ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0842/03

by Jean-Claude Fruteau (PSE) to the Commission

(18 March 2003)

Subject: Reform of the Common Agricultural Policy

The principle of a single farm payment subject to compliance with environmental, food safety, animal welfare, health and occupational safety standards as well as the requirement to keep all farmland in good condition has the advantage of moving away from the production-incentive approach that has prevailed until now and has revealed its limits.

However, there is a possible concern that decoupling does not take adequate account of regional diversities, particularly with regard to production in the ultra-peripheral regions. In these regions, many farmers set themselves up in business each year, without necessarily occupying a farm.

By restricting eligibility for the single payment to producers who have received financial aid during the 2000-2002 period, the Commission proposal is, in fact, denying new producers access to aid. This measure addresses only the limitations of continental production, but is completely inappropriate for the situation in the overseas territories where local production only provides for a small percentage of local consumption.

What specific measures does the Commission intend to put in place in order not to discourage young farmers from setting up in business in these regions?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 April 2003)

The Community has for a long time been engaged in helping newly established farmers, and in particular young farmers, to start up.

To this end, the Community set up, in the reform of rural development implemented by Agenda 2000, a system of specific support applying mainly to young farmers, the results of which are promising.

Under the reform of the common agricultural policy which the Commission has just proposed to the Council, particular focus was given to the issue of new entrants to farming; it is also for this purpose that the Commission has proposed to the Council that a national reserve be constituted in every Member State.

In accordance with Article 45 of the proposal for a Council Regulation establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and support schemes for producers of certain crops, Member States may use the national reserve to grant reference amounts to new farmers who commence their agricultural activity after 31 December 2000, according to objective criteria and in such a way as to ensure equal treatment between farmers and to avoid market and competition distortions.

Thus, it will be up to the Member States to define the allocation criteria and to grant rights to newly established farmers, which will have to be objective and ensure equal treatment among farmers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0382/03

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 February 2003)

Subject: Environmental pollution caused by a factory in the Larissa area

In the Larissa area (6 kilometres along the regional road linking Larissa and Sykourio) there is a brick and tile factory, Terra Ltd Viokeral, which uses the fuel Pet Coke without any sulphur dioxide filters. This fuel has been found to have serious consequences for the environment because of the increased sulphur content and sulphur dioxide emissions which are over the permitted limits.

Does the Commission consider that this constitutes a violation of Directive 96/61/EC(1)? If so, how does it intend to intervene so as to prevail upon Greece to comply with this Directive and put an end to the pollutant emissions of sulphur dioxide from the factory in question and any other similar emissions by other factories on Greek territory?

(1) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996, p. 26.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(20 March 2003)

On the basis of the situation reported by the Honourable Member, the Commission has launched an own-initiative investigation to determine whether the factory in question complies with the Community's environment legislation.

A letter has been sent to the Greek authorities asking them for information on compliance with Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning integrated pollution prevention and control and Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985(1), as amended by Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997(2), on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment.

Once it has received a reply from the Greek authorities, the Commission will examine whether there is any violation of the aforementioned Community acts and will take the necessary steps to ensure that Community law is observed in this instance.

(1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0140/03

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

(28 January 2003)

Subject: EU-Greenland international fisheries agreement and development cooperation

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

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

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

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

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 March 2003)

1. The fisheries relations between the Community and Greenland are governed by a Fisheries Agreement(1) that entered into force on 1 February 1985, at the same time as the entry into force of the Treaty of withdrawal, or Greenland Treaty(3). Drawing upon the principles of the Greenland Treaty, which emphasises co-operation and development, the Fisheries Agreement is not confined to fisheries matters but that is also intended to support the development of Greenland.

Article 11 of the current Protocol to the fisheries agreement between the Community and Greenland(2) fixes the level of financial compensation at EUR 42 820 000 per year. The Protocol does not make a clear distinction between the amount due for obtaining catch quotas in Greenland waters and the amount intended to cover co-operation and development.

