ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0067/99

by Esko Seppänen (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(27 January 1999)

Subject: EU Directive on working hours

According to information available in Finland, the EU has adopted a Directive on working hours which permits drivers of emergency vehicles to work for an uninterrupted period of more than ten hours. As the Directive evidently excludes drivers of such vehicles from the scope of industrial safety provisions, does the Commission intend to draft provisions to protect them from having to work excessively long hours?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(9 April 1999)

Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1996(1) lays down minimum safety and health requirements for the organisation of working time. This Directive applies to workers using emergency vehicles, such as fire appliances and ambulances, to the extent that characteristics peculiar to their activities do not inevitably conflict with the legislation. Article 6 of the Directive stipulates that the average working time for each seven-day period, including overtime should not exceed 48 hours. Article 3 sets a minimum daily rest period of 11 hours. It is, therefore, possible within the Directive to work more than 10 hours per day, provided the average weekly working time remains 48 hours in total. Article 4 of the Directive states that every worker is entitled to a rest break where the working day is longer than six hours.

There is additional flexibility in Article 17 (2)(1)(c)(iii) which allows derogations from these minimum standards for the ambulance, fire and civil protection services by means of national legislation, collective agreements,or agreements between both sides of the industry provided that the workers concerned are afforded periods of equivalent compensatory rest. There is consequently, flexibility within the Directive, but on the basis of an established framework of social protection.

(1) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0970/99

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE) to the Commission

(15 April 1999)

Subject: Trade promotion programme for European products on the Japanese market

The Commission has submitted to the Council a proposal for a regulation on the implementation of a programme of specific measures and actions to improve access of EU goods and services to the Japanese market (COM(98) 722 final).

Bearing in mind that Parliament has adopted a resolution in which it declared itself in favour of a regulation covering Community actions to promote exports to third countries, particularly for the textile sector, will the Commission take account of Parliament's request and expand the regulation to include other third countries?

Answer given by Sir Leon Brittan on behalf of the Commission

(7 May 1999)

In its conclusions of 29 May 1995 the Council recognised the distinct and specific problems of market access for Community businesses in Japan and considered that priority should be given to improving access to the Japanese market. The current Commission proposal for a regulation(1) on the implementation by the Commission of a programme of specific measures and actions to improve access of Community goods and cross-border services to Japan emanates from these conclusions. It will establish a legal base for this programme and ensure its continuation until the end of 2001. It is not intended to enlarge this regulation to include countries other than Japan.

The Gateway to Japan export promotion campaign is one of the two principal measures to be implemented by the Commission (the other is the Executive training programme in Japan). At the launch of this campaign in 1997 the Commission decided, in conjunction with Member States, on the sectors to be targeted by the campaign. The textile sector was not one of them.

(1) COM(98) 722 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 144/99 by Brigitte LANGENHAGEN EU aid to Verden (SUPPLEMENTARY ANSWER)



Official Journal C 370 , 21/12/1999 P. 0021



WRITTEN QUESTION E-0144/99 by Brigitte Langenhagen (PPE) to the Commission (11 February 1999) Subject: EU aid to Verden During the 1994-99 parliamentary term, what European Union grants, broken down by aid area, and for what amounts, were made to Verden?
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2191/99

by Jorge Hernández Mollar (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 November 1999)

Subject: Drinking on planes

In some EU Member States there have been a number of cases of in-flight disturbances being caused by people who have been drinking heavily. Such incidents can actually jeopardise flight safety.

Is the Commission aware of this situation?

Does it intend to take any action on the issue of alcohol consumption on commercial flights?

Answer given by Ms de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(1 December 1999)

The Commission is aware of the safety problems caused by the excessive consumption of alcohol on aeroplanes.

The Commission, in collaboration with the national authorities and the parties concerned, is considering what measures could be taken to deal with this relatively recent development.

Possible measures include, first and foremost, increasing the number of flight attendants and giving them special training. It is they, under the authority of the pilot-in-command, who are responsible for safety in the cabin. It is therefore important that they be properly trained to deal with aggressive behaviour.

Recommendations could also be made to the carriers regarding the amount of alcohol distributed on board, especially during long haul flights.

The Commission will address the problem and present possible solutions in a communication on passenger protection which it plans to adopt after extensive consultation of the parties concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1916/99

by Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(14 October 1999)

Subject: EU Development aid programmes in Mozambique

Could the Commission explain why EU development aid programmes in Mozambique were suspended for a period of several months at the beginning of this year, which had the effect of endangering whole programmes and diplomatic relations?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(9 November 1999)

The question must be based on a misunderstanding. The Commission has not taken any decision in 1999, or indeed in recent years, to close, or otherwise suspend, development aid to Mozambique.

