ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1664/98

by David Hallam (PSE) to the Commission

(29 May 1998)

Subject: Intervention price for white sugar

The Explanatory Memorandum of the Commission's 1998/1999 farm price proposals, presented on 4 February 1998, indicates that agricultural price indices have declined in real terms by 48 % since 1980, in line with falling input prices. Over the same period, the intervention price for white sugar, as published in the Official Journal, has increased by 45 % despite falling labour and energy costs, and the continuing rationalization of the sugar industry.

In the light of this contradictory trend, can the Commission explain why its 1998/1999 farm price proposals do not include a reduction of the intervention price for white sugar?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 June 1998)

The seemingly contradictory trend identified by the Honourable Member between the evolution of the agricultural price indices on the one hand and the intervention price for white sugar on the other hand is only an illusion and is due to the comparison between the former price expressed in real terms and the latter price expressed in nominal terms.

When applying the same methodological treatment to the two series of prices, i.e. using the same deflator method also on the intervention prices for white sugar in order to express them both in real terms, it becomes clear that they have followed the same evolution between 1980 and now. Both prices have declined by about 45 %. Based on this reasoning, the Commission's proposal for the 1998/1999 intervention price for white sugar can be seen to be justified.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1862/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(16 June 1998)

Subject: Implementation of the telecommunications programme in Greece

The answer to my Written Question E-3538/96(1) on the OTE telecommunications programme for Greece states that the take-up rates for 1994-1995 and 1996 were 106 % and 37 %, respectively. According to press reports there is a danger that funding may be lost owing to delays in the implementation of projects under the programme.

Will the Commission say what factors have precipitated a decline in the take-up rate which was initially very high? What is the take-up rate per subprogramme at present? What measures has it taken - or does it intend to take in future - to ensure that the programme is implemented smoothly?

Answer given by Ms Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(30 July 1998)

So far the take-up rates for the telecommunications operational programme (OP) for Greece for 1994-1999 are 90 % of the commitment appropriations and 65 % of the payment appropriations.

However, the Honourable Member refers to the answer given to written question E-3538/96, where the figures given related to expenditure in Greece in the first years of implementation. In terms of expenditure on the ground, 57 % of the budget for the 1994-99 period has been taken up so far. The take-up rate per subprogramme is as follows:

>TABLE>

Despite a slight delay, therefore, it is not true to say that there is a low take-up rate for the OP as a whole, but there is an imbalance in the progress of the subprogrammes.

The Commission has already attracted the attention of the Greek authorities first to the need to promote all OP measures under the Community Support Framework and second to the real need finally to bring the national regulatory framework into line with European legislation in the telecommunications sector, as planned under subprogramme 1.

With regard to fluctuations in the rate of implementing the OP, these are largely down to the timetables for concluding the various network infrastructure contracts between OTE (the Greek telecommunications operator) and its equipment suppliers.

(1) OJ C 105, 3.4.1997, p.85.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2052/98

by Carlos Lage (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: Porto metro

The city of Porto is the centre of an agglomeration which has a population of 1 200 000 and in which traffic problems have worsened dramatically in recent years. The construction of an underground rail network has therefore become a crucial and urgent issue. Now that the relevant studies, projects and invitations to tender have been completed, the metro is ready to start. Nevertheless, complaints made to the Commission by a consortium which was passed over in the final stage of the tender procedure are paralysing the commencement of work on the project, much to the detriment of the population.

Why is the Commission taking such a long time to come to a decision on this urgent matter? When does it expect to reach a final decision? Is it aware of the damage being caused by its slowness in taking decisions?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(17 August 1998)

The Commission is fully aware of the importance for the citizens of Oporto of the construction of an underground rail network in their city.

Nevertheless, as guardian of the Treaties, it is responsible for ensuring that Community law is correctly applied and therefore has to investigate any complaints it receives alleging breaches of Community law.

Where Community funds may be involved, as is the case here, the Commission is moreover under a particular obligation to see that they are used properly.

It has taken care at all times to adopt an appropriate course of action in this matter, despite its complexity.

