ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2113/01

by Gordon Adam (PSE) to the Council

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Temelin nuclear power plant environmental impact assessment

In light of the report on the above assessment, preparation of which was agreed in Melk in December 2000 and concluded with a public hearing in Vienna in June 2001, does the Council agree that the Czech Republic has fulfilled the commitments made at Melk? Does the Council also agree that there are no safety reasons why the commissioning of number one reactor should not proceed?

Reply

(27 November 2001)

The Council is not aware of the report. Neither is it involved in the assessment process mentioned by the MEP.

The Council attaches however great importance to candidate countries achieving a high level of nuclear safety. To that effect, a report on nuclear safety in these countries was prepared, comprising detailed recommendations for each country. These recommendations have been forwarded to the candidate countries including the Czech Republic and apply i.a. to the Temelin nuclear power plant.

Replies to these recommendations are now awaited and will be considered in the framework of the enlargement negotiations.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2600/01

by Wolfgang Ilgenfritz (NI) to the Commission

(20 September 2001)

Subject: Turnover tax on occupational medical services

Under the Austrian law on turnover tax (§6, paragraph 1, point 19 UstG 1994), doctors (natural persons) are covered by the exemption from turnover tax referred to in §6, while this provision does not apply to limited liability companies licensed by the profession.

Is this unequal treatment of natural persons and companies under the law on turnover tax compatible with EU law?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2001)

The Commission's view is that the exemption provided for in Article 13(A)(1)(c) of the Sixth VAT Directive (Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment(1)) for the provision of medical care in the exercise of medical professions applies to both natural and legal persons.

The Commission would point out that the Court of Justice is currently considering an application for a preliminary ruling on this issue (Case C-141/2000).

(1) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2089/01

by Marco Pannella (TDI) to the Council

(12 July 2001)

Subject: Press freedom in Laos and the funding of the magazine Le Rénovateur

The Government of the People's Democratic Republic of Laos has a total monopoly over the written and audiovisual media. The laws governing the media envisage prison sentences of between five and 15 years for any journalist who does not report events in a constructive way or reports them in a way which obstructs the work of the Communist Party. On 8 June last the Minister for Education and Culture, Mr Phandouangchit Vongsa, promulgated a law setting out in detail the criteria which all journalists are now obliged to respect when reporting a piece of news, and stepping up the monitoring of information published on the Internet. Furthermore, the weekly magazine Le Rénovateur, which is published in French and is funded by the Intergovernmental Agency for French-speaking Communities, in no way escapes the control of the authorities and its content does not distinguish it from any other publications, since it merely prints the official French translation of texts produced by the Ministry for Information, and its editor is also the editor of the Vientiane Times (the English edition of one of the national newspapers published in the Lao language).

Is the Council aware that the Member States in the context of their participation in the Intergovernmental Agency for French-speaking Communities are funding a publication which serves as the organ of the only political party in the country? Does the Council not consider that funding of this kind, even if indirect, by the Member States is in blatant contrast with the Union's official policy of promoting freedom of the press? If so, does it intend to include this issue on the agenda for one of its future meetings and, more generally, what practical and effective measures will the Council take to promote true freedom of the press in Laos?

Reply

(27 November 2001)

The Council has not been informed about the funding of the publication Le Rénovateur. It attaches importance to freedom of the press and upholds it everywhere, whether it be in the People's Democratic Republic of Laos or elsewhere. Through the procedures of the Council, the concerns of the Honourable Member have been brought to the attention of the Member States concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1057/01

by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission

(5 April 2001)

Subject: Veterinary inspections in slaughterhouses

Can the Commission confirm that it would be correct to interpret Council Directive 64/433/EEC(1), and in particular Article 2(d) and Article 9 thereof, as implying that the official veterinarian must be physically present in the slaughterhouse during ante-mortem and post-mortem inspections?

(1) OJ B 121, 29.7.1964, p. 2012.

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(14 June 2001)

Council Directive 64/433/EEC as amended lays down health rules for the production and placing on the market of fresh meat from domestic bovine animals, swine, sheep, goats and solipeds.

Article 3(1)(A) provides that carcase meat must (b) come from a slaughtered animal inspected ante mortem by an official veterinarian and (d) have been inspected post mortem by an official veterinarian

Article 9 provides that Member States shall ensure: (i) the permanent presence of at least one official veterinarian in a slaughterhouse approved in accordance with Article 10 throughout the ante-mortem and post-mortem inspections.

