ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3925/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Subject: Brazil and retreaded tyres

A few years ago, EC Regulations relating to retreaded tyres were updated to bring retreaded tyres into a similar category as new tyres. As a result, there is now a Type Approval for retreads within the EC.

On the 27th September 2000 the Brazilian Government extended an existing ban on the importation of second-hand tyres to include remoulded and re-manufactured tyres.

Brazil is a major market for the retreading industry, and this ban poses a major threat to the retreading industry, which is the most effective and important method of re-use and recycling of worn tyres.

Has the Commission raised this issue with Brazil?

What action does the Commission plan to take as a result of this ban?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-3925/00, E-4014/00 and E-4026/00 given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2001)

According to Brazilian national trade regulations, notified to the World Trade Organisation (WTO), imports of used equipment, machinery and consumer goods are expressly prohibited, with the sole possible exception of donations.

The Brazilian customs authorities referred the import of retreaded tyres to their judicial authorities which concluded that licensing such imports was inconsistent with local trade regulations. They therefore immediately suspended the granting of import licences for these products. In this context, the trade regulation Portaria MDIC/SECEX No 08, of 25 September 2000, has sought to implement the judicial ruling.

The Commission is aware of this issue and of the concern it has caused some European companies that produce and export retreaded and remoulded tyres. According to initial contacts with the Brazilian authorities, the Commission understands that the Brazilian government may have health or consumer protection concerns about the import of used goods and, because the aforementioned judicial decision stretched the scope of used goods to include retreaded tyres, the Brazilian authorities have enacted Portaria No 8, which blocks the import of such tyres. After further clarifying this issue with the industry, the Commission will approach the Brazilian government to set out the case for distinguishing these products from the general category of used goods and to explain the European system of type approval. In the absence of a positive solution, the Commission will consider what further action to take in the light of the Brazilian government's response.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3708/00

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 November 2000)

Subject: The plight of the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan

Is the Commission aware of the infringements of the Ahmadiyya community's human rights in Pakistan? A number of laws passed in 1974 made it a criminal offence for Ahmadis to profess, practise and preach their faith. Several members of the community have been charged with blasphemy under Section 295C, which carries the mandatory death penalty. Recent religiously motivated murders committed by orthodox Muslims against the Ahmadis have not been investigated. What does the Comission intend to do to protect the fundamental rights of the Ahmadiyya community?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(5 January 2001)

The Commission is aware that the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan has repeatedly been the target of extremist violence. The Commission is further aware that religious minorities in Pakistan (Christians, Hindus, Ahmadis and Shias) are affected by discriminatory legislation.

The situation of religious minorities in Pakistan was raised during recent ad hoc Troïka political talks in Islamabad (20-21 November 2000). With regard to blasphemy charges, the Pakistani authorities acknowledged that these cases had created anxiety and promised renewed reform efforts. The Commission intends to continue raising the question of religious minorities with the Pakistani authorities on all relevant future occasions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3780/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 December 2000)

Subject: Objective 2 aid to Hainaut

The awarding of Objective 2 aid to the Walloon province of Hainaut is leading to the relocation of firms which have been established for many years in the neighbouring province of Western Flanders.

The businesses operators in question acknowledge that the removal of their activities to Hainaut is entirely dependent on their obtaining Objective 2 subsidies. If these business operators do not obtain any European aid, they will keep their operations in Western Flanders. In order to be considered for such aid they have to have their company headquarters in Hainaut.

I should be glad if the Commission would answer the following questions. For the sake of completeness I should add that these questions were first submitted to the Commission in mid-March 2000 (Written Question E-0951/00). Since then the Commission has merely said that the information in question still had to be gathered.

1. How many applications have been made since 1 January 2000 for Objective 2 aid for new economic operations in Hainaut, and to what do they relate?

2. When and where were the company headquarters of these firms registered?

3. (a) How many of these firms were formerly operating in the province of Western Flanders?

(b) How many of these firms are currently operating in Western Flanders?

4. Have the firms in question expressly been asked whether their relocation from Western Flanders to Hainaut is dependent on the award of Objective 2 aid?

(a) If so, how many West Flanders operators would choose to move their operations to Hainaut without Objective 2 aid?