In the light of the information it obtained at a bilateral meeting held in Portugal on 16 June 1998, at which the matter was discussed with the Portuguese authorities, the Commission found that there had been no breach of Community law and accordingly decided to close the case.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2091/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(10 July 1998)

Subject: Suspension of end-of-service payments to the financial police

The Prodi government has suspended the payment of end-of-service lump sums from the financial police assistance fund. In some cases lump sums have been paid to some until the available funds were used up and not to others, who have thus been arbitrarily deprived of their rights

Often, despite the existence of an Italian state decree suspending them, payments have been made so that there has been a serious difference of treatment between citizens.

1. Does the Commission not consider the Prodi government's decision to suspend payment of an acquired right such as the end-of-service lump sum to be arbitrary?

2. Does it not consider the payment of end-of-service lump sums to only a lucky few and not to others with the same rights to be discriminatory?

3. Does it not think it should intervene vis-à-vis the Italian authorities to ensure impartial treatment of citizens if nothing else?

4. What is its general reaction?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(10 September 1998)

Compensation to workers in connection with the end or cancellation of a contract or employment relationship is currently not covered by Community legislation. The national legislation of each Member State determines the amounts of and procedures for the payment of such compensation.

The decision of the Italian Government concerning the implementation of the "Trattamento di Fine Rapporto" is exclusively a matter for the national authorities and, in particular, for the relevant courts before which any question of law in this field should be raised.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0996/98

by María Sornosa Martínez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 April 1998)

Subject: Toxicity of PVC toys

The European Union has recently confirmed that soft PVC toys are toxic. The European Union's Committee on Toxicity, Ecotoxicity and the Environment has acknowledged that exposing children to the three softening agents added to the toys - DINP, DEHP and DNOP phthalats, is dangerously close to the recommended limits, exactly as found by the Greenpeace investigation of PVC toys.

Since it has been shown that children can directly ingest toxic chemical substances from PVC toys,

1. what steps does the Commission intend to take in this matter?

2. does the Commission believe that lower levels of additives or toxins should be aimed at, or does it think that

3. the ban on PVC toys should be made effective by promoting alternatives which do not require the use of softening agents?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1401/98

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Commission

(7 May 1998)

Subject: Cyberpolice

According to press reports, a form of "cyberpolice" is being set up in the United States. Its purpose is to counteract the threat posed by hackers and their ability to use their personal computers to penetrate protected databases. There are also increasing reports of hacker activity in Europe, where the threat posed is rising with the growing economic interconnectedness made possible by the Internet.

1. Is the Commission also making efforts to set up any such form of Europe-wide "cyberpolice"?

2. If so, what progress has been recorded and with what substantive results?

Answer given by Mrs Gradin on behalf of the Commission

(16 July 1998)

The Commission is not considering the creation of a "cyberpolice" or any other kind of Europe-wide police force.

The Commission is, however, aware of the seriousness of the threats posed by hackers described by the Honourable Member and other type of improper use of computer networks technology and it is, in the context of the group of eight most industrialised nations (G8) and of the Union as well as in the framework of the Council of Europe, looking at ways to ensuring an efficient public protection, in particular against the use of new means of telecommunication for the benefit of criminal organisations.

In this context, and following on a recommendation contained in the Union action plan to combat organised crime, the Commission launched a study on the subject of criminality liked to high technology. The findings and eventual follow-up of this study are currently under discussion in the Commission. The study is found under address http://www.qlinks.net/comdocs/washcomm.htm. The G8 communiqué is found under http://www2.echo.lu/legal/en/comcrime/sieber.html.

For further information the Commission would also refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written question No 1510/98 by Mr Robles Piquer(1).

(1) See page 38.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1987/98

by Nikitas Kaklamanis (UPE) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: Surveillance and telecommunications networks in Europe

There have been an increasing number of allegations in Europe that the American secret services are bugging European telephone, fax and telecommunications networks.

In particular, the European Parliament's Committee on Legal Affairs and Citizens' Rights has debated the bugging of fax, telephone and E-mail in Europe; the report it drew up on this matter states that the information gathered in this way is passed on via satellite to Fort Meade in Maryland, USA, where it is processed by CIA experts. There are also the familiar allegations that during the GATT negotiations, the American side had received information about the EU's position, having gained access to the Commission's data-processing system.

Will the Commission say what measures have been taken so far to prohibit the access of secret services to confidential information, given that this is an issue which involves the security of telecommunications in Europe and poses enormous problems both for ordinary citizens who feel insecure when they use the telephone or computer, and for the administration of the EU which seems to be the victim of constant surveillance and the bugging targeted at valuable information?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 1998)

The Commission has no evidence of any of these allegations.

