425/03

by Dorette Corbey (PSE) to the Commission

(15 April 2003)

Subject: Directive on packaging and packaging waste

The Directive on packaging and packaging waste (94/62/EC (1)) is currently undergoing revision. Article 6 of the Directive sets quantitative targets for the recovery and recycling of packaging waste. The beginning of Article 6 reads as follows:

In order to comply with the objectives of this Directive, Member States shall take the necessary measures to attain the following targets covering the whole of their territory …

Can the Commission confirm that there is a firm obligation on the Member States to attain the targets for recovery and recycling?

Can the Commission confirm that, as the guardian of the legal framework responsible for ensuring that EC legislation is properly transposed, complied with and implemented, it will initiate proceedings against any Member State which does not attain the targets contained in Article 6?

Does the Commission agree that the measures to be taken by the Member States are only a means of fulfilling the obligation laid down in Article 6 and are not the objective per se?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2003)

The achievement of the recovery and recycling targets are legal obligations for the Member States, required under Article 6 of Parliament and Council Directive 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994, on packaging and packaging waste. The Commission can confirm that it will fulfil its role as guardian of the EC Treaty and follow-up cases of non-compliance with the targets of the Directive. This will, if necessary, include the initiation of infringement proceedings under Article 226 of the EC Treaty.

Article 6 of Directive 94/62/EEC stipulates that the Member States shall take the necessary measures to attain the targets set out by that provision. The Member States have the possibility to choose the means they use to achieve these targets provided that Community legislation is complied with.

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994, p. 10.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/218

(2004/C 33 E/222)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2107/03

by Isabelle Caullery (UEN) to the Commission

(18 June 2003)

Subject: Non-governmental organisations in Moldova

Can the Commission tell us which types of programme, project and/or budget lines can be called upon to support the activities in Moldova of NGOs set up under Moldovan law?

Can it also state the criteria that the NGOs must meet before they can apply for subsidies from the European Union?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(29 July 2003)

The Commission is committed to supporting non-governmental organisations (NGOs) directly, through projects and grants, and to involving them whenever possible in its initiatives.

The Delegation of the Commission to Ukraine, Moldova and Belarus is running a programme for small grants to NGOs in the framework of the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights. In addition, the Institutional Building Partnership Programme (IBPP) is designed to strengthen NGOs and other local initiatives through partnership with similar bodies in the Union and neighbour countries. Refinancing the IBPP is foreseen in the draft Action Programme (AP) 2003 for Moldova.

The draft AP 2003 for Moldova also envisages:

— a project to support civil society which aims to increase the influence of civil society in political life and to provide well-targeted support to the social sector through civil society organisations;

— four different projects will be implemented with the Council of Europe, aimed at strengthening the protection of human rights in Moldova. The projects cover training of judges, lawyers, prosecutors, trade unions, NGOs and law students in human rights. They also cover assistance in the implementation of the Revised European Social Charter and assistance in strengthening local democracy.

The Community is furthermore providing financial support through the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) for actions against trafficking in human beings and women, and tackling the various aspects of drug use and trafficking. Both actions have a heavy involvement of NGOs.

As regards the conditions for obtaining grants, NGOs have to satisfy the eligibility criteria set out in specific detail in each call for proposals. These criteria are announced together with the call for proposals, are transparent, and accessible to all potential applicants. They generally include conditions on the status (non-profit-making), geographic location, trade record and financial viability.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/145

(2004/C 33 E/143)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1618/03

by José Ribeiro e Castro (UEN) to the Commission

(13 May 2003)

Subject: Structural and Cohesion Funds in Portugal (repeat question)

In Written Question P-0976/03 (1) I asked the Commission about a significant utterance by Mr Verheugen to the effect that the Commission would propose that the level of support for Portugal in the forthcoming financial package should remain more or less the same. It was natural to believe that his words reflected a consensus within the Commission. Although it was supposed to provide the necessary information, the answer failed in the end to address the key question, which I am therefore repeating.

