ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 65/15

(2004/C 65 E/015)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3525/02

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 December 2002)

Subject: Obstacles to trade in the applicant countries

In July 2002, the Spanish Secretary of State for Trade processed some 20 complaints from exporters concerning trade obstacles caused by administrative and fiscal problems in the applicant countries. 48 % of the complaints related to Poland and 28 % to the Czech Republic.

The sectors most affected were agri-foods, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, textiles, plastics, wood and furniture, footwear, building materials, capital equipment and automobile parts.

What action is the Commission taking or going to take with a view to preventing such obstacles to trade from proliferating once enlargement has actually taken place?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2003)

The Commission considers the smooth functioning of the internal market from the first day of accession of the new Member States as being of primary importance. In order to ensure that this will be the case, intensive monitoring of commitments made under the relevant chapters of the acquis is already being undertaken and will continue until the date of accession. In the event that major disruptions are deemed likely, the Commission reserves the right to invoke the ‘safeguard clause’ announced by the Commission on 9 October 2002 and now accepted by all parties. The safeguard clause in the accession treaty will allow the Commission for a period of three years following accession, if it is considered necessary, to take appropriate action to ensure the orderly implementation of Community law, particularly in areas such as the Internal Market (including food safety) and Justice and Home Affairs. Decisions can be taken already prior to accession.

Upon accession the administrative and informational architecture ensuring the free movement of goods in the current Member States will become operational automatically. No transition periods have been negotiated as regards the principles of mutual recognition and Articles 28-30 of the EC Treaty. The obligations of new Member States to ensure the removal of all obstacles to the free movement of goods will therefore be the same as those currently in place amongst the fifteen existing Members. These obligations apply regardless of whether the goods concerned are covered by harmonised product legislation or not. In the event of non-respect of these obligations, the Commission will examine the possibility of infringement proceedings on the same basis as is currently the case in the Member States.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 33/11

(2004/C 33 E/011)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2750/02

by María Izquierdo Rojo (PSE) to the Commission

(1 October 2002)

Subject: Rape of Pakistani teacher Mukhtar Mai and tribal law

In June 2002, Pakistani schoolteacher Mukhtar Mai was gang-raped by four men by order of a people's court or ‘panchayať in the southern Punjab. Mai was punished because her twelve-year-old brother had had relations with a young woman from a higher caste. She was found guilty on the basis of the laws of honour’ applied by (illegal) tribal courts in Pakistan. After being raped, Mai returned to her house on foot, semi-naked, in full view of hundreds of neighbours. Two of the rapists were subsequently sentenced to death in late August.

In the light of this case and of others like it which, regrettably, are becoming increasingly common in Pakistan, what action could the European Union take to prevent this use of tribal law, which constitutes a violation of human rights? What development and cooperation projects might be used to counter these so-called ‘crimes of honour?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(16 October 2002)

The Commission is seriously concerned by human rights violations in Pakistan, in particular by the discriminatory laws of honour’ applied in some cases by Pakistani tribal juries.

In addition to official demarches to the Pakistani authorities, the Union, through the Delegation of the Commission in Pakistan, together with Member States Embassies tries to draw the attention of the Pakistani authorities to such issues at every appropriate opportunity. An official Union demarche to the Pakistani Minister of Law and Justice focusing on human rights including the issue of laws of honour is expected to take place in the coming weeks.

The Commission, as a rule, in all development projects related to education, health, agriculture and social and rural development increasingly takes account of gender equity as a cross-cutting theme so that the actual implementation of our programmes has a significant impact on issues related to gender discrimination. An example of this is the ‘Rural Social Development Programme’ (RSDP) in Pakistan which is addressing gender related issues through education, advocacy and raising of awareness through funding of small local non-governmental organisations (NGOs), which can operate in remote rural areas where codes of honour are still practised.

Moreover, Pakistan has been declared a priority country under the ‘European Initiative for Human Rights and Democracy’. In this connection, a call for proposals has been issued, with the specific objective of strengthening the capacity of civil society organisations and providing support to the legal system, emphasising on institutional strengthening and legal assistance for victims of domestic and gender-based violence.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0154/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: EU-Senegal international fisheries agreement and development cooperation

In the context of the current EU-Senegal international fisheries agreement, can the Commission indicate:

1. how much the EU has earmarked for the development of the fisheries sector in Senegal?

2. how much the EU pays by way of a financial contribution in exchange for fishing rights for the Community fleet?

