ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/90

(2004/C 84 E/0111)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3716/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update concerning the funds for the Altener II programme for the municipality of Pistoia

With reference to question E-0970/03 (1), in which the Commission was asked whether the municipality of Pistoia (Italy) had submitted projects and obtained funds under the Altener II programme, the Commission replied to the effect that a proposal had been submitted but had not been accepted.

Can the Commission provide information on the reasons for this rejection and state whether any other projects have been submitted since then?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 169.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/330

(2004/C 78 E/0347)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3883/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(16 December 2003)

Subject: Alcatel Italia: Community funding for telecommunications

From a restructuring plan presented by the management of Alcatel Italia S.p.A. it emerges that two Italian plants will be closed down, although they are both at the forefront of telecom technology. However, there are a number of Community programmes to support technological innovation, such as the @-Europe programme, which provides for the possibility of subsidising investments for broad-band facilities in depressed areas by means of the ESF. Furthermore, in the context of measures to promote the development of broad band, investments of EUR 1 680 million over five years are envisaged, to be financed partly by European funds and partly by means of project-financing.

In view of all this, can the Commission say:

1. to what extent Alcatel Italia may benefit from such funding;

2. to what extent it may benefit from funding provided under the Galileo project and the Sixth Framework Programme for Research;

3. what other future financial instruments are envisaged for telecoms?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2004)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/821

(2004/C 78 E/0874)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3513/03

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) and Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Subject: Water

Could the Commission say whether any (and, if so, how many) of the Member Sates have so far complied with Article 24 of Directive 2000/60/EC (1)? Will the Commission be able to report to Parliament by January 2004? In 2002, did the Commission submit to the Regulatory Committee the plan referred to in Article 19 of the Directive, and what effect has that plan had as regards a possible resolution — or, indeed, action — in respect of the rules relating to water?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(19 January 2004)

Article 24 of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy, requires the transposition of the Directive into national legislation by 22 December 2003. The 10 Acceding Countries will have to complete transposition of the Directive by the date of accession.

The Commission will report on the state of transposition and notification shortly after the deadlines have passed. The Commission will initiate legal proceedings on ‘non-communication’ for those countries which do not give notification in time.

Article 19 paragraph 1 of the Water Framework Directive requires the Commission to inform the Committee established under Article 21 of an ‘indicative plan of measures having an impact on water legislation which intends to propose in the near future, including any emerging from the proposals, control measures and strategies developed under Article 16’. On 6 May 2003, the Commission reported to the first meeting of the Committee on the state of development of the Daughter Directives on priority substances (Article 16) and groundwater (Article 17). The documents for the Committee meeting were sent to Parliament through the regular transmission routes.

In addition to the formal reports to the Committee, the Commission is working closely with the Member States, the Candidate and European Economic Area (EEA) Countries, stakeholders, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and other organisations, including the European Environment Agency, in the development of new water policies through the Expert Advisory Fora which were established in 2001. In this respect, the Expert Advisory Forum on Groundwater successfully finalised its work in June 2003 and enabled the Commission to present its proposal on 19 September 2003 (2).

Six meetings of the Expert Advisory Forum on Priority Substances have already taken place from March 2001 to November 2003. The preparatory work is still ongoing and the next meeting is scheduled for 8 March 2004.

(1) OJ L 327, 22.12.2000, p. 1.

(2) COM(2003) 550 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/447

(2004/C 78 E/0469)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2996/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 October 2003)

Subject: Standardisation of computer dates

Will the Commission state whether there is any EU legislation that sets a standard format for dates in computer software?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(24 November 2003)

The format for dates in computer software has not been regulated by Community legislation.

However, in 1992 the European Committee For Standardization (1) has adopted ISO 8601 under the standard EN 28601 to end the traditional confusion involving periods, slashes, the order of the numbers, and other date formats formerly used throughout Europe.

(1) http://www.cenorm.be/
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/479

(2004/C 84 E/0555)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1886/03

by Emmanouil Bakopoulos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 May 2003)

Subject: Iraqi cultural heritage

According to press reports, the Baghdad National Museum and the Mosul Museum have been primary targets for looting. To date, over 170 000 ancient exhibits have been stolen.

