ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2593/00

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

(1 August 2000)

Subject: IRELA

During his appearance before the Committee on Development and Cooperation at its meeting in Strasbourg in June 2000, Mr Patten, Commissioner responsible for Foreign Affairs, gave a comprehensive and excellent report on his plans for the reform of the Commission's services responsible for external relations and the management of foreign aid.

Nevertheless, some of the questions which I put to him during the debate were not answered, doubtless owing to lack of time.

With a view to a more leisurely answer in writing, on the subject of IRELA (Institute for Relations with Latin America), what plans does Mr Patten have regarding its viability and objectives, particularly bearing in mind its scant economic resources, as a result of which its staff officials and contract staff have not received their salaries since January 2000?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2000)

The 10 July 2000 General Affairs Council endorsed a proposal to create an informal ad hoc working group, consisting of representatives of the Presidency assisted by the Secretariat, the Commission, the Parliament and interested Member States. The aim of that working group is to find a solution to the problems confronting the Instituto de Relaciones Europeo Latino americanas (IRELA) and it would be an appropriate forum to discuss IRELA's future legal basis and income sources, pulling together support from all parties involved.

Pending the result of the working group's discussion, the Commission naturally cannot advance a position on the future structure of IRELA or its income sources. Nevertheless the Commission is committed to a permanent solution and believes the working group should be established and start its activities as soon as possible.

Concerning IRELA's staff, the Commission is aware that IRELA's experts have continued to run the Institute over the last few months regardless of its financial problems. IRELA has not diversified its income sources in order to ensure the continuity of the Institute and the working stability of its staff. The Commission regrets the present situation, especially taking into account the quality of IRELA's work.

In any case, IRELA was created as an independent institution and the Commission cannot and should not intervene in its personnel policy.

In the framework of the activities of the above mentioned working group, the Commission is open to discuss any solution with regard to IRELA's staff, within the existing financial rules framework.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2678/00

by Mary Banotti (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Delays in processing development projects

It has been brought to my attention that in spite of the hard work of those involved in DG Development there are serious delays in processing proposals for funding already allocated. New proposals

for the year 2000 are still not forthcoming and the DG Development budget for 2001 is being curtailed rather than increased through the merging of budget headings B7-6000 and B7-643A, thereby compounding these problems.

Given the European Commission's commitment to providing a European development programme, what measures is the Commission prepared to take in order to ensure that the world's poor are not suffering because of a lack of staff to process work in DG Development? What steps can the Commission take to rectify this situation as soon as possible?

Answer given by Mr Nielson on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2000)

The Directorate-General for Development has drawn up an operational guide in the light of the new General Conditions governing the cofinancing of operations by NGOs which came into force on 7 January, the rules of transparency introduced by the Amsterdam Treaty to provide greater public access to information and Parliament's recommendations. This is accessible to the public and explains how the system of processing NGO cofinancing applications is applied to projects and programmes in developing countries (budget heading B7-6000), projects and programmes to raise public awareness in the European Union on development issues (budget heading B7-6000), capacity building programmes and decentralised cooperation programmes and projects (budget heading B7-6430).

This exercise, which preceded the processing of applications, was essential as, again in the interests of transparency, NGO cofinancing applications will in future be examined on the basis of an invitation to submit proposals. An invitation has been published in the Official Journal for 2000(1).

This is why there has been some delay in the processing of proposals. However, 244 projects totalling 80 million have already been approved by an internal selection committee for this year and 200 million of the appropriations allocated by the budgetary authority are expected to have been committed by the end of the year.

For 2001, the Commission has proposed that budget headings B7-6000 and B7-6430 be combined in the interests of rationalisation and in view of the importance placed on the consolidation of civil society and its participation in Community development aid policy. It is intended to make full use of decentralised cooperation which gives local stakeholders responsibility for drawing up and implementing cooperation programmes. The pooling of funds under headings B7-6000 and B7-6430 will ensure more effective allocation of and deployment of resources to promote ownership which is an essential component of poverty reduction.

(1) OJ C 177, 27.6.2000.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3247/00

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(20 October 2000)

Subject: Negotiations with Cape Verde for a new fisheries agreement

The Community fisheries sector is concerned at the fact that the existing EU-Cape Verde agreement expired on 6 September 2000, while no negotiating timetable has yet been set for its renewal.

What contacts has the Commission entered into with the Cape Verde authorities for the renewal of this agreement? Have the Commission and the Cape Verde government agreed on a negotiating timetable?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 December 2000)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Members for their interest in the renewal of the protocol to the EU-Cape Verde Fisheries Agreement and is pleased to inform them of the following.