2. It is the Community's view that for the sake of transparency, the financial compensation should in the future be split into a fisheries component and a cooperation and development component. Negotiations will continue in 2003 under the review process aiming at achieving this financial transparency.

3. There are no licence fees for vessels fishing under the Protocol to the fisheries agreement with Greenland.

(1) OJ L 29, 1.2.1985.

(2) OJ L 209, 2.8.2001.

(3) OJ L 29, 1.2.1985.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1135/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the action programme for migrant workers by the municipality of Pistoia

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Pistoia, urgently need to use European funds to support migrant workers, including those from outside the Community, in order to guarantee them the best conditions in which to live and integrate with the local community, in terms of both work and social conditions,

Can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Pistoia has submitted projects for the action programme for migrant workers?

2. whether the municipality of Pistoia has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-0828/03, E-0894/03, E-1126/03,E-1127/03, E-1128/03, E-1129/03, E-1130/03, E-1131/03, E-1132/03,E-1133/03, E-1134/03, E-1135/03, E-1136/03, E-1137/03 and E-1138/03given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

There is currently no Action Programme for Migrant Workers at Community level. The Commission recalls that funding for measures to promote the integration of migrant workers, under Budget Line B3-4110, was suspended in 1998 following the judgement of the European Court of Justice in Case C-106/96. No funding has been awarded in this field since that date.

A new programme to promote the integration of third country nationals, under Budget line B5-815, will be launched by the Commission (Directorate General Justice and Home Affairs) in May 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1133/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the action programme for migrant workers by the municipality of Pesaro

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Pesaro, urgently need to use European funds to support migrant workers, including those from outside the Community, in order to guarantee them the best conditions in which to live and integrate with the local community, in terms of both work and social conditions,

Can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Pesaro has submitted projects for the action programme for migrant workers?

2. whether the municipality of Pesaro has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-0828/03, E-0894/03, E-1126/03,E-1127/03, E-1128/03, E-1129/03, E-1130/03, E-1131/03, E-1132/03,E-1133/03, E-1134/03, E-1135/03, E-1136/03, E-1137/03 and E-1138/03given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

There is currently no Action Programme for Migrant Workers at Community level. The Commission recalls that funding for measures to promote the integration of migrant workers, under Budget Line B3-4110, was suspended in 1998 following the judgement of the European Court of Justice in Case C-106/96. No funding has been awarded in this field since that date.

A new programme to promote the integration of third country nationals, under Budget line B5-815, will be launched by the Commission (Directorate General Justice and Home Affairs) in May 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1132/03

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 April 2003)

Subject: Use of funds from the action programme for migrant workers by the municipality of Perugia

In September 2002, the monitoring committee of the Italian Ministry for Economic Affairs issued a report on the spending of EU funds.

The report reveals the alarming slowness and inefficiency with which EU funds are allocated to projects by some regional authorities.

The grave concerns about the inadequate use of European funds by local authorities have frequently been echoed by the Commission.

Bearing in mind that some local authorities, such as the municipality of Perugia, urgently need to use European funds to support migrant workers, including those from outside the Community, in order to guarantee them the best conditions in which to live and integrate with the local community, in terms of both work and social conditions,

Can the Commission state:

1. whether the municipality of Perugia has submitted projects for the action programme for migrant workers?

2. whether the municipality of Perugia has secured funding for these projects?

3. whether this funding has been used?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-0828/03, E-0894/03, E-1126/03,E-1127/03, E-1128/03, E-1129/03, E-1130/03, E-1131/03, E-1132/03,E-1133/03, E-1134/03, E-1135/03, E-1136/03, E-1137/03 and E-1138/03given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 April 2003)

There is currently no Action Programme for Migrant Workers at Community level. The Commission recalls that funding for measures to promote the integration of migrant workers, under Budget Line B3-4110, was suspended in 1998 following the judgement of the European Court of Justice in Case C-106/96. No funding has been awarded in this field since that date.

