ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2730/01

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(5 October 2001)

Subject: Fresh details concerning the Mugardos regasification plant

In connection with questions E-1310/01, E-1359/01 and E-1379/01(1) I should like to add that the considerable public alarm roused by the planned Mugardos regasification plant has brought together all the various citizens' groups opposing the project, who have set up the Comité Ciudadano de Emergencia para la Ría del Ferrol (Citizens' Emergency Committee for the Firth of Ferrol). General of the Reserve José Gabeiras Montero has been appointed honorary chairman of this Committee.

General Gabeiras, who has expert knowledge of the position with regard to the Ferrol Military Arsenal, has informed the competent bodies of the proven fact that the planned regasification plant is to be located at 800 metres from the Navy Arsenal which means that any accident involving a liquefied gas tanker in such a location could detonate the contents of the Arsenal and result in thousands of deaths.

General Gabeiras claims that the strategic value of the Ferrol harbour to the Spanish Navy and as a NATO base are dependant on the site's natural defences and those provided by the Spanish military base, but the installation of the regasification plant and its gas tanks would make the whole defence system so vulnerable that the site would be rendered strategically worthless.

Could the Commission stress to the Spanish authorities just how seriously this would jeopardize the safety conditions obtaining in the town of Ferrol and its surrounding area?

(1) OJ C 350 E, 11.12.2001, p. 117.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(21 November 2001)

In connection with the investigation of this issue, the Commission has just received a reply from the Spanish authorities and is currently examining it.

The Commission contacted the Spanish authorities to draw their attention to the potential risk of locating a regasification plant near an arsenal and to request information on measures planned or taken to avoid an accident.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3401/01

by Anneli Hulthén (PSE) to the Commission

(21 December 2001)

Subject: Research into the manufacture of paediatric medicinal products

The medicines that are the subject of current research and approval procedures are, almost without exception, intended for adults and not for children. When children fall ill, they are often given the same medicines as adults, albeit at lower doses. Such medicines have not been tested on children, however, the reason being that children constitute a relatively small patient group and clinical trials are very expensive to conduct in the case of medicinal products.

Medicines that work well for adults do not necessarily work as well for children. Children's bodies are growing, children have a higher metabolic rate than adults, and children are more sensitive to active substances in medicines.

In December 2000, the Council adopted a resolution stressing that incentives were one possible route Europe could take with a view to increasing the range of paediatric medicinal products.

What progress is the Commission making as regards devising measures to promote clinical research which will result in better medicines for children?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 2002)

The difficulties associated with the development of suitably adapted medicines for children is recognised by the Commission.

In response to the Council's resolution of December 2000, the Commission clearly indicated that it recognised the problem and was prepared to take action in accordance with resource and priority considerations.

The Commission is committed to the development of a new legislative proposal in 2002. A meeting with Member States was organised on this subject in November 2001 and a consultation document is currently under preparation in order to encourage input and discussion from all the stakeholders concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2465/01

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

(11 September 2001)

Subject: The internal political enlargement of the Union

As part of the work to be carried out in preparation for the Laeken Summit, in respect of the 2004 Conference and the Constitution of the European Union, is the Presidency intending to review the future status of stateless nations? Does it make sense, within a fully political European Union, that nations such as Scotland, Wales, Galicia, Catalonia or Euskadi do not have the political presence and powers within the European institutions enjoyed by Member States of comparable cultural and national importance and, in several cases, smaller populations?

Reply

(12 February 2002)

The Honourable Member will understand that it is not for the Council to comment on the internal organisation of the Member States of the Union. Questions relating to the future of the Union fall within the scope of the public debate launched in March 2001. The opening of that debate marked the beginning of preparations for an intergovernmental conference in 2004, as provided for in the declaration on the future of the Union adopted in Nice in December 2000. The debate, for which the Presidency, in cooperation with the Commission and with the participation of the European Parliament, will encourage wide-ranging discussion involving all the interested parties, must be actively pursued in the years to come.

At its meeting in Laeken in December 2001, the European Council is to adopt a declaration containing appropriate initiatives for the continuation of this process, including ways of structuring the preparatory phase for the IGD 2004. Besides other matters, this process should cover the four questions expressly set out in the Nice declaration, which aim to improve and permanently monitor the democratic legitimacy and transparency of the Union and its institutions, to bring them closer to the citizens of the Member States.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2747/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Council

(10 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 Council doing to deal with this problem?