The Commission is aware of the importance of renewing the protocol before its expires and, following a series of preliminary contacts, took part in three successive rounds of talks in Brussels on 19/20 July 2000, in Praia on 23-25 August 2000 and in Brussels on 6/7 November 2000.

Although significant progress was made in the talks, in particular concerning fishing opportunities and financial compensation, the agreement was not concluded. This was because the Commission, in full agreement with the Member States concerned (particularly Spain), was not in a position to agree to the Cape Verde demand that a provision be inserted obliging surface longliners to land their catches at the port of Mindelo.

The Commission is making every effort to ensure that this agreement is concluded as soon as possible. However, Cape Verde has not yet been in a position to set a new date for talks.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-3186/00

by Marie-Arlette Carlotti (PSE) to the Commission

(4 October 2000)

Subject: Negotiations on Turkey's accession to the European Union and acknowledgement of genocide against Armenians

In its resolution of June 1987 on a political solution to the Armenian question(1), the European Parliament most notably expressed the belief that the Armenian question and the question of minorities in Turkey must be resituated within the framework of relations between Turkey and the Community and called on the Turkish authorities to acknowledge formally that the tragic events of 1915-1917 involving Armenians living on the territory of the Ottoman Empire constituted genocide within the meaning of the convention adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1948.

With Turkey's status as an applicant country having been confirmed by the Helsinki European Council in December 1999, and with institutional activities and political dialogue within the Association Council having resumed last April, will the Commission say exactly to what extent the issue of acknowledgement by the Turkish authorities of the genocide against Armenians features in the negotiations on Turkey's accession to the European Union?

(1) OJ C 190, 20.7.1987, p. 119.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2000)

The Commission considers that this issue is not covered by the Copenhagen criteria.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3045/00

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 September 2000)

Subject: Euro games

What games for popular consumption have been produced with European Union funding to teach people about the euro?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 2000)

As part of the Eurofacile programme, the Commission has developed prototype games with consumer associations and with associations representing social groups which have difficulty gaining access to information about the euro.

Apart from these purely educational games, the Commission has not provided financial backing for any game to be marketed commercially, not wishing to become involved in what is a highly competitive field. Games may have featured as teaching aids in projects carried out in partnership with civil society (non-profit-making associations).

The Commission has also agreed to make available to game designers facilities such as the Quest database, which contains questions and answers on the euro.

The Commission does not claim an exhaustive knowledge of the field, but is aware of various euro games marketed by well-known manufacturers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2227/00

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Use of headlights to reduce accidents

A recent study carried out by various American universities and followed up by a research centre in Paris has shown that the constant use of dipped headlights by vehicles at all times (including during daylight hours) would reduce accidents by 16 %.

Is the Commission aware of these findings and will it say whether any such studies have been conducted or are planned?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2000)

The Commission is continuously reviewing the available research evidence concerning the effectiveness of daytime running lights as an accident reduction measure. The results of the considerable amount of research in this field are not conclusive, but they do indicate that for all road users daytime running lights would be a positive road safety measure and that the effects are directly proportional to ambient daylight levels. Estimates of the accident reduction effect vary widely and are still the subject of unresolved academic debate. The study mentioned by the Honourable Members contributes to this assessment.

The Commission concludes that daytime running lights are likely to be a cost-effective road safety measure but not to be as significant, for example, as the benefits to be obtained from speed reduction, less drinking and driving, or increased seat belt wearing. The Commission view on the significance of these measures is described in greater detail in the latest road safety communication(1).

It should also be noted that daytime running lights will have a cost, in the form of higher fuel consumption. The Commission has estimated that the maximum additional fuel consumption, and consequent CO2 emissions, is between 1,5 % to 2,0 %, although this depends to some extent upon the technical specification for daytime running lights.

(1) COM(2000) 125.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2497/00

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

(2 August 2000)

Subject: Impact of the Natura 2000 network on the environment in the Spanish province of Malaga

By means of the Natura 2000 network, the European Union is seeking to take action on protected areas of high environmental value, so as to provide for the expansion of sites of Community interest (SCIs), with protected species of flora and fauna.

In the Spanish province of Malaga, the impact of the Natura 2000 network has sparked off particular interest amongst nature lovers, who hope to see a significant increase in the number of hectares subject to the conservation measures that the network seeks to enforce.

Will the Commission specify what the precise impact of the Natura 2000 network on Malaga province will be, and when an official statement from the European Union on the matter will be forthcoming?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 2000)

Malaga province is located in the Mediterranean biogeographical region, for which the Spanish authorities have promised an additional list of sites by December 2000.

Consequently the Commission will not be in a position to evaluate all of the proposals submitted by Spain and the other member States of this biogeographical region before the first half of 2000. Provided that the national lists of sites include an adequate representation of all the natural habitats and flora and fauna species present in that region, the Commission might be able to adopt the list of Natura 2000 sites in the course of 2001.

