ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/871

(2004/C 84 E/0964)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0755/04

by José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 March 2004)

Subject: Statistics relating to the harmonised consumer price index in Europe

The harmonised consumer price index used by Eurostat is a benchmark for comparing inflation between Member States but, without casting doubt on its highly sophisticated scientific nature, how does the Commission explain the persistent feeling among the public in the euro zone that price rises far exceed the increase recorded by the harmonised consumer price index?

Does the Commission realise that, if it cannot be changed, this public perception will have particularly negative effects as it is common knowledge that inflationary factors have very important psycho-sociological interactions and that the fall or stagnation in household consumption can partly be explained by this perception, which may well be mistaken, but which demands a convincing response?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 2004)

The Commission has noted the discrepancy between price increases recorded by official statistics such as the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HICP) and measures of perceived inflation in several Member States. There are various possible explanations for such discrepancy. One that has received supportive evidence (see for example Eurostat's June 2003 HICP press release) is related to the fact that, following the euro cash changeover, consumers experienced significant price increases for some types of goods and services, mostly small services and some frequently bought items. These goods tend to have a large impact on how the public perceives price developments, whereas, due to their relatively small weight in the overall basket of consumption measured by Consumer Price Indices, their price increases were offset by more moderate price developments in other categories of goods and services.

The Commission is fully aware of the possible macroeconomic risks that might stem from the mismatch between inflation perceptions and recorded inflation. However, the Commission also notes that other more fundamental elements are generally advanced as having a stronger bearing on the behaviour of private consumption expenditure. These include changes in unemployment levels, in wages, in asset prices and in the fiscal stance of Member States. Hence, on the basis of available economic evidence it appears unlikely that the discrepancy between recorded and perceived inflation would be a major element behind the recent behaviour of private consumption in the euro area.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/189

(2004/C 84 E/0230)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0263/04

by Matti Wuori (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(29 January 2004)

Subject: Safety at Sosnovyi Bor nuclear power station

Sosnovyi Bor nuclear power station is located on the southern coast of the Gulf of Finland, some 200 km from Helsinki. The four reactors at the power station, which was built in 1973, are of the same RBMK type as the reactor involved in the Chernobyl disaster.

In 2003 the operating permit for the power station's oldest reactor expired. Russia's Nuclear Energy Ministry, Minatom, wanted the power station to be allowed to operate for another 15 years, no less. Apparently Russia's radiation safety authorities have granted the oldest reactor a five-year extension of its permit.

The Norwegian environmental organisation Bellona recently reported on safety problems and financial difficulties at Sosnovyi Bor. According to Bellona, the power station's spent nuclear fuel stores were full years ago, radioactive emissions into the Gulf of Finland are an everyday occurrence, embezzlement of funds and thefts of equipment have occurred at the power station, safety regulations have been systematically disregarded, and the plant's fire safety is poor. Bellona states that Finland's radiation safety authorities have played down the seriousness of the safety situation at Sosnovyi Bor. It has become more difficult to obtain reliable information about safety at Sosnovyi Bor as its management has prevented access to the region, using the threat of terrorism as a pretext.

Sosnovyi Bor nuclear power station is a ticking time-bomb. A group of NGOs based in Russia and the Baltic region has accordingly launched a campaign in favour of the power station's closure.

Nuclear safety is one of the priorities in relations between the EU and Russia. What is the Commission's view of the safety situation at Sosnovyi Bor? What has the Commission done to eliminate the safety risks there? Have Tacis funds been allocated to Sosnovyi Bor? Has the issue of safety at Sosnovyi Bor been discussed as part of the EU-Russia energy dialogue? Has the Commission, at Parliament's request, explored the possibilities of setting up an international environmental and nuclear non-proliferation supervisory authority to coordinate assistance in dealing with radioactive waste and environmental problems caused by it in Russia?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2004)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to oral question No H-39/04 put by Mrs Aaltonen (1) at the February 2004 part-session.

(1) Written answer of 10.2.2004.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/348

(2004/C 84 E/0405)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0277/04

by Philip Claeys (NI) to the Commission

(5 February 2004)

Subject: EU participation in a project to build a multi-purpose hall in Brussels

The Brussels Capital City Region intends to build a multi-purpose hall in the ‘European district’, in the so-called Van Maerlant block. According to the spokesman for the Brussels Chief Minister, Mr Ducarme, the European Union has agreed to co-finance the project, meeting 30 % of the total cost.