Currently, implementation of development aid programmes in Mozambique has been progressing according to plan. During the first semester of 1999, the Commission approved two new programmes amounting to 25,8 million. There has been no particular problem with the Mozambican authorities during the period mentioned by the Honourable Member. On the contrary, relations have improved, allowing for the Mozambican authorities to be very much involved in the definition, planning and implementation of the aid programmes.

The Honourable Member might wish to note, as well, that funding from the Community to Mozambique is presently at a high level. Indeed, disbursements in 1998 reached 91 million, whereas forecasts for 1999 and 2000 are presently set at 132 million and 127 million.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1600/99

by Marco Cappato (TDI) to the Commission

(7 September 1999)

Subject: Conditions under which Mr Ashot Bleyan, former Education Minister of the Republic of Armenia, is being held

According to his lawyer and to information in the press, Mr Ashot Bleyan, former Education Minister of the Republic of Armenia, who has been in prison for several months, has been beaten and placed in solitary confinement.

What information does the Commission have about Mr Ashot Bleyan, particularly as regards the charges made against him, compliance by the authorities with the rules of penal procedure, the conditions under which he is being held and his current state of health?

In more general terms, what steps has the Commission taken or does it intend to take to ensure that Mr Ashot Bleyan benefits from the rights of any accused person to a legal defence and to proper treatment that complies with the international rules governing the holding of prisoners?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(4 October 1999)

The Commission has been following the detention and legal proceedings brought against former Education Minister Ashot Bleyan by the Armenian authorities, charging him with civil and criminal offences including embezzlement.

The Commission is concerned by reports alleging that Mr Bleyan has been subjected to beatings while in custody leading to a serious deterioration in his health. The Commission is urgently seeking clarification on these allegations from the Armenian authorities.

The partnership and cooperation agreement (PCA) with Armenia, which entered into force in June 1999, provides a basis for discussion of human rights issues which will be on the agenda and discussed at the forthcoming meeting of the cooperation council on October 12th 1999.

To assist Armenia to meet its rule of law and human rights obligations under the PCA and its application for membership of the Council of Europe, the Commission is about to launch a 1 million programme for training of the Armenia judiciary and has allocated funds to help Armenia to improve compliance with the European Convention on human rights in a joint programme with the Council of Europe.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1848/99

by Carlos Carnero González (PSE) to the Commission

(11 October 1999)

Subject: Imprisonment of opposition figures by the government of Equatorial Guinea

On 9 September 1999, Mr Plácido Micó, the President of the Convergence for Social Democracy party (CPDS), a member party of the Socialist International, who became a member of the national parliament following the elections of 7 March 1999 but resigned his seat in protest at the totally undemocratic circumstances in which they were held, was arbitrarily arrested by the authorities of Equatorial Guinea, and was kept in prison for almost one week. This is one, particularly serious, example among many of the failure of the Malabo regime to keep the promises of democratisation made by it to the international community including, in the past, to the President of the European Commission.

What action has the Commission taken to condemn this act, and what measures does it intend to take to call on President Teodoro Obiang to ensure full respect for human rights and, as a matter of urgency, to establish democracy in Equatorial Guinea, a country which is a signatory to the Lomé Convention?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 1999)

The Commission is aware of the difficulties connected with the process of democratisation, especially as regards the exercise of fundamental freedoms by the opposition in Equatorial Guinea. With regard to the arrest of Mr Placido Mico, the President of the Convergence for Social Democracy (CPDS) and leader of the opposition in Equatorial Guinea, the Commission, together with the locally represented Member States (Spain and France), has sought explanations from the national authorities for the arrest and detention of Mr Mico. Mr Mico was conditionally released on 16 September 1999. The Commission is following developments in the country very closely and continuing the dialogue with the national authorities with a view to advancing and consolidating the fragile process of democratisation.

In this connection, the Commission is studying the possibility of supporting the process under way by adopting positive measures including aid for the organisation of municipal elections in early 2000, on condition that the electoral process takes place in acceptable conditions of transparency and fairness, and by drawing up an overall programme of support for the consolidation of the democratisation process, improvements in human rights and the construction of a State based on the rule of law in Equatorial Guinea.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1976/99

by Inger Schörling (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(28 October 1999)

Subject: Brominated flame retardants

There have recently been alarming reports in Sweden of high levels of brominated flame retardants in fish in the Baltic. The Swedish government has promised to ban brominated flame retardants in 2004 and to press for reductions in their use.