It nonetheless remains vigilant in defence of Community interests and continues to make stringent efforts to improve the security of its data networks, especially as regards e-mail communications. The Commission condemns any and all attempts to breach the confidentiality of information held or transmitted by the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1988/98

by David Bowe (PSE) to the Commission

(30 June 1998)

Subject: Safety of cigarette lighters and matches

At present, European voluntary safety standards exist for lighters (EN ISO 9994 of February 1996) and for matches (EN 1783 of February 1997). Most European cigarette lighter and match manufacturers comply with the standards.

The Commission has mandated the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) to look at new and stricter safety standards. However, is the Commission aware that the current standards are not observed by many third country manufacturers, which leads to unfair competition and, more importantly, a safety risk for European consumers? Furthermore, is the Commission prepared to make existing standards mandatory in order to protect consumers from dangerous cigarette lighters and matches? If not, why not?
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1658/98

by Edouard des Places (I-EDN) to the Commission

(18 May 1998)

Subject: Powers of interprofessional bodies regarding management of markets

Under Article 47 of the agricultural guideline bill, which will shortly be submitted to the National Assembly, the French Government has provided for specific regulatory powers to be allocated to agricultural interprofessional organizations relating to products subject to a common organization of the market (COM).

The bill specifies that

"measures taken by an interprofessional organization specific to an officially designated quality product aimed at bringing supply into line with demand shall, if unanimously adopted by sectoral bodies, be deemed to comply with the 2nd paragraph of Article 10 of Order No 86-1243 of 1 December 1986 on freedom of prices and competition.

Such measures may include no competition restrictions other than the following:

- a coordinated forward plan of production based on outlets,

- a plan to improve product quality leading directly to a limitation of production volume,

- a restriction on production capacities."

Will the Commission state whether, in its view:

1. such provisions relating to the management of markets are the responsibility of the European Union or Member States?

2. on this basis, national authorities may delegate their powers in this area to national or regional interprofessional organizations?

3. such provisions comply with the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Communities?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(15 June 1998)

The French authorities notified to the Commission on 13 May 1998 the general agricultural bill that they plan to present to Parliament in the next few weeks.

The Commission is at present examining the entire bill with reference to Community law, including the provisions on interprofessional organisations to which the Honourable Member refers.

Given the short time that has elapsed since notification the Commission has not yet formulated its views on this wide-ranging bill. When it has done so the Honourable Member's individual questions will be answered.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0681/98

by Florus Wijsenbeek (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 March 1998)

Subject: Cabotage in Italy

Is the Commission aware that the capacity rules, whereby foreign carriers can become established in Italy but cannot obtain a licence immediately, will continue in force on a provisional basis even after cabotage is permitted on 1 July 1998?

Is the Commission aware that - in addition to the capacity rules - there are still compulsory tariffs for national transport, and hence for cabotage, too, in Italy?

Does the Commission feel that such systems are in accordance with the principle of the free movement of goods in the European Union?

Does the Commission intend to exert pressure on the Italian authorities to liberalize this obsolete policy in the spirit of Community thinking?

If so, how?

If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(25 May 1998)

The Commission is aware that Italy still maintains capacity rules for carriers established in Italy who want to carry out national transport in Italy. A foreign carrier, after becoming established in Italy, may therefore face difficulties in obtaining a licence in a similar manner to a "new" Italian carrier. Community rules of non-discrimination could only be invoked if foreign carriers had more difficulties than "new" Italian carriers. A Member State seeking to maintain capacity rules in national transport will find that they become largely ineffective - and even discriminatory against its own national carriers - after 1 July 1998 when, provided that they have a Community licence for international transport, non-resident carriers can carry out cabotage free of quantitive restrictions in the Member State concerned.

Council Regulation (EEC) 4059/89 abolished tariffs for international transport between Member States as from 1 January 1990 but tariffs for national transport can still be set by the national authority. The Italian tariff rules for national transport are also applicable to cabotage in Italy since Article 6.1(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) 3118/93 states that the rules of the "host" Member State apply for "rates and conditions governing the transport contract".