Is this information accurate?

What specific undertakings have been given to the Brussels Capital City Region?

What added value does the proposed multi-purpose hall offer the European institutions when set against the existing (and planned) infrastructure?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2004)

The ‘Plan Médiateur’, a study commissioned by the Belgian government, produced ideas for 133 initiatives on which the Belgian authorities are consulting the public. Among those ideas was one which would involve the construction of a cultural centre in the Place Jean Rey the activities of which would be centred round the concept of ‘European culture’.

In the ‘Plan Médiateur’ co-financing from the European Institutions (Parliament, Council, Committee of the Regions, Economic and Social Committee and Commission) of up to 30 % for the whole project was suggested.

The Commission welcomes the exercise as a contribution to the ongoing debate on ways to improve the ‘Quartier Européen’. As made clear in its Communication of 10 December 2003 (1), the Commission would like to work in partnership with the Belgian authorities in efforts to achieve a variety of possible improvements relating to the area.

However, the Honourable Member will wish to note that the Commission has yet to submit its comments to the Belgian authorities on the Plan Médiateur and there have been no formal discussions of any kind on any possible financial contribution.

(1) COM(2003) 755 final.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/922

(2004/C 84 E/1019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0952/04

by Benedetto Della Vedova (NI) to the Commission

(29 March 2004)

Subject: Procedure under Article 24 of Community Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88

In 1999, following the initiation of criminal proceedings against a former director relating to events dating back to the period 1991/1992 and unconnected with training activities, the Italian Ministry of Labour issued a training organisation with an order suspending financing for some EOS, Now, Adapt and Youthstart training programmes pending the outcome of those proceedings (procedure under Article 24 of Community Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 (1)).

The organisation in question appealed first to the Regional Administrative Court and then to the Council of State against this ministerial decision. This appeal was rejected on the grounds that the ministry had not cancelled the measures granting financing, but reserved the right to do so on conclusion of the criminal proceedings.

A final judgement was subsequently delivered acquitting the former director. The organisation therefore asked the ministry to launch the projects and release the corresponding financing. The ministry replied that, despite the acquittal, it could refuse to consent to the conclusion of the new agreement and, therefore, also to the launching of the activities.

However, procedure under Article 24 of Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 is not very clear. It is unclear what the procedure should be for the relaunch of activities (and/or conclusion of an agreement on the carrying-on of activities) and the release of funds when a final outcome has been reached on the circumstances resulting in the freezing of financing (e.g. acquittal of the accused).

Could the Commission therefore indicate:

1. Whether, besides the funds, the activities frozen can be reactivated?

2. What procedure is provided for as regards conclusion of the agreement, since an order has been issued suspending both the conclusion of the agreement and the corresponding financing?

Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(30 April 2004)

The decision to grant a subvention falls within the competence of the Designated Authority in Italy (in conformity with Community Regulations and the Operating Programme approved by the Commission, and Italian legislation). The case raised by the Honourable Member relates to an action decided upon by the Designated Authority managing the project in Italy and therefore, in order to either release the funds, or proceed with the activity, the matter should be addressed to the Designated Authority in Italy.

The Commission can provide contact details to the Honourable Member.

(1) OJ L 374, 31.12.1988, p. 1.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 88/193

(2004/C 88 E/0198)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0559/04

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(26 February 2004)

Subject: EU subsidises First Lady Suha Arafat's high life in Paris

OLAF is currently conducting an investigation into EU subsidies to Palestine (approximately EUR 350 million a year).

A French judge has recently ordered an inquiry into money laundering by Mrs Suha Arafat, the wife of the President of the Palestinian Authority involving a substantial sum (EUR 9 million) transferred from a Swiss bank to Mr Arafat's wife's accounts with the Arab Bank and BNP in Paris.

A significant proportion of the sums involved (EUR 2 million) ended up in the accounts of a well-known interior designer for the Paris jet set (Alberto Pinto).

Similarly substantial IMF funds for Palestine have been diverted to a special account controlled by Arafat.

Does the Commission intend to verify whether or not all or part of the large amounts of aid granted to the Palestinian Authority have been used to fund the life of luxury led by First Lady Suha Arafat in her opulent Parisian residence, far from the dangers and suffering endured in the tortured land of Palestine?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(1 April 2004)

The Commission wishes to inform the Honourable Member that it has been in close contact with the Palestinian Authority (PA) in order to ascertain whether Community funds allocated to the PA have been used by Mr Arafat's wife for personal reasons.