However, Article 4, by way of derogation from Article 3, allows Member States to place meat from low-throughput slaughterhouses on the market for marketing in their national territory under certain conditions. These include a degree of latitude in that the slaughterhouse in question must notify the veterinary service in advance of the time of slaughter to allow it to carry out the ante mortem inspection either on the farm or at the slaughterhouse. In addition, the official veterinarian or an auxiliary under the responsibility of the official veterinarian must carry out the post mortem inspection of the meat and where the meat has lesions or appears to have deteriorated, the post mortem inspection must be carried out by the official veterinarian.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1882/01

by Michl Ebner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(27 June 2001)

Subject: Premiums for arable crops (Sweden)

With regard to animal premiums, the European Commission is planning to introduce a ceiling for subsidised animals per holding and per age category. Would it not be sensible to introduce a similar ceiling for arable crops subsidies, for example 50 hectares, so that holdings would receive support only in respect of that maximum area?

Can the Commission indicate:

- how many agricultural holdings in Sweden have an area of more than 50 hectares;

- how many agricultural holdings in Sweden have an area of less than 50 hectares;

- if such a measure were introduced, what savings would be made expressed in absolute figures and as a percentage in the budget devoted to arable crops?

Supplementary joint answerto Written Questions E-1870/01, E-1871/01, E-1872/01, E-1873/01,E-1874/01, E-1875/01, E-1876/01, E-1877/01, E-1878/01, E-1879/01, E-1880/01, E-1881/01,E-1882/01, E-1883/01 annd E-1884/01given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(18 September 2001)

The Farm Accountancy Data Network (FADN) was used as a source to determine the number of holdings with an area of less than 50 hectares and of 50 hectares or more under cereals, oilseeds and protein plants (COP). Though that database is weighted by the results of the Farm Structure Survey (Eurostat), it is generally acknowledged that large holdings are over-represented. The figures given below should accordingly be regarded as upper limits. The year used is 1997, the last year for which data for all Member States are available in the FADN database.

Columns A and C of the table below give the percentages per Member State of holdings with an area under COP of, respectively, less than 50 hectares and 50 hectares or more.

Columns B and D of the table below give the percentages per Member State of the area under COP of holdings with, respectively, less than 50 hectares and 50 hectares or more under COP.

Column F gives the percentages per Member State of the area under COP that would be excluded if, all other factors being equal, a ceiling of 50 hectares were applied.

Lastly, Column I gives the savings in millions of euro per Member State if, all other factors being equal, a ceiling of 50 hectares were applied. The yields used are the reference yields supplied by the Member States. The total reduction in cost to the Community would amount to EUR 4 billion.

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2618/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 September 2001)

Subject: Dangers associated with anti-cholesterol drug

A number of fatalities have occurred in Greece recently as a result of the side effects of an anti-cholesterol drug, Cerivastin, sold under the trade name of Lipobay. The press reports that the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products had details of the drug in its possession since April following notification by the working parties concerned in the Member States.

Did Greece supply the relevant information and did the European Agency inform that country of the dangers associated with the drug?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(7 November 2001)

Information about possible rare but potentially fatal side effects of the anti-cholesterol medicinal product cerivastatin, sold under the name of Libobay has been available in all Member States for some time. New concerns about the implications of the available information were raised in April 2001 at a meeting in the European Medicines Evaluation Agency which was attended by all Member States. This led to a new analysis of the situation, a detailed discussion with all Member States in June 2001 and a subsequent decision by all Member States to contraindicate the use of this medicinal product with another medicinal product, gemfibrozil. The decision, which was expected to substantially reduce the risk of fatalities, came into effect at the end of June 2001. This was prior to the company's decision to withdraw the product worldwide.

As far as the Commission is aware, Greece supplied all necessary and relevant information and was fully involved in the discussions at a European level concerning this medicinal product.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2524/01

by Diemut Theato (PPE-DE) to the Council

(20 September 2001)

Subject: Detailed rules for the implementation of the Financial Regulation

Pursuant to Article 139 of the Financial Regulation, the Commission is to adopt implementing measures for the Financial Regulation in consultation with the European Parliament and the Council.

On 21 August 2001, the Commission adopted Regulation (EC) No 1687/2001(1) amending the detailed rules implementing the Financial Regulation. The majority of the amendments called for by Parliament at its sitting of 15 May 2001 to the Commission's original proposal(2) were not incorporated.