The Commission considers that the abolition of quantitive restrictions on cabotage as from 1 July 1998 will be a further step in the opening up of national markets of individual Member States thus promoting the free movement of goods in the Community.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1940/98

by Wilfried Telkämper (V) to the Commission

(11 June 1998)

Subject: Joint declaration on EU-New Zealand relations

1. Is Commissioner Sir Leon Brittan prepared to instruct his services to present to the Council a draft of a joint declaration on EU-New Zealand relations, as he promised to do in February under pressure from the President of the Council and the New Zealand Foreign Minister?

2. If not, is the Commission's failure to take action in this area an indication that it intends to leave its right of initiative to others in the future?

3. Does the Commission see any reason why New Zealand should be treated differently from Australia with which a joint declaration was signed in mid-1997?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(25 June 1998)

1. The Commission has never promised to submit a draft Community-New Zealand joint declaration to the Council.

2. In any event, the Commission does not possess an exclusive right of initiative to table draft joint declarations to the Council. There are therefore no grounds for inferring that the Commission is surrendering any of its rights.

3. In general terms, the Commission considers that each separate relationship between the Community and a third country should be developed on its own merits and according to the particular needs in question and not merely in comparison to other relationships with other third countries.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1886/98

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

(16 June 1998)

Subject: Convergence report

The Commission's document COM(98) 1999 (report on progress towards convergence and recommendation with a view to the transition to the third stage of economic and monetary union) states that on 23 October 1995 the Council adopted Regulation 2494/95(1) setting the legal base for the establishment of a harmonized methodology for compiling consumer price indices in the Member States.

This regulation proposed a two-stage harmonization:

1. the production of a set of interim indices of consumer prices (IICPs), based on existing national CIPs, adjusted so as to make the coverage of goods and services as similar as possible;

2. the construction of harmonized indices of consumer prices (HICPs).

The same report states that the HICPs may be used for drawing up the following aggregate indices at European level: the European Index of Consumer Prices (EICP), the European Economic Area Index of Consumer Prices (EEAICP) and the future Monetary Union Index of Consumer Prices.

Can the Commission provide information on the EICP for 1997?

(1) OJ L 257, 27.10.1995, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2441/98

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 July 1998)

Subject: Disposal of sludge from the Psyttaleia sewage treatment plant

Sludge from the Psyttaleia sewage treatment plant is provisionally being transported to the Ano Liosia waste tip, until a special site can be set up to bury it in accordance with the relevant health regulations. Owing to suspensions in the operation of the waste tip over the last few years, the sludge has been dumped at sea, a practice which creates an unbearable and suffocating atmosphere in the region of Perama; in addition the Psyttaleia plant is not hidden from view by any "optical barrier".

What measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the disposal of the sludge from the above plant complies with Directive 91/271/EEC(1) concerning urban waste water treatment, and in particular Article 14 thereof?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 1998)

Article 14(2) of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 concerning urban waste-water treatment, as amended by Commission Directive 98/15/EC(2) of 27 February 1998, requires the competent authorities or appropriate bodies in the Member States to ensure that, before 31 December 1998, the disposal of sludge from urban waste water treatment plants is subject to general rules or registration or authorisation.

Paragraph 3 of that Article requires Member States to ensure that, by 31 December 1998, the disposal of sludge to surface waters is phased out.

From the start of 1999, the Commission will ask for the necessary information on the disposal of sludge from urban waste water treatment plants, including the plant located on the island of Psyttalia which treats waste water from the Athens urban area. After examining the information received, the Commission will, if necessary, initiate infringement proceedings against any Member States which have failed to comply with the abovementioned Community legislation.

(1) OJ L 135, 30.5.1991, p. 40.

(2) OJ L 67, 7.3.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1810/98

by Peter Truscott (PSE) to the Commission

(11 June 1998)

Subject: Structural Fund

Could the Commission please state to what extent projects under the new Objective 3 will be required to meet criteria for sustainable development, especially in terms of environmental sustainability?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 1998)

Article 1 of the proposed general regulation on the structural funds(1) and Article 1 of the proposed European social fund (ESF) regulation1 set out the mission of the ESF and make specific reference to sustainable development as well as to protection and improvement of the environment, alongside other policy concerns, as part of the policy context in which the ESF must operate.

The guidelines on objective 3, which are required under Article 9.4 of the general regulation, will therefore take this legal requirement into account. The precise form which this requirement will take will be determined once the regulations have been adopted and in the light of the exact provisions laid down in those regulations.

(1) OJ C 176, 9.6.1998.