(b) If not, will the Commission ask these business operators to what extent their relocation is dependent upon Objective 2 aid?

5. Is the Commission prepared to take measures to prevent the relocation of West Flanders firms to Hainaut?

(a) If so, what measures?

(b) If not, why not?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2001)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the additional answer to his Written Question E-0951/00(1).

(1) See page 3.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3628/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(22 November 2000)

Subject: Swaziland

Would the Commission outline any plans which exist to deal with the crisis in Swaziland?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 2000)

The Commission is concerned by the recent developments in Swaziland and the social unrest which culminated mid-November in a two day stay-away called by the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions. However, the Commission notes that it is not the first social crisis in Swaziland. On the contrary, protests, stay-aways and blockades have been a recurrent feature since the suspension of the constitution in 1973, and demands for political reform have intensified in the mid-1990s as other countries in the region transformed into multi-party democracies.

The issues at stake in the current crisis are essentially of a political nature, having to do with the country's constitution, political freedoms, industrial relations and the security of land tenure. A statement of the Union at this stage can only emerge as a result of a coordinated approach of the Commission and the Member States of the Community, in line with the rules of the Common foreign and security policy (CFSP). To date, the Commission has followed a constructive approach involving a constructive and thorough dialogue with the Swazi Government and established authorities, support to the various democratic forces and the civil society and assistance with the constitutional reform process.

The Commission is in any case following the situation closely. It remains concerned that if the current crisis over the political and social climate persists or aggravates, this will have an impact on the dialogue with the Swazi Government and negatively affect the implementation of development cooperation with Swaziland.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3977/00

by Bartho Pronk (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Minimum age-limit of the working population

In Directive 1897/2000(1) concerning the operational definition of unemployment, the working population is designated as comprising persons in the age-group 15 to 64.

In most European Union Member States young persons remain in compulsory education until age 16.

Taking that into consideration, can the Commission explain:

1. The circumstances under which young persons at age 15 are designated as already forming part of the working population, whereas in most European Union Member States they are still in compulsory education at that age?

2. In which Member States young people remain in compulsory education only until age 15?

(1) OJ L 228, 8.9.2000, p. 18.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2001)

1. The reference to 15 years as the bottom age limit for defining the working population is a recognised standard used in accordance with international recommendations from the International Labour Organisation.

There is a need to ensure consistency in the measurement of unemployment and employment, also for ease of international comparison. In that regard, adjusting the definition of the bottom age limit for the working population to the age when compulsory schooling ends, presents some drawbacks. For example, in some Member States, in particular those having a well developed initial vocational training system in a work situation (dual system), the line between compulsory schooling and work can be difficult to draw.

The Commission is aware of the situation regarding education systems and compulsory schooling as well as of the trend towards longer stay in education and training. One concern is that in the perspective of a knowledge-based economy and society as defined by the Lisbon European Council, the objectives in terms of higher employment rates for the Community should not conflict with the need to ensure that young people achieve minimum educational qualifications beyond compulsory schooling.

2. In Sweden and Austria, compulsory schooling is not defined in terms of an age limit but in terms of a minimum number of years in education. However, in these cases, information on the starting age for education permits calculation of the average age for completion of compulsory schooling.

According to the most recent information (1999-2000) from Eurydice (the information network on education in Europe), the end of compulsory schooling is still 15 in Greece, Ireland, Italy (after recent change), Luxembourg, Austria and Portugal.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3049/00

by Jean-Claude Martinez (TDI) to the Council

(29 September 2000)

Subject: Elephant hunting in Africa

The cruel and senseless practice of elephant hunting is still going on, unfortunately against a background of widespread indifference.

Given that the massacre of these mammals, one of the symbol's of our planet, is prompted by financial motives connected to the trade in ivory tusks, what steps will the Council take to introduce a total Community-wide ban on this vile trade?

Will the Council introduce a system of fines for states which continue to allow hunting of this kind within their territory, reminiscent as it is of the archaic and barbaric practices of former times?

Will it take measures against travel agencies and other organisations which organise these large-scale massacres under the guise of safaris or big-game hunting?