How does the Commission intend to deal with the problem of brominated flame retardants?

Does it intend to seek a ban at EU level, and if so, when?

Could a unilateral Swedish ban on brominated fire retardants constitute an obstacle to the free movement of goods and thus an infringement of EU law?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(24 November 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer to Written Question E-3004/98 by Mr Eisma(1).

The Commission is aware of recently published Swedish research on brominated flame retardants, in particular as regards polybrominated diphenylethers (PBDEs). In this context, information not only on the levels of certain brominated flame retardants in fish but also on increased concentrations of five PBDE congeners in the blood of workers at recycling plants is a cause for concern. The Commission will give full consideration to these findings in preparing a proposal for a directive on waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), which is intended to lead to a increase in the recycling of plastics containing flame retardants.

With respect to the last question of the Honourable Member, a possible unilateral ban on brominated flame retardants would have to be assessed according to Articles 28 and 30 (ex Articles 30 and 36) of the EC Treaty concerning quantitative restrictions between Member States.

(1) OJ C 142, 21.5.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1972/99

by Gilles Savary (PSE) to the Commission

(19 October 1999)

Subject: Harmonisation of driving restrictions for heavy goods vehicles at weekends and on public holidays (proposal for a directive COM(1998) 115 final of 25 May 1998

What is the state of play regarding the Commission's position and its work, following the conclusions of the Council of Ministers of Transport, which met in Luxembourg on 6 October 1999, in connection with driving restrictions for heavy goods vehicles at weekends and on public holidays?

Is the Commission still working on the harmonisation of time-slots for the circulation of heavy goods vehicles at weekends and on public holidays? In particular, is the proposal for a directive COM(1998) 115(1) still in its current form, or does the Commission intend to change or simply to withdraw its proposal?

If changes are envisaged, what is the basis for a compromise, and what is the timetable for such changes?

(1) OJ C 198, 24.6.1998, p. 17.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(10 November 1999)

The Commission can inform the Honourable Member that following the Transport Council on 6 October 1999, and the discussions on the proposal for a Council and Parliament directive on harmonised rules for driving restrictions on heavy goods vehicles involved in international transport on designated roads, it is currently working on a revised proposal for the directive.

During the Transport Council, there was a substantial degree of agreement on two issues: the obligation for the Member States to notify the restrictions in advance to the Commission for the sake of greater transparency; and the harmonisation of the scope of the restrictions which means that a common list of exceptions will be established.

However, the issue of restrictions during the weekends and public holidays is still pending. The strength of feeling on the subject in both the Council and Parliament is leading to polarised position being taken.

Therefore, the Commission intends to adopt and present to Council and Parliament by the end of 1999 a revised proposal which aims to take into account on the one hand the implications for the internal market of the restrictions to the circulation of heavy goods vehicles on the Trans European road network, and on the other hand the need to ensure that due consideration is given to the limitations adopted by Member States for legitimate and justified reasons.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-1874/99

by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission

(12 October 1999)

Subject: Noise pollution at Barcelona airport

For some time now, people living in close proximity to Barcelona airport, particularly inhabitants from the Gavà municipality, have been complaining about the high noise pollution levels of many aircraft making their approach to the airport, even at night. It would appear that the culprits are often aircraft from the former USSR which fail to comply with European regulations.

Can the Commission provide information on the extent to which the competent authorities at Barcelona airport have been applying and taking further action on the relevant Community regulations?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 1999)

The Commission has no evidence of any infringement of the Community legislation on aircraft noise by the Spanish authorities, in particular by the authorities of Barcelona airport. The Commission can however provide some general information concerning aircraft noise.

Council Directive 92/14/EC of 2 March 1992 on the limitation of the operation of aeroplanes covered by Part II, Chapter 2, Volume 1 of Annex 16 to the Convention on international civil aviation, second edition (1988)(1) aims at gradually phasing out those aircraft (the co-called Chapter 2 aircraft) that do not meet the most recent noise standard. The phase-out started on 1 April 1995 and will be finalised on 1 April 2002. This Directive provides for a derogation from the phase-out until 1 April 2002 for aircraft fitted with engines having a by-pass ratio of more than 2, which is the case for some of the Russian built aircraft.