3. how much Community shipowners have to pay in fees for fishing licences and fishing rights?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2003)

1. Article 2 of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Agreement between the Community and the Republic of Senegal(1) fixes the level of financial compensation at EUR 16 000 000 per year. Out of this amount, the Protocol foresees EUR 3 000 000 per year for the development of a partnership aiming at, inter alia, stock evaluations, control and surveillance of the fishing activities, improvement of the safety of the small-scale fishing vessels and institutional support for the introduction of sustainable and responsible fishing (see Article 4).

2. The financial compensation of EUR 16 000 000 per year represents the amount that is paid in exchange for the fishing opportunities made available to the Community fleet.

3. The amounts paid by the vessel owners are fixed in the Annex to the Protocol.

The licence fees for the trawlers increase progressively from year one to year four of the Protocol. The trawlers (inshore demersal fishing for fish and cephalopods) pay EUR 246/258/271/285 per gross registered ton per year. Ocean-going fish trawlers (deep-water demersal species) and bottom longliners pay EUR 157/161/165/169 per gross registered ton per year. Ocean-going freezer trawlers fishing for crustaceans except lobster pay EUR 210/215/220/226 per gross registered ton per year. Fees for half-year licences shall be 3 % higher and fees for quarterly licences 5 % higher.

The licence fees for tuna seiners are EUR 25 per tonne of tuna caught within Senegalese waters, with an advance payment of EUR 3 000. The licence fee for surface longliners is EUR 48 per tonne of tuna caught within Senegalese waters, with an advance payment of EUR 2 000. The amount of these advances are deducted from the total amount due on the basis of the catches during the preceding year, but if the amount due is less than the advance the balance is not recoverable. The pole and line vessels pay EUR 15 per tonne of tuna caught within Senegalese waters.

(1) OJ L 349, 24.12.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0156/03

by Jillian Evans (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(29 January 2003)

Subject: Maltreatment of animals at European livestock markets

Each year, thousands of animals such as horses are transported from Eastern European owners and dealers to European Union countries, in particular to the more

southern countries. These animals are often maltreated, beaten and tortured and are not transported according to EU animal welfare laws. Why is the ruling on sentiency not being used and enforced in these instances to prohibit such cruel and inhumane treatment of animals?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2003)

Animals are recognised as sentient beings in the Protocol to the EC Treaty on the protection and welfare of animals and, furthermore, that text requires the Community and the Member States are to pay full regard to animal welfare in formulating and implementing the Community policies on agriculture, transport, the internal market and research.

The principal Community requirements for the protection of animals during transport are contained in Council Directive 91/628/EEC as amended by Directive 95/29/EC(1). This Directive applies only in the territory of the Union as presently constituted, although the candidate countries for membership are currently in the process of aligning their legislation with its requirements.

The Commission recognises that the transport of horses from Central and Eastern European countries for slaughter in the Community has, in the past, given rise for legitimate concerns in relation to animal welfare. The Commission's Food and Veterinary Office (FVO) has highlighted these concerns in a number of its mission reports. Furthermore, animal welfare groups have frequently provided information concerning alleged breaches of the requirements of the Directive.

The Commission has intervened vigorously with the Member States concerned when these matters have been brought to its attention. More recent FVO mission reports have noted some improvement in the condition in which horses arrive in southern Italian slaughterhouses after long journeys from Central and Eastern Europe.

The Commission is currently completing the drafting of a proposal for a new Council Regulation on the protection of animals during transport which contains a number of provisions which aim directly to improve the situation of transported horses, for example requiring lorries transporting these animals to be divided into individual compartments.

More comprehensive and stringent requirements for the registration of transporters and the training of those handling animals should also help to improve standards of animal welfare during journeys.

Last but not least, the accession of the principal countries of origin and transit of horses imported into the Community for slaughter will mean that in the majority of cases, the whole journey will be in territory where the requirements of Community law can be fully enforced.

(1) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0082/03

by Carlos Bautista Ojeda (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(23 January 2003)

Subject: Concessions on fruit and vegetables for Morocco

The Association Agreement between the EU and Morocco is currently under negotiation.

Is the Commission aware of the socio-economic repercussions which the new concessions on fruit and vegetables to be granted to Morocco will have on Andalusia, a region whose unemployment rate is among the highest in the EU?

If so, can the Commission provide information on those repercussions?

Has account been taken of the opinion of the Andalusian authorities and government in the negotiations on this new agreement?