Reply

(12 February 2001)

The Council shares the concerns of the Honourable MEP about the trade in ivory tusks and the conservation of the African elephant. It has adopted Council Regulation (EEC) No 3626/82 (replaced by Council Regulation (EC) 338/97)(1) implementing the Convention on international trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora (hereinafter the CITES Convention) in the Community. Import of African elephant ivory for commercial purposes has been prohibited under Community law since 1989.

However, import of hunting trophies is allowed from some African countries where it has been established that this limited hunt is not detrimental to the populations concerned, and the gains of sport hunting are in part returned to the local population and conservation authorities. In such cases, export quotas apply, and hunting trophies, which must be for personal use only and not for commercial use, must be accompanied by proper export and import certificates. As to the matter of fines and for measures against travel agencies, it is pointed out that the CITES Convention in no way affects the right of parties to adopt stricter domestic measures regarding the conditions for trade, taking possession or transport of specimens or species included in the appendices to the convention, or the complete prohibition thereof.

The parties to the CITES Convention may take stricter measures to prohibit the trade when it is detrimental to the conservation on the species. The export quotas applicable to elephant trophies adopted by the Convention's secretariat are considered non-detrimental to the species and therefore deemed satisfactory.

In the present situation, the Council does not envisage taking steps against countries which authorise hunting when duly regulated, or against travel agencies promoting it.

(1) OJ L 61, 3.3.1997, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3794/00

by Cristiana Muscardini (UEN) to the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Subject: SIDS research project

Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), also called cot death, and stillbirth, the unforeseen death of a foetus, are two of the biggest problems from the scientific point of view and where State health services are concerned that modern medicine has yet to solve.

In sudden infant death syndrome, an apparently healthy infant between a month and a year old dies out of the blue and without warning. The condition affects 1 in 500 to 1 000 infants born and is the most frequent cause of death in the first year of life. The unexpected death of the foetus at the final stage of pregnancy is five times as common, despite the latest advances in maternity care. The emotional consequences for the relatives are devastating, and medical and psychotherapeutic support entails very substantial costs to society, without considering the untimely loss of a large number of potentially productive individuals.

A fuller understanding of these syndromes, which occur in the perinatal and neonatal periods both still shrouded in such deep mystery would undoubtedly lead to immense scientific and financial benefits. There is as yet no standard systematic approach to the conditions at clinical level. Further, extremely delicate research on a microscopic scale is accordingly required, but this could be carried out only in highly specialised centres.

In the light of the foregoing and of the social repercussions can the Commission say whether it has made provision in its research programmes for projects to probe into the subjects referred to above? If not, would it be willing to support research projects focusing on the neurocardiac disorders associated with SIDS and foetal death?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) is seen as a serious problem in all Member States. There is a distinct variation in the diagnosis (identification of at risk infants) and also attribution of the causes of infant death.

With this in mind the Commission, under the Biomed 1 (1990-1994), supported a project involving 15 centres from 12 Member States. The main objective was to harmonise clinical protocols in this network. By combining data from these centres and with analysis exploiting differences between the Member States, the network resulted in providing data which contributed to improving the effectiveness of child care. Additional factors considered also included clothing, bedding, heating and co-sleeping. This project has contributed, both at national and European level, to providing guidelines for the identification of at risk families, surveillance procedures for at risk infants and support groups for parents who have lost an infant.

Currently, no project on this subject is being funded, however should a new application be submitted which expands upon the existing knowledge and is innovative, it could be submitted to the quality of life and managing of living resources programme of the Fifth framework programme for Research and technological development (RTD), under public health research.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-4161/00

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(16 January 2001)

Subject: European Commission's proposed Chemical Testing Programme

I am receiving letters every day from constituents who continue to be concerned about the European Commission's proposals to test 70 000 existing chemicals, which, I am advised, will result in the death of around 10 million animals.

1. Where can I find a list of the 70 000 chemicals it is proposed to test?

2. Which committee, or group of persons, within the European Commission decided on this recommendation?

3. What are the opportunities for MEPs to debate, amend or reject these proposals?

4. Does the European Commission agree with the estimate that over 10 million animals will be slaughtered as a result of this proposal?

5. Which organisations and individuals have, to date, made representations to the European Commission against this proposal?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(14 March 2001)

On 13 February 2001 the Commission adopted a White Paper on a strategy for a future chemicals policy. The White Paper will be presented to the Parliament which will have the opportunity of giving its opinion.

