ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3555/01

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Failure of Greece to comply fully with the judgment of the Court of Justice concerning used cars

In reply to my Question No E-0574/01(1), the Commission informed me that it had addressed a reasoned opinion to the Greek administration under Article 228 (ex-Article 171) of the EC Treaty for incomplete application of the Court of Justice judgment in Case C-375/95, Commission v. Hellenic Republic, concerning the taxation of motor vehicles.

Can the Commission say what developments have taken place in the above matter?

(1) OJ C 318 E, 13.11.2001, p. 75.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 February 2002)

Greece has replied to the reasoned opinion mentioned in the Commission's reply to the honourable Member's previous written question E-574/01. In addition, the European Court of Justice has issued its decision in case C-393/98 (Gomez-Valente), which has aspects in common with the present case. The resultant legal position has been examined, and the Commission will decide in the near future how to proceed further.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3659/01

by Helle Thorning-Schmidt (PSE) to the Commission

(9 January 2002)

Subject: Directives on public supply and service contracts

Under:

- Council Directive 93/36/EEC(1) of 14 June 1993 (as subsequently amended) coordinating procedures for the award of public supply contracts, and

- Council Directive 92/50/EEC(2) of 18 June 1992 (as subsequently amended) relating to the coordination of procedures for the award of public service contracts,

Member States are required to forward annual reports to the Commission on the service contracts and public supply contracts which they have concluded.

The purpose is to enable the Commission to assess the results of the application of the directives.

Has the Commission carried out such assessments in the light of these reports?

Is it also possible for the public to obtain access to those reports?

(1) OJ L 199, 9.8.1993, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 209, 24.7.1992, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2002)

The Commission regularly carries out an evaluation of application and effectiveness of the public procurement directives, on the basis of the statistical reports from Member States, published notices in the Official Journal Supplement S, and other available statistics.

The results of these evaluations have contributed to the Commission's reports on the functioning of Community product and capital Markets(1) and, as structural indicators to the Contribution of the Commission to the Spring European Council, Stockholm 23-24th March 2001(2).

Access to the statistical reports from Member States is governed by the guidelines laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001(3). Before replying to requests for access to reports submitted before the date of application of this Regulation (3 December 2001), the Member States concerned will be consulted for their prior authorisation. For reports submitted after 3 December 2001 access will be granted unless there are grounds for exception under Article 4 of the Regulation.

(1) COM(2001) 736.

(2) COM(2001) 79 final.

(3) Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, OJ L 145, 31.5.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2714/01

by Martin Callanan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 October 2001)

Subject: Sixth VAT directive

The sixth VAT directive provides a lower rate of VAT for installed energy-saving materials, but excludes energy-saving materials sold directly to consumers.

Would the Commission agree that this discrepancy sends out a mixed message regarding the importance of tackling climate change?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(20 November 2001)

The Honourable Member is referred to the Commission's answers to Written Questions E-3018/00 from Mr Ford(1) and E-2431/01 from Mrs McNally(2).

(1) OJ C 163 E, 6.6.2001.

(2) See page 7.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2656/01

by Stavros Xarchakos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 October 2001)

Subject: Reconsideration of the EU's foreign policy

According to information so far made public by the American authorities, Muslim extremists led by bin Laden are implicated in the terrorist attack on the USA, while Afghanistan's Islamic leadership is accused of providing him with support. It is worth noting that in the past information has been published in the European press concerning the involvement of bin Laden's followers in the Bosnian war, while Muslim extremists also participated in the conflict in Kosovo in 1999. It should be remembered that many EU countries helped the Bosnians and the Kosovans both militarily and politically in their conflict with the Serbs.

Does the EU intend to reconsider the policy of support which it has given to Muslim extremist cells in the Balkans? Does it consider that the USA's planned retaliation is placing EU countries in danger? Can accurate figures be provided for the total humanitarian aid given by the EU to Pakistan and Afghanistan during the last five years?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(27 November 2001)

The Community's support in the Balkans is designed to build stability, democracy and the rule of law; it aims to counter extremism in all its forms which has wreaked such havoc across the region in the last decade.

The Commission considers that the attacks in the United States on 11 September represented an attack on open and free societies everywhere. The threat of terrorism is a danger to us all, and the firm action being taken to deal with it is necessary and legitimate. The most dangerous course of action would be to not take action.