What steps will the Commission take to safeguard Iraq's cultural heritage and to locate the stolen exhibits?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2003)

The Commission is deeply concerned by the looting and the destruction of a large number of archaeological treasures in the National Archaeological Museum of Baghdad. The Commission supports the views expressed by Unesco in the call issued on 17 April 2003, which deplored the extensive damages to the cultural heritage of Iraq, and recommended measures to stop the traffic of cultural objects exported illicitly.

The Commission is confident that all measures will be taken by the coalition forces, as present the responsible authority in Iraq, so that further destruction is avoided. In this respect, the Commission is preparing a draft regulation to implement the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1483, which repeals the sanctions imposed on Iraq trade. The Commission is considering the possibility of introducing a ban on the import of cultural objects from Iraq, according to the relevant article of Resolution 1483.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/375

(2004/C 88 E/0381)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1821/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(2 June 2003)

Subject: Sausage meat

Is the Commission satisfied that the labelling of the ingredients of sausages makes clear to consumers what they are eating, particularly as regards fat content? What measures have been taken now that the food industry has developed new products to ensure that fats remain solid when cooked to make clear to consumers that the fat content of economy sausages has increased?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(10 July 2003)

The labelling of sausages intended to be delivered as such to the ultimate consumer is subject to the rules laid down by Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 (1), as amended in particular by Commission Directive 2001/101/EC of 26 November 2001 (2) and Commission Directive 2002/86/EC of 6 November 2002 (3).

Directive 2000/13/EC (Article 7.2) provides that the quantity of the ingredient which characterises the foodstuff must be stated. In the case of sausages, therefore, it is the quantity of meat which must be stated.

Although there is no obligation to indicate the quantity of fat present in the meat or present in the end product, there is a maximum limit of fat that meat may contain, for example 30 % fat in pigmeat and 25 % fat in beef and veal (Annex to Directive 2001/101/EC).

Moreover, if these maximum fat limits are exceeded, the meat content must be adjusted downwards and the presence of fat must be indicated in the list ingredients.

Pursuant to Directive 2002/86/EC, the labelling of the products concerned must be in conformity with the rules indicated above with effect from 1 July 2003.

(1) Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the labelling, presentation and advertising of foodstuffs, OJ L 109, 6.5.2000.

(2) Commission Directive 2001/101/EC of 26 November 2001 amending Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 310, 28.11.2001.

(3) Commission Directive 2002/86/EC of 6 November 2002 amending Directive 2001/101/EC as regards the date from which trade in products not in conformity with Directive 2000/13/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council is prohibited, OJ L 305, 7.11.2002.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/251

(2004/C 84 E/0298)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3829/03

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

(12 December 2003)

Subject: The milk quota situation after enlargement: Galicia's production allowance

The dairy sector in Galicia is seriously concerned about what situation it will find itself in after the enlargement of the EU. If, as a consequence of what was agreed at the time of Spain's entry into the Union, the current production quota for Spain, which has 40 million inhabitants, is 6 million tonnes, making a much smaller quantity per inhabitant than in the rest of the Union, its relative position may become much worse, since the accession countries will have a global quota of 18 million tonnes for a population of 75 million. In Spain Galicia — the most important dairy-farming region — will become the most disadvantaged region, since its overall quota will be no more than one third of that quantity.

Are these the actual figures for the accession countries? What is the production allowance for each of the accession countries and what is the ratio between that and population? What criteria were used to determine the quotas for each country? What possibility is there that in view of all this the production quota for Spain and Galicia will be improved, considering, moreover, that production is now not even enough to cover the needs of the Spanish domestic market?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 February 2004)

All Member States' national reference quantities have been determined on the basis of their actual production over a specific period. This approach, taken when the milk quota scheme began in 1984 and on the occasion of subsequent enlargements, including the present one, avoids discrimination between producers by not using population and internal consumption as criteria for setting milk quotas.

The national reference quantities allocated to the new Member States were determined country by country on the basis of production in 2000 or 2001 or the average for a three-year period from 1997. These production figures were then increased by 1 % giving a total of 18 327 895 tonnes for the ten countries.