If not, does the Commission believe that these bodies should have been consulted?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 February 2003)

An agricultural agreement between the EU and Morocco is currently under negotiation, and a new round of negotiations was held in Rabat on 14 January 2003.

Article 18 of the Euro-Mediterranean association agreement provides that, from 1 January 2000, the Community and Morocco are to assess the situation with a view to determining measures for the gradual liberalisation of their agricultural trade to create a free trade area by 2012, as stipulated in the Barcelona Declaration.

To that end, the Commission has been given clear and precise negotiating directives from the Member States, in which Spain supported the Commission.

The Commission's offer takes account of the requirements of the common agricultural policy (CAP) and the sensitivity of Mediterranean products. Community proposals on these products are almost always subject to tariff quotas and/or well-defined import schedules. The Commission's proposal is also mindful of balance in the fruit and vegetable sector and provides for targeted monitoring of the quantities imported using various control systems.

In addition, the agreement provides for control and safeguard measures protecting the Community's interests should market disturbances occur.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0139/03

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: EU-Gabon international fisheries agreement and development cooperation

In the context of the current EU-Gabon international fisheries agreement, can the Commission indicate:

1. how much the EU has earmarked for the development of the fisheries sector in Gabon?

2. how much the EU pays by way of a financial contribution in exchange for fishing rights for the Community fleet?

3. how much Community shipowners have to pay in fees for fishing licences and fishing rights?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2003)

1. Article 2 of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Agreement between the Community and the Gabonese Republic(1) fixes the level of financial compensation at EUR 1 262 500 per year. Out of this amount, the Protocol foresees EUR 883 750/year for the measures in support of the Gabonese fisheries sector specified in Article 3 of the Protocol.

2. The financial compensation of EUR 1 262 500 per year represents the amount that is paid in exchange for the fishing opportunities made available to the Community fleet.

3. The amounts paid by the vessel owners are fixed in the Annex to the Protocol.

The licence fees for the trawlers is EUR 168 per gross registered ton per vessel per year. Fees for half-year licences shall be 3 % higher and fees for quarterly licences 5 % higher.

The licence fees are EUR 25 per tonne of tuna caught within Gabonese waters. The licences are delivered after advance payments of EUR 2 600 for tuna seiners and EUR 1 100 for surface longliners.

(1) OJ L 89, 5.4.2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0343/03

by Miquel Mayol i Raynal (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 February 2003)

Subject: Tax and social charge handicaps in EU internal border areas

According to a study conducted by Mr Hervé Germa, a tax lawyer in Perpignan (France) and Figueras (Spain), the differences between the social security and taxation systems of the two countries are so great that they represent a form of unfair competition.

These differences mainly relate to social security contributions and business tax. Social security contributions, for example, represent 48 % of a worker's gross salary in France but only 30,6 % in Spain. The business tax payable by a company with fewer than ten workers is around EUR 1 200 in France but only EUR 400 to 500 in Spain.

These differences do not affect areas removed from borders between Member States, but they are having a particular impact on Roussillon, a region with a very frail economy.

What measures will the Commission take to compensate, if possible, for the economic handicap brought about by these circumstances?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 2003)

Under current Community law, direct taxation still falls essentially within the competence of Member States. From past experience, the Commission knows that difficulties may arise in crossborder situations because of differences in the existing tax systems of different Member States. There may be problems, for example, of discrimination and obstacles to the exercise of the four freedoms.

Provided that Member States respect the EC Treaty provisions, they are free to choose the tax systems that they consider appropriate and according to their preferences. Tax levels have links to the level of public expenditure which is equally a matter for national preferences as long as this is adequately met by revenues in such a way that budget positions remain close to balance or in surplus. Nevertheless, in its Communication on tax policy in the Union Priorities for the years ahead(1), the Commission suggested that better co-ordination of tax systems might be necessary in order to prevent discrimination in cross-border situations or to remove obstacles to the exercise of the four freedoms.

As regards social security in general, Community law does not detract from the power of Member States to organise their social security systems. In the absence of harmonisation at Community level, it is therefore for the legislation of each Member State to determine the level of social security contributions but the Member State must comply with Community law when exercising that power. In addition, it should be borne in mind that such contributions are only one element of total labour costs and that what matters from the point of view of competition are labour costs in relation to productivity (unit labour cost). Productivity depends on a number of factors, including the level of skills and the quality of public infrastructure.

Since the situation described by the Honourable Member does not appear to represent a breach of Community law, the Commission has no reason to take any particular measures.