Commitments of Community aid to Pakistan for development and economic cooperation over the last five years amount to:

>TABLE>

Pakistan can further benefit under decentralised regional projects, on the basis of calls for proposals.

Humanitarian aid for Pakistan and Afghanistan for the period 1997-2001.

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3504/01

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

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Statements by the Commissioner responsible for the budget concerning the level of Union budgets after 2007 and the future of the Structural Funds for the current Objective 1 regions

In statements made to a Spanish newspaper, the Commissioner responsible for the budget, Michaele Schreyer, underlined her position regarding the point at which decisions should be taken on the appropriations to be allocated to the current Objective 1 regions, including my own region, Galicia, by saying that it is too early to make any forecasts on the future economic situation in Andalusia. However, the Commissioner did not display the same reticence in defining the upper limits for the Community budget in the coming years, even going so far as to claim, looking ahead to the end of the current programming period, which runs until 2006, that she could say very clearly that, even after enlargement, the budget would remain below the maximum ceiling

of 1,27 % of Union GDP. What is the significance of the Commissioner's remarks? How can she venture to make such a budget forecast when her mandate will end with the current parliamentary term in 2004? Why is she so cautious when it comes to defining the Structural Funds for the end of this programming period but so determined on the subject of the level of a Union budget which has yet to be debated by society and the European institutions and which will definitely have to be increased in order to guarantee the very existence of a political and social Europe?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2002)

The budget Commissioner's interview with the Spanish daily El País on 30 November 2001 refers to decisions taken by the Heads of State or Government at the Berlin European Council on 24 and 25 March 1999. The 2000-2006 financial perspective adopted at that Council allows scope for admitting six new Member States in 2002 by creating a specific heading with annual appropriations rising from 6,45 billion in 2002 to 16,78 billion in 2006.

The recent Laeken European Council on 14 and 15 December 2001 confirmed that ten applicant countries will be able to join in 2004, provided that the current pace of negotiations and of reforms in those countries is maintained. On 30 January 2002 the Commission adopted a financial framework for enlargement which will fall within the limits set in Berlin for the new Member States until 2006.

In accordance with the provisions adopted in Berlin, the current Community budget which includes the specific heading for the new Member States does not use up the limit of 1,27 % of Community gross domestic product.

The Commission proposal for the financial perspective after 2006 will be presented in time for the necessary decisions to be taken sufficiently in advance of the end of the current financial perspective.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2027/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Third party taxes in Greece

In its endeavour to harmonise taxes in the Member States, the Commission has taken Greece to the Court of Justice for not having abolished its third party taxes, which are statutory financial charges, imposed on persons or firms paying tax or conducting business, in order to give financial support to third parties.

Given that third party taxes constitute revenue for a number of insurance funds, such as the Farmers' Security Organisation, sports associations and cultural organisations, will the Commission say:

1. how the organisations deprived of the revenue from third party taxes will be given support, and

2. what proposals it has put forward to remedy this situation?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2001)

1. The question of the Honourable Member apparently refers to a court case involving Greece (case C-426/98) that is presently pending before the Court of Justice. The case concerns contributions in favour of the lawyer's welfare fund, insofar as they are levied in connection with the setting up of a company or the increase of a company's capital. The Commission considers that they are contrary to Article 10 of Council Directive 69/335/EEC concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital(1).

Apart from this issue of tax rules, which are harmonised at Community level, Member States remain free to opt for the tax policies which they consider the most adequate, including the financing of organisations by parafiscal taxes. Such tax policy must however respect the general principles of Community law.

2. The Commission has no intention to make proposals in this field.

(1) OJ L 249, 3.10.1969.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3465/01

by Amalia Sartori (PPE-DE), Renato Brunetta (PPE-DE),Giorgio Lisi (PPE-DE) and Giacomo Santini (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(4 January 2002)

Subject: Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and the Decopaint study on the potential for reducing emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) due to the use of paints and varnishes

The Decopaint study on the potential for reducing emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) due to the use of paints and varnishes, published by the Commission in July 2001, envisages the possibility of regulating the percentage of solvents in decorative paints and varnishes and the use of solvent-based paints. In view of the importance of paint-producing SMEs for the European economy, the potentially extremely negative impact of a legislative proposal on employment in the sector must be seriously assessed.