Reply

(12 February 2002)

The Council informs the Honourable Member that measures to improve the effectiveness of Member States' control of external borders have mostly been drawn up within the framework of the Schengen cooperation which, since the entry into force of the Treaty of Amsterdam, has been incorporated into EU legislation. These measures are carried out by the Member States themselves, but the Council monitors actual implementation through its relevant subordinate bodies.

The Schengen acquis, as part of EU legislation, contains provisions on the control of external borders. These provisions are contained in the Common Manual for border control. However, it does not include provisions regarding the number of personnel or the type of equipment required for efficient border control which is left to the competence of the Member States.

The Council can, however, monitor Member States' implementation of the Schengen acquis via the Standing Committee on the evaluation and implementation of Schengen created by a

decision of the former Schengen Executive Committee on 16 September 1998. One of the tasks of this Committee is to ensure that the Schengen acquis is properly applied by all Member States implementing the Schengen convention. The Committee will undertake an evaluation of the Schengen acquis in France early in 2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2606/01

by María Rodríguez Ramos (PSE) and Luis Berenguer Fuster (PSE) to the Commission

(26 September 2001)

Subject: Milk marketing in France

There have been recent press reports that an agreement possibly exists between several hypermarket chains and the French association of dairy product manufacturers to sell French milk, to the detriment of the other Member States, particularly Spain.

If this is true, why has the Commission not yet opened proceedings for infringement of Article 81 of the Treaty?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 November 2001)

The Commission has no evidence at present of any agreements between French milk producers and major distributors to favour sales of French milk.

Nonetheless, the Commission is watching developments in the milk market with all due attention and will not fail to take appropriate action if infringements of the relevant Community legislation are discovered.

All due attention would be given to any more detailed information on such an agreement in the possession of the Honourable Member which was forwarded to the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3154/01

by Karin Riis-Jørgensen (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 November 2001)

Subject: Breach of competition law

The conclusion of glass supply contracts between Carlsberg A/S and Ritzenhoff Cristal AG has prompted complaints from competing companies to the Commission that the contracts which also involve J.G. Durand, a partner are contrary to EU competition law. Their claims are supported by numerous documents.

In the Commission's view, are the contracts between Carlsberg A/S and Ritzenhoff Cristal AG together with the associated contracts with J.G. Durand consistent with EU competition law?

If the Commission finds that EU competition rules have been breached, how does it envisage putting an end to these unlawful contracts?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2002)

All the Commission has received so far in the matter referred to by the Honourable Member is a facsimile of 5 October 2001. The Commission has asked for additional documentation which has not been received yet. Should this documentation contain evidence pointing towards a possible violation of Community competition rules the Commission will, to the extent that this is in the interest of the Community, open an investigation in order to establish whether those rules have been infringed. If an infringement were to be found, the Commission will take the necessary measures to bring it to an end.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3084/01

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(30 October 2001)

Subject: Experts' statements on the health hazards arising from adulterated butter

Until mid-2000, members of the Italian mafia were involved in the large-scale adulteration of butter, adding milk-free animal and vegetable fats and chemical substances to it before marketing it through Belgian, French, German and Italian firms. It is believed that a total of 100 000 tonnes of adulterated butter was used, principally in the production of pastries and processed cheese. When the fraud was revealed, neither the Commission nor the Member States took any steps to withdraw from sale the remaining stocks of products made with the adulterated butter. Nothing was done, despite the fact that, in a press release published on 5 July 2000, the Italian Public Prosecutor's Office gave a warning about possible hazards for consumers' health.

In December 2000, the French magazine Expansion published extracts from transcriptions of messages intercepted by the police which lead inevitably to the conclusion that those responsible for adulterating the butter were perfectly well aware of the health risks involved. A witness claimed that the product, unlike other mixtures, had a stinging taste in the mouth, smelt like glycerine and, when a drop of it fell on his hand, burned his skin.