A new programme to promote the integration of third country nationals, under Budget line B5-815, will be launched by the Commission (Directorate General Justice and Home Affairs) in May 2003.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0352/03

by Jean-Claude Fruteau (PSE) to the Council

(6 February 2003)

Subject: Ultraperipheral regions

The European Union has seven ultraperipheral regions: the Azores, Madeira, the Canary Islands, Guadeloupe, Martinique, Guyana and Réunion. These regions form a unique and remarkable part of the Community's territory, enshrined in Article 299(2) of the Amsterdam Treaty.

The ultraperipheral regions suffer from many geographical and natural handicaps (distance from continental Europe, difficult topography, small size, insularity and/or enclosed position), which considerably hamper their economic development. As a result, six of the European Union's ten least prosperous regions are ultraperipheral regions.

What measures does the Greek Presidency intend to take for the benefit of these regions?

Joint answerto Written Questions E-0235/03 and P-0352/03

(13 May 2003)

In the context of the report(1) from the Commission on implementation of Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty: measures to assist the outermost regions, the Council, during the first semester of 2003 has planned to examine the Commission proposals concerning on the one hand modifications to the POSEI regime(2) and on the other, the modification of the Regulation(3) introducing a scheme to compensate for the additional costs incurred in the marketing of certain fishery products from the outermost regions. These proposals have not yet been officially presented to the Council.

Furthermore, the Council will examine the 2nd Interim Report on Economic and Social Cohesion, which presents an update of the analysis of the situation and trends emerging in the regions, along with the main topics of the debate on future cohesion policy after enlargement.

(1) COM(2002) 723 final.

(2) Regulations 1452/2001, 1453/2001 and 1454/2001.

(3) Regulation 579/2002.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1452/03

by Hiltrud Breyer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(28 April 2003)

Subject: Acrylamide

There is evidence suggesting that the presence of acrylamide in potato products, especially chips, could be linked to the adding of silicone oils to certain fats for frying.

Is the Commission able to provide information concerning such a connection? Are there studies or opinions of scientific committees on this subject? Does the Commission intend to commission studies in order to determine the facts?

What is the level of silicone oil permitted in the EU?

What steps does the Commission intend to take in order to ban the use of silicone in fats for frying?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(6 June 2003)

Current knowledge indicates that acrylamide can be formed in high-starch foods when they are cooked at high temperatures, such as frying, grilling, baking, roasting etc. The mechanisms of formation of acrylamide in food are complex and the Commission is in the process of gathering information. The interaction of certain amino acids and sugars appears to be a major route for the formation of acrylamide although other factors are involved. Based upon current knowledge it is unclear whether the choice of oils for frying foods would be an important factor to prevent the formation of high levels of acrylamide.

With regard to the use of silicone oil in frying oils, this substance is equivalent to E 900 dimethyl polysiloxane and is authorised as an additive in food. Parliament and Council Directive No 95/2/EC of 20 February 1995 on food additives other than colours and sweeteners(1) authorises the use of dimethyl polysiloxane in fats and oils for frying up to a limit of 10 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). This limit was set in line with the opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food. The opinion indicated that toxicological information showed no safety concerns at such levels of use and an Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI) of 1,5 mg/kg bodyweight was set for this substance.

Dimethyl polysiloxane is used as an anti-foaming agent and as such it affects the release of moisture during frying. The Commission is aware that one study has indicated a possible link between moisture and levels of acrylamide. However, the link became apparent using unacceptably high levels of dimethyl polysiloxane which would not be permitted in commercial practice.

Research is ongoing to help better understand how acrylamide is formed in food. The Commission has constructed a database to summarise the various research activities and this is available on the website(2). From our current understanding of the formation of acrylamide in food, the Commission is not aware of information that dimethyl polysiloxane at permitted levels would be an important contributor. However, this is an area to be considered further as more data on the mechanisms of formation of acrylamide in food become available.

(1) OJ L 61, 18.3.1995.