Does the European Commission intend to carry out a cost/benefit analysis of the impact of the proposed rules on SMEs?

Will the Commission take due account of the needs of SMEs and the effects on the SME paint sector when it assesses the regulatory options in this area?

Answer given by Mr Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(6 February 2002)

The Commission will consider the impact of any proposal to reduce the content of volatile organic compounds (e.g. decorative paints) in products on all affected sectors including small and medium-sized enterprises (SME's). In this context, the Decopaint study is one of the elements that will be taken into consideration to prepare a proposal.

As is normal practice any draft proposal will be the subject of consultation with all stakeholders including representatives from the SME sector where they are affected.

In the context of the recent discussions leading to the adoption of the Directive 2001/81/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2001 on national emission ceilings for certain atmospheric pollutants(1), reducing the solvent content of certain categories was stated to be a cost-effective route to reducing emissions that lead to the formation of tropospheric ozone.

The preliminary analysis appears to confirm this. However when finalising a proposal the Commission will endeavour to find ways to allow the industrial sectors affected to adapt to whatever new requirements may evolve.

(1) OJ L 309, 27.11.2001.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3584/01

by Anna Karamanou (PSE) to the Council

(9 January 2002)

Subject: Dress rules for female employees in Turkey

On 7 December 2001 female civil servants in Turkey were urged by their union to appear at work wearing trousers as a way of protesting about a regulation of 1982 which specifically bans female public sector workers from wearing trousers at the workplace. During this protest which was very widely supported by female civil servants, problems occurred at Izmir where women wearing trousers were barred from entering their offices by their superiors.

What steps does the Council intend to take, as part of the pre-accession procedure, to prevail upon Turkey to change its antiquated legislation and outlook, to comply with the European acquis and to respect the human rights and democratic freedoms of women?

Reply

(13 May 2002)

Guaranteeing full enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms without any discrimination and irrespective of, inter alia, gender, is one of the medium-term priorities of the Accession Partnership with Turkey.

A reform of the civil code was adopted in mid-January in Turkey, the new provisions of which explicitly stipulate equality between men and women. As part of the process of monitoring implementation of the Accession Partnership, the Council will ensure that those new legislative provisions are implemented in accordance with the principle of non-discrimination.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3537/01

by Concepció Ferrer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Anchovy fishing

Since the studies conducted into the state of anchovy biomass in the Gulf of Lion date from the first half of the 1990s, their findings may have become outdated.

Does the Commission have any recent information on the current state of anchovy biomass in the Gulf of Lion and the likelihood of overfishing in that area?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 2002)

The information available to the Commission on status of stocks is derived from the work done by the Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC), and its subsidiary bodies, of the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM). According to the results of the working group on small pelagic species (Kavala, Greece, 27-30 March 2001), the stock of anchovy, as studied by the laboratories of the French Research Institute for Exploitation of the Sea (Ifremer), seems moderately exploited in the Gulf of Lions with an increasing trend in the biomass levels of the most recent years.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3535/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Cluster bombs in Kosovo and elsewhere

What EU resources have been and are being devoted to the clearance of cluster bombs in Kosovo and elsewhere in the Balkans? What is the Commission's estimate of the scale of the remaining problem, if any?

Has the Commission made, or does it intend to make, any representations to Member States or other bodies regarding the future manufacture and use of cluster bombs?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2002)

Decontamination from landmines is inextricably linked to clearance of unexploded ordnance (UXO), cluster bombs (CB) and antitank mines (ATM).

The Community has devoted some 8,32 million between 1998 and 2000.

It is estimated that approximately 50 000 mines were laid in Kosovo and that around 30 000 cluster bombs contaminated the area. After three years of hard work, the United Nations Mine Action Centre in Kosovo has declared Kosovo a mine safe area. This rapid progress can be attributed to the fact that the mine and UXO problem in Kosovo is, relative to other parts of the world, limited in scope and comparatively recent; the conflict in Kosovo was relatively short; Serb maps of mined areas, and NATO maps of air strikes, were available to deminers; and substantial assistance was provided by donors for mine clearance work.

The Commission is aware that a marginal UXO problem still remains. Specific measures such as explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) training supported by the Community in 2001- are being taken in order to address this specific need. These operations and residual mine clearance will be handled by the Kosovo Civil Protection Corps (KCPC).