At present, the PA is facing a serious financing deficit and has been unable to pay its regular bills to the private sector or to contribute sufficiently to social services, which has resulted in an accumulation of arrears.

Commission support since 2003 has been targeted on helping to clear these arrears in order to directly assist the private and social sector in the most effective way by supplying emergency relief and help to preserve jobs and social services. These payments are subject to the implementation of ongoing reforms within the PA, notably linked to further improvements in financial management and financial control.

The Commission has set up a technical assistance team which verifies and approves all invoices. The checks performed by the technical assistance team are backed up by further certification of the invoices by an auditor seconded from a European national audit office to ensure that all invoices are for private sector enterprises and social services. It is only after the invoices have been checked that funds are released. Invoices for payments to Mrs Arafat, and other non-eligible third parties, would be excluded under this system of control.

The Commission has no knowledge of diversion of International Monetary Fund (IMF) funds, to which the Honourable Member refers, into a special account controlled by Mr Arafat.
2.

There can therefore be no question of the Commission having to terminate a contract. There has never been any reason for any such contract to exist, either with Professor Ramadan or with the other members of the group. The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that the membership of this group of wise men was designed to reflect the diversity of perspectives of inter-cultural dialogue in the EU and the Mediterranean basin. The Commission plans to continue working along these lines because it believes that its ability to make a clear diagnosis as a prelude to action which is in the common interest of the EU as a whole and of its Member States is largely contingent on a wide range of viewpoints and analyses being heard. The Commission would also stress that the work of the group of wise men took place in full accordance with the principles on which the European Union is based and with the requirements which dialogue imposes. Each member of the group, without exception or restriction, complied with this common rule by approving and signing a report specifically based on the principles of ‘respect for the Other’, ‘equality at all levels’, ‘freedom of conscience, absolute and without restriction of any kind’, ‘solidarity’ and ‘mutual knowledge’.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 78/687

(2004/C 78 E/0733)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0417/04

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 February 2004)

Subject: Sackings from the Finex Group factory

The Finnish Finex Group owns a clothing factory in Nogueira, Maia, Portugal, which used to employ some 1 000 workers. Finex has already pressurised over half of them to accept dismissal agreements. Of the current 430 workers, some 300 women are now being pressurised to consent to unacceptable agreements on their dismissal by the end of this month. It should be noted that this company has received various subsidies.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1. How much Community subsidy has been paid to the Finex Group in Portugal and in other EU countries?

2. What measures are the Commission and the Portuguese Government going to take with a view to defending the employment and all the rights of Finex's workers, most of whom are women?

3. Is the Commission prepared to demand that the subsidies paid to the Finex Group should be repaid, if Finex continues to put pressure on its workers with a view to getting rid of them?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 2004)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as soon as possible.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/383

(2004/C 84 E/0445)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0380/04

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(12 February 2004)

Subject: Contract-holders at the Fire Service

Every year the Fire Service takes on approximately 5 500 fire-fighting/rescue workers on contracts; it states that this is because of a lack of staff (3 500 vacant posts). These workers, who have been the same for decades, are taken on every year on a fixed-term contract, usually for five months, based on a five-year list. The basic qualification for being on the list was the fact that the workers in question had served as volunteer forest fire-fighters. These workers, however, are called upon to intervene in events (road accidents, floods, earthquakes, etc.) throughout the duration of the year and after their contracts have ended, unpaid, on the grounds that they are volunteer fire-fighters. Under the Fire Service's regulations, any refusal by them to work on a volunteer basis may have a consequence on the renewal of their contracts.

1. In view of Directive 2000/78 (1), do the above facts not constitute victimisation under the terms of Article 11?

2. Can those of the workers who, despite this, yield to pressure and agree to carry out duties whenever they are called on and not only in exceptional circumstances (at least four times per month) — thus making it impossible for them to be employed by another employer — argue that they are meeting fixed and constant needs of the Fire Service?

Answer given by Mr Dimas on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2004)

1. Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation puts in place such a framework, and prohibits discrimination on grounds of age, disability, religion or belief or sexual orientation. The Directive covers access to employment, pay, working conditions, dismissal, training etc, and both direct and indirect discrimination are covered.

From the information provided, the Commission does not believe that the treatment of the workers in question is based on any of the grounds of discrimination covered by the Directive, and that therefore the issue raised does not fail within the material scope of Directive 2000/78/EC.