Each country's figure is:

(in tonnes) Czech Republic 2 682 143 Estonia 624 483 Cyprus 142 200 Latvia 695 395 Lithuania 1 646 939 Hungary 1 947 280 Malta 48 698 Poland 8 964 017 Slovenia 560 424 Slovakia 1 013 316

Because of the very high rates of on-farm consumption, which is not included in milk quotas, in the acceding countries, the Act of Accession includes a special reserve of 671 418 tonnes for them (Malta and Cyprus excluded), to be released from 1 April 2006 onwards in line with whatever falls may occur in their on-farm consumption. A decision on release of the reserve will be taken by the Commission on the basis of reports from these countries to be made by 31 December 2005.

Beginning from 1 April 2000 Spain received a 550 000 tonne increase in two instalments decided on by the Council as part of Agenda 2000. No further increase for her is planned at present.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/625

(2004/C 78 E/0660)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3671/03

by Joost Lagendijk (Verts/ALE) and Arie Oostlander (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 December 2003)

Subject: Further cooperation in the fight against terrorism

Turkey recently suffered terrorist attacks on two synagogues on 15 November and on the British Consulate and the HSBC headquarters in Istanbul on 20 November 2003.

Does the Commission see any further possibility of extending cooperation with Turkey in the fight against terrorism, given that these attacks could impede the reform process in Turkey?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2004)

The Commission is already providing assistance in a number of the areas defined by the United Nations (UN) as essential in the fight against terrorism, notably capacity building for the police, border control, customs and immigration services. In addition, the co-operation with Turkey in the fight against terrorism will be further extended through a twinning project which will start in early 2004 to strengthen the Financial Crimes Investigation Board (MASAK). This body has administrative, regulatory and supervisory powers concerning the identification of suspicious transactions related to money laundering and the financing of terrorism.

The twinning will analyse current Turkish legislation on money laundering, confiscation and forfeiture of proceeds related to financing of terrorism and draft proposals for improvements, will develop co-operation between all agencies involved in the fight against money laundering, and will train personnel.

A further twinning entitled ‘Strengthening the struggle against money laundering, financial sources of crime and the financing of terrorism’ with the Turkish National police will commence in late 2004. This twinning is intended to eliminate any legal or practical difficulties in the freezing and confiscation of terrorist assets, to assist the Turkish authorities to provide the widest possible range of assistance to other countries' law enforcement and regulatory authorities for terrorist financing investigations and to ensure that entities, in particular non-profit organisations, cannot be misused to finance terrorism.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/57

(2004/C 84 E/0064)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3333/03

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(6 November 2003)

Subject: North Korean refugees in China

Is the Commission aware of the current situation in China of North Korean refugees being deported back to the DPRK?

What measures are being taken by the Commission to address this state of affairs? Has it raised this issue with the Chinese government and reminded them of their obligations under the 1951 UN Convention on the status of refugees?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-3214/03 and P-3333/03

given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 November 2003)

North Korea is currently a major concern for the international community including the Union. The Commission has various channels to meet representatives of the North Korean Government and to put forward its concerns. Human rights issues, including the situation of North Korean refugees on the border with China, are systematically raised during these regular political contacts. It has expressed to the North Korean authorities its concerns about the treatment of these people once returned by China to the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea (DPRK). The Commission urged the DPRK to respect the fundamental rights of these citizens.

At the recent session of the United Nations Commission of Human Rights in Geneva (UNHCR), the Union tabled a resolution on the human rights situation in the DPRK. This was adopted by the UNHCR on 16 April 2003 and included a mention of the North Korean refugees in China.

The Union has consistently, within its political dialogue with China, expressed concern about the forcible repatriations of North Korean asylum — seekers to the DPRK. The issue has also been addressed within the Union — China Human Rights Dialogue. The Union will again raise the matter during the upcoming round of this dialogue, on 27/28 November 2003 in Beijing, China.
2.

Is the Commission also aware that these flats, which were initially rented out to residents by the State, were sold to the occupants before it became known in Hungary that a clean-up operation is required in the interests of both the survival of the residents and the obligation to comply with the Community ‘acquis’ but that the removal of one square metre of asbestos costs between EUR 160 and 190, which is more than a resident's average weekly salary?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/900

(2004/C 78 E/0951)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4040/03

by Glyn Ford (PSE), Kathalijne Buitenweg (Verts/ALE), Claude Moraes (PSE) and Anna Terrón i Cusí (PSE) to the Commission

(12 January 2004)

Subject: MEDEA Programme and Article 13 of the Treaty

Will the Commission outline its plans for incorporating the concerns of Article 13 of the Treaty in the MEDEA Programme? Is the Commission aware how far behind it is here compared to other areas of its work?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(12 February 2004)

The MEDEA programme referred to in the question was launched by the Andalusian autonomous government (Junta de Andalucia) as part of the Euromed Audiovisual I Regional Programme. Its purpose is to devise Euro-Mediterranean audiovisual projects. MEDEA was selected by the Commission in 2000 and its three-year funding has been extended up to September 2004 without any change to the Community contribution.