According to information issued by the Italian Public Prosecutor's Office on 20 March 2001, not only were chemical substances used for the production of the adulterated butter but also large quantities of fats from rendering plants, produced from cattle brains, bones and internal organs, in other words from materials which might very well contain BSE pathogens. Nonetheless, on 23 May 2001, in its Annual Report for 2000 on the Fight Against Fraud, the Commission claimed that, on the basis of analyses of the seized goods, the experts had, to date, not established any direct hazard for the [sic] consumers' health.

In response to my request (set out in Written Question P-2535/01(1)) that the Commission publish the names and indicate the official positions of the experts it consulted, the Commission simply recommended that I should approach the national judicial authorities.

Must we conclude from that answer that the Commission does not even know the names and official positions of the experts it consulted?

Can the Commission forward to me copies of the conclusions of the national authorities to which it referred in its answer?

(1) See page 27.

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to her Written Question P-2535/01.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3053/01

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Release of hostages

Amnesty International has announced that the Israeli Government and the Hizbollah in Lebanon are holding hostages in defiance of the rules of international law and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

What measures does the Commission intend to take to put an end to the use of hostages as a negotiating chip, to give hostages access to the International Red Cross (which is a fundamental right of anyone arrested during an armed conflict), to oblige Israel to respect its commitments under the Geneva Convention and, finally, to release all the hostages?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(6 December 2001)

The European Commission strongly supports the upholding of the rule of law, and finds completely unacceptable the taking of hostages by any country or organisation. The taking of hostages is against law, and contravenes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Member of the Commission responsible for External Relations received the families of the four Israelis on 21 June 2001 at which he stated that hostage-taking was unacceptable, to withhold information about the well-being of the detained Israelis was wicked, and to deny access to them by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) was indefensible.

The Commission has raised the subject of the four Israeli citizens held by Hizbollah since 7 October 2000 with the Lebanese, Syrian and Iranian authorities, expressing its serious concern, and seeking information regarding their well-being. The Israeli authorities have recently indicated that three soldiers abducted at the Syria-Lebanon border (in the Shebaa farms area) are understood to be no longer alive.

With regard to the 19 Lebanese hostages abducted from Lebanon and held in Israeli prisons under administrative detention, the Supreme Court of Israel recently ruled after a lengthy legal procedure that this practice was to be ended for all hostages except two: Messrs Obeid and Dirani. As a result of this ruling, the Israeli authorities have announced the gradual release of 17 Lebanese held under this form of detention. Messrs Obeid and Dirani, after much international pressure, and following an order of the Supreme Court, were recently allowed visits by the ICRC. The Commission and the Member States have raised their serious concern, through the appropriate channels, on the new legislative attempts in Israel to alter the status of Messrs Obeid and Dirani (from civilian to illegal combatant) so as to allow their continued detention in terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention. This legislative procedure is currently suspended.

The Commission insists on the right of all those arrested or detained in circumstances of conflict to have access to the ICRC, and that international law be respected. The Commission will continue to use its contacts with the authorities of the concerned countries to bring an end to this illegal practice.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2502/01

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(14 September 2001)

Subject: Continued violation of human rights in Turkey and Kurdistan

In reply to my question E-1563/00(1), the Council informed me that it remained concerned about the human rights situation in Turkey, including the practice of torture. There were several serious reports about torture and ill-treatment in Turkey, not only from Kurdistan but also from other regions.

According to the Council, the Turkish Government openly recognised the existence of torture. The Turkish authorities were taking a number of measures in order to put an end to the practice of torture in Turkey, and had announced plans for further measures. The Council also stated that it would continue to monitor the situation and encourage Turkey to take all necessary measures to ensure that human rights were fully respected.

Almost eleven months following this statement by the Council, however, a drastic deterioration is being seen in the human rights situation in Turkey. On Thursday, 23 August 2001, the Human Rights Association of Turkey (IHD), one of the most highly respected human rights organisations, reported a sharp rise in the number of cases of torture (source: Reuters).

In the first six months of this year, no fewer than 435 people made complaints of torture, compared with 263 during the same period of last year and 334 in 1999. In addition, the public prosecutors indicted 1 519 people for opinions expressed in speeches or in writing. There is, consequently, clearly no question of an improvement in the human rights situation in Turkey.

Does the Council endorse the findings of the Human Rights Association of Turkey? (a) If so, will the Council be seeking clarification of these findings in the political dialogue meetings with the Turkish authorities? (b) If not, does the Council reject the findings of the Human Rights Association of Turkey, and does it take the view that the human rights situation in Turkey has improved?