1. How does the Council view the fact that the Commission did not attempt to seek an agreement between Parliament, the Council and itself on the amendments to be made?

2. How does the Council view that fact that the Commission:

(a) did not incorporate Parliament's proposals for the safeguarding and strengthening of the internal auditor's independence (in particular as regards a right to bring action similar to that of the financial controller)?

(b) went back on its original proposal and failed to include provisions pursuant to which the internal auditor, in addition to evaluating the effectiveness of management and control systems, was also to have verified the regularity of financial operations and the soundness of financial management?

(c) has not acted on new Article 24a of the Financial Regulation(3), under which implementing measures are to be laid down pursuant to Article 139 on the verification, by means of internal audit, of the regularity of budget management?

(1) OJ L 228, 24.8.2001, p. 8.

(2) SEC(2000) 1890.

(3) OJ L 111, 20.4.2001, p. 2.

Reply

(10 December 2001)

The Council would point out that, under Article 139 of the Financial Regulation, the opinions of the European Parliament and of the Council required for adoption by the Commission of implementing rules for this Regulation are of an advisory nature: agreement between the three institutions is not required by that article.

It notes that in the final text of Regulation (EC) No 1687/2001, which it adopted on 21 August 2001(1), the Commission has taken account of the opinions delivered by the European Parliament and the Council respectively on the draft Regulation on implementing measures which was submitted to the Council on 17 November 2000. It is not for the Council to comment on the final text of the Regulation, which the Commission adopted under its own responsibility.

(1) OJ L 228, 24.8.2001, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2748/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 October 2001)

Subject: Loopholes in Schengen checks

The police in Södermalm, Stockholm, report that in the summer of 2001 a number of individuals were caught who had entered the Schengen area via Paris but without entry stamps in their passports. For example, a policeman stopped two people from Chile who had flown from Santiago via Paris to Arlanda airport by Air France. They only had exit stamps from Santiago. One of them had been barred from entry to the Schengen area. At the checkpoints in Arlanda there have also been cases of US citizens arriving in Sweden via Paris without having been checked at Charles de Gaulle airport.

According to information obtained by the Stockholm police, Paris and Milan lack both the staff, equipment and procedures to comply with the Schengen agreement. It is quite likely that international criminals have noted and exploited this fact.

What is the Commission doing to deal with this problem?

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2001)

The Commission has no knowledge of the incidents reported by the Honourable Member.

It will contact the Swedish authorities for further details so that it is fully briefed before raising the matter with the French and Italian authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2769/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 October 2001)

Subject: Community School Milk Scheme

The School Milk Scheme has been at risk in the past from cost-cutting; for example in 1999 its continued existence was called into question.

Which Member States are at present receiving funds under the School Milk Scheme and what amounts are involved?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 2001)

The table below shows the payments to Member States in the framework of the Community school milk scheme for the budget years 2000 and 2001 (figures in million). The figures for the budget year 2001 are provisional.

The Community aid for school milk was reduced from 95 % to 75 % of the target price for milk, with effect from 1 January 2001. Therefore, and in view of the payment delays, the expenditure for the budget year 2001 does not fully reflect the impact of the aid reduction.

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2949/01

by James Nicholson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 October 2001)

Subject: Spending on health and personal social services in Member States of the European Union

1. What was spent as a percentage of GDP on health and personal social services in each of the Member States during the last four years?

2. What was the per capita spent on health and personal social services (excluding capital projects) in each of the Member States during the last four years?

3. What percentage of that was funded:

- directly by government,

- privately,

- through insurance schemes?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 2001)

The Commission does not collect all the information that the Honourable Member requests. In particular data on health expenditure is not collected routinely at the moment and the same applies to data on personal social services.

Data on health expenditure is collected by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), but great caution should be exercised in making comparisons between countries on the basis of this data because of the important differences in definitions between countries. The Commission is working with OECD to improve the quality and comparability of the data for example in relation to introducing a new framework, System of Health Accounts (SHA). Moreover, a key objective of the proposed public health programme is to provide a more comprehensive health information system for the Community.

Specific issues concerning the data provided in response to the Honourable Member are set out in the following paragraphs for health expenditure. Personal social services however are not a specific function in the European System of Social Protection Statistics. For this reason these data are not available.

The following data come from OECD and are sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament's Secretariat general.

1. The most recent reference year varies across Member States; data from 1994-1999 are provided to ascertain sufficiently long time series for each of the Member States.