In reality, what Mr Barnier said fell substantially short of the promise that Mr Verheugen made in Portugal. The written reply stated merely that a decision had still to be reached in the discussions on future Community cohesion policy after 2006 and the proposals on the financial perspective for that period would be submitted at a later date. It was consequently not possible to indicate at the present time roughly how much funding might be allocated to Portugal after 2006.

Can the Commission answer the following:

— Do Mr Verheugen's and Mr Barnier's attitudes to this vital matter amount to the same thing?

— Do the views expressed by Mr Verheugen — as referred to in the above-mentioned question — stem from an agreement within the Commission?

— Even though it might not wish to specify approximate amounts for the period after 2006, does not the Commission have at least a general idea at this stage of what it intends to propose, as Mr Verheugen gave clearly to understand?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(5 August 2003)

As mentioned in the answer to the Honourable Member's Written Question P-0976/03, the future shape of Community cohesion policy after 2006 is still being discussed within the Institution.

The interview of the Member of the Commission responsible for Enlargement, and in particular the statement mentioned by the Honourable Member, was variously reported in several Portuguese newspapers (Diário Económico, Correio da Manhã, etc.). He was in fact referring to the well-known position of the Commission that the so-called ‘statistical effect’ of enlargement should be taken into account for the period 2007-2013, to avoid penalising certain regions of the present Member States that otherwise would not be eligible for Objective 1 support in an enlarged Union.

In the third cohesion report at the end of 2003, the Commission will present its economic and social proposals for future cohesion policy after 2006. The financial perspective proposals for the post-2006 period will be presented later. The Commission can already inform the Honourable Member that it will be seeking a fair and meaningful solution for the regions that will suffer the ‘statistical effect’ due to the fall in the Community's average per-capita gross domestic product (GDP).

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/592

(2004/C 84 E/0668)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0469/04

by Richard Corbett (PSE) to the Commission

(23 February 2004)

Subject: Aviation health warnings

In view of the growing evidence of health risks involved with flying (deep vein thrombosis, exposure to cosmic radiation, airborne infections etc.), does the Commission agree that safety warnings announced on aircraft prior to take-off should be extended to include an appropriate health warning?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(29 March 2004)

The Commission agrees that air carriers have an important part to play, alongside health authorities, in informing passengers about the possibility of developing deep vein thrombosis. As a precautionary measure, they should warn their passengers of the risk of deep vein thrombosis, of predisposing factors to the illness and of preventive measures to take before flying and on-board the aircraft. The Vice-president of the Commission in charge of Energy and Transport has written to Community carriers urging them to give passengers such information and intends now to write again to see what each airline has done. However, the Commission considers that it is for airlines to decide on the most effective means of getting the message across rather than for public authorities to lay it down.

The Commission is financing research on the strength and nature of the link between air travel and deep vein thrombosis, the results of which will be available in mid-2005. This should considerably advance understanding of the condition and of what should be done to prevent it. It is also supporting research on conditions in aircraft cabins, including air quality, on which possible measures could be based.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/914

(2004/C 84 E/1010)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0923/04

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(26 March 2004)

Subject: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowance Trading Scheme

Can the Commission indicate why the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowance Trading Scheme has been designed in such a way that substitution of primary carbon fuels by non-biomass alternatives derived from waste materials are not accorded either credit or neutrality within the terms of the scheme but are instead treated as though they are primary carbon fuels, thereby restricting their potential use and the likelihood that they will be moved up the waste hierarchy so as to facilitate energy recovery from them?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2004)

The atmosphere makes no distinction how carbon emissions arise. When installations covered by Directive 2003/87/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC (1) burn forms of waste, the resulting emissions are treated in the same way as emissions from a fossil fuel.

However, the incentive for operators to switch to fuels with low carbon content is inherent to any Carbon dioxide (C02) emissions trading scheme. Therefore, as long as a waste fuel has a lower carbon content than a primary carbon fuel there will be an incentive to fuel-switch, and thus such waste fuels will move up the waste hierarchy.

(1) OJ L 275, 25.10.2003.