(1) OJ C 81 E, 13.3.2001, p. 55.

Reply

(1 March 2002)

The Council continues to follow the human rights situation in Turkey very closely. It takes seriously recent reports of Turkish human rights associations indicating an increase in the number of acts of torture.

The whole human rights issue in Turkey in all its aspects, including the continuing use of torture (despite the measures taken by the Turkish authorities to put an end to these practices), was recently raised during the visit by the European troika of political directors to Ankara on 1 October 2001 in the course of a frank political dialogue.

In this context the Honourable Member's attention is drawn to the vote by the Turkish Parliament on 3 October on a series of constitutional amendments bringing Turkey closer to international human rights standards.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2868/01

by Florence Kuntz (EDD) to the Council

(19 October 2001)

Subject: Imposition of VAT on service charges

On 1 October 2001 the imposition of VAT on service charges levied on behalf of staff in eat-in catering establishments and hairdressing salons became compulsory in France.

Until this year, however, France had been exempt from imposing VAT on such charges in accordance with Council Decision 89/487/EEC(1) of 28 July 1989, authorising the French Republic to apply a measure derogating from the second subparagraph of Article 17(6) of the Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC(2) on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes.

A judgment delivered by the Court of Justice on 29 March 2001 put an end to this exemption. Why did the Council not intervene to extend a derogation which only the Court and the Commission found problematic? And, above all, why is VAT being imposed on service charges now, when the euro is about to be introduced? Prices are already rising in the run-up to the arrival of this new currency, owing to the conversion rate (6,55957 francs to the euro) and the tricky rounding operations to be carried out. Can the Council explain why it is refusing to take action as regards this ridiculous timing, thus allowing the risk of recession to grow by discouraging private consumption, an engine of growth?

(1) OJ L 239, 16.8.1989, p. 21.

(2) OJ L 145, 13.6.1977, p. 1.

Reply

(18 March 2002)

The exemption granted to France under Council Decision 89/487/EEC of 28 July 1989, which is referred to in the Honourable Member's question and which was declared invalid by a judgment of the Court of Justice of 19 September 2000 (joined cases C-177/99 and C-181/99), does not concern service charges, but the right to deduct VAT.

In its judgment of 29 March 2001(1), to which the Honourable Member refers, the Court declared that, by authorising, under certain conditions, the exclusion from the taxable amount for the purposes of value added tax of the service charges claimed by certain taxable persons, the French Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under the Sixth VAT Directive.

Lastly, it should be pointed out that, under the system laid down in the Treaty, the Council acts on a proposal from the Commission.

(1) Case C-404/99.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2635/01

by Jillian Evans (Verts/ALE) and Eurig Wyn (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(2 October 2001)

Subject: Protection of minorities closure of the Sorbian school in Crostwitz

The regional government of Saxony (Germany) has announced the future closure of the Sorbian school in Crostwitz. This school is one of the only two Sorbian schools where full education is given in the Sorbian language (there are two other Sorbian-German bilingual schools in the region). The official argument seems to be a lack of children to keep a class open, but it is difficult to understand why the authorities have chosen to close a full Sorbian school rather than a bilingual one. There are special circumstances where the minimum figures for classes do not apply (the classes for highly talented children in schools for example) and such exceptions should be considered for the protection of minorities.

Does the Commission consider this attitude compatible with the European values of fundamental rights and cultural and linguistic diversity? Has the Commission asked for any information from the German authorities on this issue?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(6 December 2001)

Concerning the case referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission does not have any information to suggest incorrect application of Community law or a serious and persistent violation within the meaning of Article 7 (ex-Article 4) of the EC Treaty. It refers the Honourable Member to Article 149 (ex-Article 126) of the EC Treaty, according to which each Member State is responsible for the organisation of education and for its linguistic diversity. The Commission would also point to the efforts made to promote linguistic diversity, especially in connection with the European Year of Languages, and the Community's contribution to the flourishing of the cultures of the Member States while respecting their national and regional diversity, in accordance with Article 151 (ex-Article 128) of the EC Treaty.

For more details, the Honourable Member is referred to the Commission's answer to written question E-2538/01 from Mr Modrow(1) on the same subject.

(1) See page 27.