The eligibility criteria set out in the call for proposals in the MEDEA project (point 4) are in keeping with the principles enshrined in Article 13 of the EC Treaty on the measures necessary ‘to combat discrimination based on the grounds of sex, race or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation’.

Point 4 of the call for proposals open to the 27 partners states that ‘ … special attention will be paid to projects that promote common values, as a statement of the identity of the area, creating an awareness of their contribution to international material and ethical progress, such as the fight against racism and xenophobia, intolerance, mistrust, stereotypes and prejudices; and promote activities to protect young people and human dignity.’
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/817

(2004/C 78 E/0867)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3475/03

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(24 November 2003)

Subject: Protection of the Caretta caretta turtle

Despite repeated expressions of concern regarding the Caretta caretta turtle in Zakynthos, and the decision regarding the operation of the Zakynthos marine park, the situation, according to reliable information, appears to be worsening rather than improving. Following the Commission's recent contacts, visits and inspections can it indicate what results were obtained and what action it intends to take to ensure progress regarding protection for the turtle and the practical functioning of the marine park?
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/93

(2004/C 84 E/0120)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3728/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(10 December 2003)

Subject: Update concerning the funds for the SAVE II programme for the municipality of Pistoia

With reference to question E-0970/03 (1), in which the Commission was asked whether the municipality of Pistoia (Italy) had submitted projects and obtained funds under the SAVE II programme, the Commission replied on 25 April 2003 to the effect that no proposal had been submitted.

Can the Commission state whether, since then and up to the present, it has received any SAVE II projects from that municipality?

(1) OJ C 268 E, 7.11.2003, p. 169.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/470

(2004/C 84 E/0544)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1511/03

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(28 April 2003)

Subject: Financial corrections

In reply to point 2.57 of the Court of Auditors Annual report for 2001 (1), the Commission states that ‘as part of the follow-up to the 2001 clearance process the Commission services have informed the Portuguese authorities that a financial correction of 2 % of Ifadap expenditure is proposed (EUR 2,8 million)’.

Will the Commission provide the report it based this decision?

Will it also provide the IT audit report of Portuguese paying agencies mentioned in point 2.59 of the Court of Auditors report, as well as any other audit reports which the Commission carried out in this connection?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(16 June 2003)

The financial correction proposed by the Commission in the case of the Portuguese paying agency Instituto Financeiro de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento da Agricultura e Pescas (Ifadap) is based on analysis of the report by the 2001 EAGGF financial year by the certifying body (in this case the Inspectorate-General for Finance) under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1663/95 (2), and corresponds to extrapolation of the errors that body found. Commission officials visited Ifadap from 16 to 20 September 2002 to develop the extrapolation and carry out a general audit covering accreditation of Ifadap as a paying agency.

The clearance procedure in connection with imposition of this financial correction has not yet been completed.

The Court of Auditors' 2001 annual report (3) also mentions, as the Honourable Member indicates, a series of computer system audits of paying agencies. In the case of Portugal only the Nacional de Intervençao e Garanta Agricola (INGA) was included.

Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of 30 May 2001 deals with public access to Parliament, Council and Commission documents (4). The Commission will examine the Honourable Member's request under the procedure specified therein.

The Commission reminds the Honourable Member that under the Framework agreement on relations between Parliament and the Commission, signed on 5 July 2000, the President of Parliament, the chairpersons of the parliamentary committees concerned, the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents can ask for confidential information from the Commission.

(1) OJ C 295, 28.11.2002, p. 58.

(2) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1663/95 of 7 July 1995 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 729/70 regarding the procedure for the clearance of the accounts of the EAGGF Guarantee Section, OJ L 158, 8.7.1995.

(3) OJ C 295, 28.11.2002.

(4) OJ L 145, 31.5.2001.