(1) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992, amended by Council Directive 98/20/EC, OJ L 107, 7.4.1998.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2388/99

by Sérgio Marques (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 December 1999)

Subject: Banana import arrangements

The proposal adopted by the Commission at its meeting of 10 November 1999 on the new import arrangements for bananas poses a substantial threat to the continued production of bananas in the EU, owing in particular to the probable substantial change in marketing channels. This change may seriously hinder the marketing of Community bananas and the risk is that no aid system may be able to compensate producers.

Because of this and the fact that a senior Commission official stated that the new arrangements would not adversely affect Community bananas, can the Commission say how it intends to safeguard the interests of banana producers in Madeira under the new arrangements?

Furthermore, assuming that the marketing of Community bananas is guaranteed and bearing in mind the budgetary commitments made in Agenda 2000, how will the additional cost of the system of aid to Community producers (deficiency payments) be funded following the increased supply of bananas and the consequent fall in prices?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 1999)

The proposal adopted by the Commission on 10 November 1999(1) aims to meet the Community's obligations to the World Trade Organisation (WTO), while taking into account the essential concerns of the Community and the banana producers in the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States and the need to comply with the strict limits of the Community budget.

It is based on a tariff-only system which would enter into force not later than 1 January 2006 following a transitional period during which a system of tariff quotas would apply, together with a tariff preference which would be sufficient to maintain access for ACP produce.

The Commission considers that support for Community producers is guaranteed by the present system of compensatory aid calculated on the basis of the difference between the flat-rate reference income which was increased by 5 % in 1998 and by 3 % in 1999 and the average prices obtained during the banana marketing year. This system ensures that Community production is marketed, by providing full compensation no matter how prices move on the Community market during this period.

The Commission's proposal is accompanied by a financial statement. The proposal is expected to entail an increase in expenditure of EUR 77 million and an increase in income of EUR 30 million. The impact on the budget of applying a tariff-only system is not quantifiable at this stage.

(1) SEC(1999) 1820 final.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2483/99

by Fernando Fernández Martín (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Illegal imports of tomatoes from Morocco

By virtue of the agreements between the European Union and the Kingdom of Morocco, Moroccan tomato producers can gain access to the European market at a tariff of EUR 500 per

tonne for a maximum quota of 150 676 tonnes. Reports from various quarters had suggested that Morocco had been breaking the said agreements, employing various means to exceed the quota allocated to it by varying degrees. Highly reliable official sources have since confirmed this. According to Eurostat, tomato imports from Morocco over the period 1998-1999 in fact amounted to 181 542 tonnes, more than 30 000 tonnes in excess of the negotiated quota.

Confirmation of this was provided by the Director-General for Agriculture himself, Mr Guy Legras, during the partnership day with the outermost regions organised by the Commission under the patronage of its President, Mr Prodi. Mr Legras stated further that the Commission lacked the human resources needed to conduct the inspection work that would ensure that the quantity of tomatoes entering the Community market from Morocco did not exceed the set quota.

Bearing in mind that this situation has placed European tomato producers B and above all those in the south, where production calendars coincide with those of Morocco B at a severe disadvantage, what measures has the Commission taken to compel Morocco to comply with its undertakings vis-à-vis the import quota? On what date does it intend to start charging the tariff applicable once the authorised quota ceiling has been exceeded?

Does the Commission envisage introducing any other measures to enable it to conduct the inspection duties assigned to it with regard to tomatoes more effectively than has hitherto been the case?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-2344/99, E-2345/99, E-2346/99, E-2347/99, E-2348/99 and P-2483/99 given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2000)

The Commission is closely monitoring developments in fresh tomato imports from Morocco.

Having noted that the quantities agreed on for the 1998/1999 marketing year were being exceeded, the Commission drew the Moroccan authorities' attention to the importance of respecting those quantities if the Community market was to remain in equilibrium.

During the current marketing year, developments in imports in October 1999 prompted the Commission to request urgent talks with the Moroccan authorities. Those talks were held in Rabat on 22 December 1999 but did not lead to a solution guaranteeing that the granted quota would not be exceeded. Accordingly, and without prejudice to future talks, the Commission, by Regulation (EC) No 2767/1999, introduced an import licence system, in accordance with the exchange of letters between the Community and the Kingdom of Morocco on 22 December 1994.

The Commission would remind the Member States that they are responsible for the correct application of the rules in force concerning imports, including the setting of customs duties due.