(2) http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sfp/fcr/acrylamide/acryl_index_en.html.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1370/03

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(4 April 2003)

Subject: Commissioners' links to the Bilderberg Group

Commissioners Mario Monti, Erikki Liikanen, Pedro Solbes Mira, Gunther Verheugen, Antonio Vitorino and Frederik Bolkestein have in the past attended Bilderberg meetings and are thus de facto members, since they are kept apprised of its activities. Commission President Romano Prodi was a Steering Committee Member of Bilderberg in the 80s, at the time when ECB President Wim Duisenberg was Treasurer. Three Commissioners are or have been members of the Trilateral Commission, Mario Monti, Chris Patten and Pedro Solbes Mira.

Will the Commission say which Commissioners will be attending the forthcoming Bilderberg and Trilateral meetings, whether they will be attending on behalf of the Commission or in an apparent private capacity, and whether they will be granted daily allowances or other expenses in connection with those meetings? Will the Commission ensure that these memberships are mentioned in the Commissioners' individual declarations of interest?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(15 May 2003)

Several Members of the Commission have been invited to and have participated in meetings of the Bilderberg group during their term of office, while others have been invited and have participated before becoming Members of the Commission and have not then participated during their term of office. It should be pointed out that in the group's rules there is no such category as member of the group. The only category that exists is member of the Steering Committee.

No Member of the Commission is a member of the Steering Committee. Personalities who do not belong to the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg group may be invited to the meetings.

Occasional participation at a meeting does not need to be mentioned in the declaration of interests provided for by the Code of Conduct for Commissioners, since the act of participating occasionally at one or another conference, or of receiving information on the activities of a group, does not necessarily mean that the person concerned is a member of or belongs to a group.

As regards participation at the next meeting of the Bilderberg group, which is due to take place from 16 to 18 May 2003 in Versailles, three Commissioners have accepted the invitation that has been extended to them on account of their functions, although they will not be participating on behalf of the Commission. The three in question are Mr Monti, Mr Bolkestein and Mr Lamy. Their trip will be governed by the rules generally applicable in this matter.

As regards the Trilateral Commission, its rules preclude the participation of any member who holds public office. No Commissioner is therefore a member of the Trilateral, and no Commissioner has as yet voiced any intention of participating in a future meeting of the Trilateral Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0092/03

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject: Programmes of assessment of buildings vulnerable to earthquakes

In San Giuliano di Puglia (Italy -31 October 2002) a recently modified school building collapsed in a moderate sized earthquake resulting in the death of 27 occupants (25 of them schoolchildren). According to the European Association of Earthquake Engineering this is not an isolated incident. Similar incidents could happen in many European countries; however, the problem is preventable and the risk can be substantially reduced by a programme of expert assessment of the older and more vulnerable existing structures and a programme of strengthening works in the highest-risk areas. The rules for the assessment and strengthening of structures are available in the European Standard, Part 1-4 of Eurocode 8, prEN 1998-3.

In the interest of preventing further loss of life and considering that in many Member States there is excessive earthquake activity, could the Commission formulate a directive requiring the Member States to establish programmes of assessment (according to the above-mentioned European Standard) of all buildings and structures in areas known to be prone to damaging earthquakes and of strengthening the ones which are found to be inadequate?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2003)

The Commission deeply regrets the loss of human lives and the damages caused to the population of San Giuliano di Puglia.

At this stage, the Commission does not envisage any specific proposal for legislation in the field of earthquake mitigation.

However, the current action programme in the field of civil protection established by Council decision 1999/847/EC(1) foresees to develop initiatives in the fields of risk management methodologies, including risk mapping, for seism and other disasters. In that context, a call for proposal shall be published in the first half of 2003.

Moreover, the Commission will adopt a communication by May 2003 that will present new concrete measures to improve public safety in the context of natural and man-made hazards. The Parliament will be invited to a meeting planned for 28 February 2003 to discuss these measures, jointly with the Commission as well as the concerned stakeholders.

The above mentioned two initiatives should contribute to the establishment of assessment programmes for identifying vulnerable structures in earthquake prone areas.

(1) 1999/847/EC: Council Decision of 9 December 1999 establishing a Community action programme in the field of civil protection, OJ L 327, 21.12.1999.