2. There is no Community legislation establishing the criteria for when a fixed-term contract rather than an open-ended contract can be concluded. Whether the work carried out meets fixed and constant needs of the Fire Service is an issue to be addressed by the competent national authorities.

(1) OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p. 16.
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/188

(2004/C 84 E/0228)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0261/04

by Baroness Sarah Ludford (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 February 2004)

Subject: Reported Spanish ban on motorcycles towing trailers

Can the Commission confirm that a ban exists in Spain against motorcycles towing trailers? Is such a ban legal under EU law, ‘inter alia’ on transport and free movement, and what action does the Commission propose to take, if this is indeed the case?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2004)

The Commission informs the Honourable Member that the transposition into Spanish law in 1997 and 1998 of Directive 97/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1997 on certain components and characteristics of two or three-wheel motor vehicles (1) made possible the type-approval and registration in that Member State of two or three-wheel vehicles (motorcycles) with coupling devices for trailers or semitrailers. However, there continued to be a ban on motocycles towing a trailer the General Vehicles Regulation.

As the Commission considered that the total ban on using a motorcycle towing a trailer was likely to constitute an obstacle to the freedom of movement, in 1998 it started infringement proceedings against Spain under Article 226 of the EC Treaty for infringement of Articles 18, 28 and 49 on the free movement of persons and goods and the freedom to provide services. This procedure is currently pending before the Court of Justice of the European Communities (Case C-l97/02).

The Spanish authorities very recently adopted Royal Decree No 1428/2003 of 21 November 2003 approving the General Road Traffic Regulation in implementation of the Law on road traffic, motor vehicles and road safety of 2 March 1990. This new General Road Traffic Regulation entered into force on 23 January 2004 and repealed the total ban on using a motorcycle towing a trailer in Spain.

The Commission emphasises that Article 12 of the new Regulation authorises motorcycles to tow trailers or sidecars only if they do not exceed 50 % of the weight of the towing vehicle. The use of these trailers is also subject to certain conditions: they must be used during daylight and in conditions that guarantee good visibility, the speed of the motorcycle must be reduced by 10 % compared with the speed limit, and these trailers may not in any circumstances be used to transport people.

Nevertheless, the General Vehicle Regulation, which is in the process of being amended, will also have to repeal this ban.

(1) OJ L 226, 18.8.1997.
2.

Must we not take the view that Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union has been breached, in so far as the rejected asylum-seekers are being expelled immediately after the first notification that their application has been rejected and (since, accordingly measures should be taken to review their cases) although they should have the right to lodge an appeal against that decision? It seems that the applications from a large number of asylum-seekers were not given fair consideration between 1993 and 1998 (because of what is known as the 48-hour AC procedure, which did not allow the asylum-seekers to submit evidence which they had obtained subsequently).
EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 84/356

(2004/C 84 E/0414)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0298/04

by Bob van den Bos (ELDR) to the Commission

(6 February 2004)

Subject: Relations between the EU and Libya and human rights in Libya

Libya is doing its utmost to become reintegrated into the international community. In September 2003, the UN sanctions against Libya were lifted. In recent years there has been a rapprochement between the EU and President Gaddafi. The President of the Commission, Mr Prodi, says that by means of his talks with the President he wishes to improve these mutual relations. On 30 December 2003, he invited Libya to join the Barcelona process, in response to which Colonel Gaddafi stated that he was prepared to consider full participation in the process. At present, consideration is also being given to concluding a fisheries agreement with Libya.

To what extent does the human right rights situation play a part in the European Union's attitude towards Libya? Are human rights a topic for discussion in relations between the Commission and the government in Tripoli?

What is the Commission's view of the human rights situation in Libya? Does it believe that the situation has improved?

Will the Commission lend its good offices to facilitate an application for permission for a delegation representing independent human rights organisations to visit Libya to review the human rights situation there?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 March 2004)

There are currently no official relations between the EU and Libya, which has been a passive observer in the Barcelona process since 1999.

The EU hopes that Libya can become a fully-fledged member of the Barcelona process, which it could only join on an unconditional basis and by accepting all its acquis.

This would make it possible to enter into dialogue with Libya on all matters of interest, including human rights.

As things stand, in the absence of any official relations with Libya, human rights issues are dealt with in an ad hoc way.

Lastly, Amnesty International has just made a visit to Libya, where it had been denied entry since 1988. The Commission views this as a positive development.