(1) COM(2001) 260 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0300/03

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(7 February 2003)

Subject: Shipbreaking yard off the coast of Guinea Bissau

On 14 January 2003 the Netherlands Honorary Consul in Guinea Bissau spoke on Radio 747AM about a contract which the Guinea Bissau Government has concluded with the Spanish firm DDI to build a shipbreaking yard on the Bissagos Islands. The socio-economic and political situation in Guinea-Bissau is very difficult at present. My fear is that firms are taking advantage of the situation by concluding damaging and inappropriate business and investment contracts with the Guinea-Bissau Government.

The Bissagos Islands as a whole form a protected area. In developing countries, old ships are dismantled and broken up under highly unsuitable conditions, a process which causes severe environmental pollution and has dire consequences for the health of local workers and local people, although the firms involved enjoy substantial profits.

1. Is the Commission aware of the plans to build a shipbreaking yard on the Bissagos Islands?

2. Can the Commission investigate whether contracts to build a shipbreaking yard have been concluded with the Guinea Bissau Government and whether those contracts are consistent with OECD, ILO and EU directives governing multinational undertakings?

3. Does the Commission share my concern that the establishment of a shipbreaking yard will pose a serious threat to the local environment and to local employment conditions?

4. Is the Commission prepared to take measures to prevent damage to the Bissagos Islands? If so, what form will the measures take?

Answer given by M. Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2003)

1. The Commission's Delegation in Bissau learnt of this initiative informally and inaccurately through the medium of the local press and a non-governmental organisation.

2. Although the social, economic and political context is difficult, as the Honourable Member says, the Delegation will, without the outcome, take contact with the authorities to enquire about this project.

3. In this context the Commission can share the concern of the Honourable Member.

4. If this information is confirmed, the Commission could under the Cotonou Agreement examine the question raised by the Honourable Member with the authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0754/03

by Philip Bushill-Matthews (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 March 2003)

Subject: Chrysotile asbestos

Further to its answer of 15 March 2002 in response to Written Question E-0200/02(1) on asbestos, could the Commission please identify the numerous scientific bodies referred to in that answer, specifically those that have done and published research into the carcinogenicity of chrysotile asbestos, and distinguishing between those research publications which treat chrysotile asbestos as a separate material to blue and brown asbestos and those that treat all asbestos as having similar carcinogenic qualities?

(1) OJ C 160 E, 4.7.2002, p. 197.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(26 March 2003)

Further to its answer to written question E-0200/02 by Mr Tannock, Mr Arvidsson and Mr Trakatellis, the Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the opinions delivered by the Scientific Committee on Toxicity, Eco-toxicity and the Environment (SCTEE) of 15 September 1998(1) and 17 December 2002(2). These opinions contain references to 82 scientific publications, of which 31 such publications deal specifically with chrysotile.

On the basis of this scientific evidence, the SCTEE has confirmed that chrysotile is a proven human carcinogen.

(1) Opinion on Chrysotile asbestos and candidate substitutes delivered on 15 September 1998 at the 5th plenary meeting, Brussels. Available on the website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/sct/out17_en.html.

(2) Opinion on the risk to human health from chrysotile asbestos and organic substitutes delivered on 17 December 2002 at the 35th plenary meeting, Brussels. This opinion is available on the Website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/sct/outcome_en.html.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0489/03

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(21 February 2003)

Subject: Registration of the DNA of new-born babies

Calls are currently being made in Italy for the example set by the United Kingdom, which has been registering the DNA of new-born babies for two years now, to be followed in that country. On the one hand, it is claimed that such registration will help scientific research into unknown diseases and, on the other, that it could, in the view of the Commandant of the Police Forensic Science Unit, result in a 20 % increase in the crime clear-up rate.

To what extent are surveys being carried out by the Commission in this field which show the advantages of such measures? Are the findings of any such surveys available? If so, what does the Commission intend to do about the implementation thereof in law?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 2003)

The Community action programme on public health 2003-2008 does not include studies on testing deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) for new-born babies. It does however include activities on sexual and reproductive health, on health monitoring, and on rare diseases, which while not corresponding to DNA testing, may have some relevance. The legal basis of Article 152 of the Treaty on which the public health programme is based, directs this programme towards improving public health, preventing human diseases and disorders and obviating sources of danger to health with a view to combating morbidity and premature mortality, while taking gender and age into consideration. To fulfill this aim, actions should be guided by the need to increase life expectancy without disability or sickness, promote quality of life and minimise the economic and social consequences of ill health. A call for proposals has recently been published for projects to be supported under this programme.