2. The funding of health expenditures by (a) government, (b) private parties, and (c) through insurance schemes as requested is only available for Total Health Expenditure (THE). Per capita expenditures are provided in National Currency Units.

3. Comparisons across countries should be made with caution for the reasons mentioned above. First SHA prototype data for selected Member States indicate that the data may change substantially, when harmonised definitions are applied.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2590/01

by Luciano Caveri (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 September 2001)

Subject: Wine growing in mountain areas

There are no Community documents, other than the recent Ebner report on mountain farming, which provide a definition of wine growing in mountain areas. This is surprising, given the specific nature of wine-growing problems in European mountain areas and the need for Community law to take account of these aspects, especially the amount of work and extra cost involved in maintaining this type of agriculture, which is essential to the protection of the countryside in particularly sensitive areas.

What does the Commission intend to do and what proposals will it put forward to support wine growing in mountain areas?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(25 October 2001)

Given the need to simplify the Common agricultural policy (CAP), it has not been judged necessary to set up a specific tool to address the specific problems of mountain vineyards.

As is the case for other sectors, the Common market organisation and the new Rural Development policy give Member States many possibilities to tackle the specific problems of wine production in mountain areas.

As regards the common organisation of the market in wine, Member States are for instance responsible for the implementation of the restructuring plans and for fixing the amounts of premia. This gives them the possibility, if they wish so, to support wine production in mountain areas, for instance through appropriately raised levels of support taking into account the higher restructuring costs of these areas.

The new rural development policy also gives Member States the possibility to take account of the positive contribution of specific production sectors to the maintenance of traditional landscapes and the protection of the environment, for instance through compensatory allowances for mountain areas or agri-environment measures. Such measures seem to be well adapted to mountain vineyards, which are an important feature of many mountain areas.

As regards the proposal to establish a definition of mountain vineyards at the European level, the Commission estimates that this centralised approach wouldn't be appropriate. While the new regulation on rural development, Commission Regulation (EC) No 1763/2001 of 6 September 2001 amending Regulaiton (EC) No 1750/1999 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF)(1) defines the general community criteria to be respected to establish the list of less favoured areas (among which mountain areas), it is indeed the responsibility of national and regional authorities to proceed to the classification of these areas and to define the detailed eligibility conditions applying to specific sectors of production.

(1) OJ L 239, 7.9.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1613/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 June 2001)

Subject: Malta and the directive on wild birds

Does the Commission intend to grant Malta an exemption from the directive on wild birds should that country become a Member State of the Union, or are transitional periods under discussion to allow Malta to comply with that directive?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-1610/01, E-1611/01, E-1612/01 and E-1613/01given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(27 July 2001)

It is for the Maltese authorities to adopt a position on Maltese becoming an official language; this matter will be dealt with at the end of the negotiations under the institutions chapter. Any candidate country wanting its national language to become an official language of the European Union is under the obligation to translate the acquis communautaire into that language, using its own resources. In that case the Commission can give technical assistance to help these countries set up the framework needed to carry out the work. Without prejudging its final position on the matter, Malta has informed the Commission that it has started translating the acquis communautaire into Maltese.

To date the EU has not given any grants to the European Movement in Malta, nor has it any plans to finance or otherwise back this Movement.

The aim of the Commission is not to try to convince the Maltese people of the advantages of EU membership. The Commission considers that it is for the Maltese people to decide on the issue. To help them do so the Commission adopted in May 2000 a communication strategy on enlargement which includes Malta along with the other applicant countries.

The strategy has three aims:

- to improve the understanding of the EU;

- to explain the implications of membership;

- to explain the link between preparing for accession and making progress in the negotiations.

With this strategy, the Commission aims to give ongoing objective information to the Maltese people and to the citizens of other applicant countries. The Commission is thereby responding to a demand from Maltese civil society and Maltese citizens who want to be correctly informed in order to make the right decision on the question of EU membership. EUR 1 million will be available until 2004, of which EUR 200 000 will be spent this year and EUR 300 000 in 2002.

To date one Local Technical Assistance Staff (ALAT) member has been recruited at the EU delegation in Malta and another is due to be taken on. This extra staff will be mainly concerned with managing the pre-accession aid package (EUR 38 million for 2000-2004) and monitoring Malta's progress in implementing the acquis communautaire.

Negotiations on the environment have just started with Malta and at this stage the Commission is not in a position to prejudge their outcome.