It is not possible, on the basis of the White Paper, to estimate the number of animals needed for testing. What can be said is that for two thirds of the substances, testing should generally be limited to non-animal testing.

The Commission has received some six thousand items of correspondence from individuals and organisations on this subject, many of which expressed concern in relation to animal testing. Other comments received emphasised the importance of ensuring that chemicals are adequately tested. The Commission has not made a precise breakdown of the different points of view expressed and is not in a position therefore to furnish the details sought on this aspect. However, the Commission can assure the Honourable Member that it will take account of the need to limit testing of live animals as far as practicable, including using available alternative tests not requiring the use of live animals, and to encourage the development of new alternative tests.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3810/00

by Neil MacCormick (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(7 December 2000)

Subject: Bridge tolls and freedom of movement

Having regard to the issue of the free movement of goods and labour throughout the Union, does the Commission have a view on the charging of tolls on bridges linking an island such as Skye (in the Scottish Hebrides) to the European transport network? What requirements as to proportionality have a bearing on the lawfulness of tolls charged?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(23 January 2001)

The application of tolls on bridges (especially for heavy goods vehicles) is subject to the provisions of Directive 1999/62/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures(1). Article 7.9 stipulates that the level of the tolls has to be related to and must not exceed the costs of constructing, operating and developing the infrastructure concerned.

There are no Community rules that specify the proportionality of tolls in relation to regional or social policy objectives. Member States are free to specify public service requirements and possibly compensate unprofitable passenger services on the basis of Regulation (EEC) No 1191/69 of the Council of 26 June 1969 on action by Member States concerning the obligations inherent in the concept of a public service in transport by rail, road and inland waterway(2) as amended by Council Regulation (EEC) No 1893/91 of 20 June 1991(3).

Finally, the Community concept of free movement of goods and persons relates rather to the free movement between Member States and the abolition of discrimination based on nationality. Bridge and motorway tolls are not in contradiction with this principle.

(1) OJ L 187, 20.7.1999.

(2) OJ L 156, 28.6.1969.

(3) OJ L 169, 29.6.1991.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2997/00

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Council

(25 September 2000)

Subject: Plan Colombia

What actions does the Council intend to take to ensure that the Colombian government honour its commitment to improve human rights conditions as set out in Plan Colombia? Is the Council aware of the inherent links between the state army, to whom the aid package is primarily directed, and the paramilitary groups who have carried out recent massacres?

Reply

(12 February 2001)

The European Union has repeatedly affirmed its support for the efforts of the Colombian Government to take forward the peace process, but it has insisted, and will continue to insist, that the Government commit itself to improving the human rights situation in Colombia.

The European Union has also appealed to all the parties to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms and to seek a negotiated solution to the conflict, without which there can be no prospect of lasting peace.

The Council has already had occasion to brief the European Parliament on Plan Colombia several times, notably at the October part-session, in reply to Oral Questions H-715 and H-776.

Plan Colombia is a National Recovery Programme launched by President Pastrana when he was elected in July 1998. The Plan, which envisages a budget of USD 7 600 million over three years, includes provisions concerning the peace process in Colombia, rehabilitation of the Colombian economy, combating drugs, reform of the legal system, protection of human rights, democracy and social development. In the course of technical missions the Union has voiced its concerns and made comments and additional recommendations, in consideration of which the Colombian representatives presented their reply at the international meeting in London on 19 June 2000.

The Union is watching the development of the situation in Colombia very closely and endeavouring to further the peace process there by seeking practical possibilities for cooperation. Following the international meeting on Colombia held in Madrid on 6/7 July 2000, attended by representatives of the 15 Member States and the Commission and by Mr Solana, the Secretary-General/High Representative for the CFSP, progress was made in the discussions at the meeting in Bogota on 24 October 2000. The Union is currently preparing a vast array of support measures exclusively concerning civil, social and ecological projects, to be presented at the meeting scheduled for March 2001 in Brussels; this meeting follows on from the previous meetings mentioned above. The package of measures reflects the independent approach taken by the European Union and its Member States to support the peace process in Colombia.

In determining the means to be deployed, the Union will ensure that its aid contributes to respect for and promotion of human rights, which are a vital component of its cooperation with third countries.