In Bosnia-Herzegovina, which is estimated to be the country most severely affected by mines/UXO in Europe, the number of UXO/CB is considered high but is not specified (a comprehensive Landmines Impact Survey has not been carried out); in Bosnia, anti-personnel mines represent much the larger proportion of the threat. Community support to mine action from 1998 to 2001 amounted to 8,7 million. On top of this, we are contributing some 3,7 million to cross border de-mining between Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), and providing very substantial support to projects under the Community Strategic Package for mine action in South East Europe, including R & D initiatives, launched under the Stability Pact; we are contributing some 17 million over three years to the latter.

The Commission was fully behind the EU approach to address the problems caused by cluster bombs and other explosive remnants of war (ERW) at the review conference of the United Nations (UN) Convention on the prohibition or restriction on the use of certain conventional weapons (CCW). These efforts resulted in the establishment of a Working Group of governmental experts mandated to explore the possibility to deal with these ordnance in the framework of the CCW.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3333/01

by Joan Colom i Naval (PSE) to the Commission

(30 November 2001)

Subject: Tax on the personal income of Community citizens living in Andorra

The Union and its Member States have launched a series of measures to combat money laundering and tax evasion in what are termed tax havens. These measures, whose aims I fully support, have already achieved some significant successes but also claimed their first innocent victims, namely a number of Community citizens living and working in Andorra.

Recent changes in Spanish tax regulations regarding tax on the income of natural persons have overturned the long-established arrangement, and the Spaniards habitually resident in Andorra, where they make up the largest group of Community citizens, are consequently having to pay too much tax. The problem appears to lie in the confusion between the concepts of residence for tax purposes and habitual residence. Residents of other Member States are not affected in the same way. The end result is that some Community citizens are suffering discrimination compared with others. Is the Commission aware of these facts?

When pursuing the measures referred to above and seeking to harmonise taxes, will the Commission allow this distinction in tax treatment to remain unaltered? Is it taking into account the legitimate interests of the citizens concerned, who have no connection with criminal activities of any kind? Will it submit any form of legislative proposal on the subject?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 January 2002)

The issue raised by the Honourable Member concerns the application of new provisions introduced by a reform of Income Tax for individuals which entered into force during 1999. Under the new rules it is likely that a Spanish citizen, previously considered as resident in Spain for tax purposes and who changes his residence to a tax haven, will continue to be subject to Spanish tax on a worldwide basis both for the year in which the change occurs and also for the following four years. The Principality of Andorra is considered to be a tax haven according to Spanish rules.

The Commission should point out that in the absence of harmonisation at Community level, the taxation of income is essentially a matter falling within the competence of Member States, subject to compliance with the basic principles of the Treaty; in particular the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of nationality.

However, the Treaties do not cover the case where a citizen of a Member State moves to Andorra, which is not a Member State. Consequently, Community law is not applicable in such a case and Spain may lay down rules applicable to their citizens who move there even if those rules could give rise to the sort of difference in treatment that is mentioned.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3641/01

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(7 January 2002)

Subject: Community aid for emigrants in Argentina

Community citizens who have emigrated to Argentina are suffering the effects of the serious economic and social crisis afflicting the country, especially those over the age of 65, who are unable to work and are losing their savings and their pensions.

The European Union uses financial instruments such as the European Social Fund to provide support programmes for Community citizens resident in the Member States, as well as projects to assist the integration of immigrants from third countries. Community emigrants to third countries such as Argentina, however, are facing serious problems and feel they have no one to turn to.

Is the EU undertaking or helping to finance any projects to assist emigrants in Argentina?

What financial instrument could be used to fund a Community project to demonstrate Europe's solidarity with its fellow citizens in Argentina and who would be responsible for taking an initiative of this kind?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 2002)

The European Social Fund area of interventions is limited to Community territory. There is no financial instrument comparable to the European Social Fund, aimed at providing support to Community citizens outside of this territory.

On the other hand, the programmes for development and co-operation with third countries (under the Asia and Latin America (ALA) regulation in the case of Argentina) aim at implementing programmes to support the development of these third countries or promote their co-operation with European bodies in established priority areas. They are not targeted on specific populations on the basis of their country of origin and can not be used for such purposes.

At present, there is no financial instrument directly targeting European migrants in Argetina neither in its social policies nor in its external relations policies.