The Commission is therefore as yet unable to judge either what will be the ultimate area concerned in Malaga province or what measures will need to be taken to manage these sites. The measures will have to be taken by the Spanish authorities.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2872/00

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

(14 September 2000)

Subject: Cod fishery agreements with Russia and Iceland

The cod fishery in the Spanish state, and, in particular, the Galician fishery, are pressing for the establishment of agreements between the EU and Russia and Iceland in the context of trade relations with those countries, since these would enable the fisheries concerned to increase their cod quotas within the areas of those countries' economic sovereignty. The sector has begun negotiations with the Commission to this end. Can the Commission state what stage these negotiations have reached? Will the Commission defend the positions of a sector which believes that the current cod catch quota for its vessels (16 000 tons) is manifestly insufficient, resulting in its activity being confined to the Svalbard Islands while, in addition, it is now denied access to the cod shoals in Greenland waters?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

The Commission is aware of the long-standing quest by the Galician ship-owners for additional cod quotas. While the Commission has a variety of informal contacts with sector representatives, the Commission has not engaged in any negotiations with private parties on this issue.

The Commission tabled in Council a recommendation for a negotiating mandate for a fisheries co-operation agreement with Russia. However, in view of political developments in Russia and other reasons, Council has not yet reached a decision on this issue.

It is highly unlikely that Iceland would grant a cod quota to Community vessels. The only species covered by the existing agreement with the Community is redfish.

The Commission has sought repeatedly additional quotas of cod and other species for Spain and other Member States in the framework of various agreements. However, the need to maintain relative stability and the precarious state of many stocks make this goal very difficult to fulfil.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3021/00

by Laura González Álvarez (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(26 September 2000)

Subject: Ban on driftnets

In 1992 the Council decided to restrict driftnets to a maximum length of 2,5 km. Despite the existence of such rules, however, driftnet fishing is still practised. For this reason the Council adopted Regulation (EEC) No 1239/98(1), pursuant to which driftnets will be gradually phased out by 1 January 2002, at the end of a transitional period granted to enable fishing fleets to adapt.

Over the summer, however, Spanish fishermen's organisations have complained that the above regulation has been ignored by French vessels fishing in the Atlantic and Italian ones fishing in the Mediterranean, which continue to use driftnets of up to 10 km. in length. Quite apart from encouraging unfair competition between fishermen (on account of the greater efficiency of driftnet fishing by comparison with other traditional techniques), such infringements of Community law impede the progress of other vessels and cause significant environmental damage in the form of secondary catches of species such as dolphins, whales and sharks.

What action has the Commission taken (and what further action does it intend to take) in order to ensure compliance with Regulation (EEC) No 1239/98 on the phasing out of driftnets?

How many infringements has the Commission detected annually and per country since 1998?

How many vessels (classified by countries) have been authorised to use driftnets for each of the years from 1998 to 2000?

(1) OJ L 171, 17.6.1998, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(17 October 2000)

Respect for Council Regulation (EC) No 1239/98 of 8 June 1998 amending Regulation (EC) No 894/97 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources is one of the Commission's priorities every year in the policing of fishing. Commission inspectors regularly take part in inspection operations on land and sea organised by the Member States concerned.

For the outcome of the policing carried out the Honourable Member is requested to refer to the Commission's report to Parliament on the application in 1998 and 1999 of Community legislation on the use of drift nets to catch highly migratory species in the North-East Atlantic and the Mediterranean.

Since 1998 the numbers of vessels authorised by Member States to fish for albacore using drift nets have been:

>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3580/00

by Adriana Poli Bortone (UEN) to the Commission

(17 November 2000)

Subject: Mansio Ad Quartum

Does the Commission intend to open infringement proceedings against Italy for failing to take the necessary action to protect the important Mansio Ad Quartum site in Quarto Flegreo (Naples), which has been totally wrecked by the wholly inappropriate work carried out there?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(9 January 2001)

Article 151 (ex Article 128) of the EC Treaty gives the Community the right to encourage cooperation between Member States in the field of culture. The issue raised by the Honourable Member is not a Community matter, however. In line with the principle of subsidiarity, this is a matter exclusively for the Member State concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3470/00

by Lord Inglewood (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 November 2000)

Subject: Internal market for professional services

Would the Commission agree that the offline market for services, particularly services provided by the regulated professions, still suffers from too many restrictions on the freedom of consumers to select how and in what manner they purchase those services?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 2000)

The Commission is preparing a communication in response to the call from the Heads of State and Government at the Lisbon European Council for a strategy by the end of 2000 for the elimination of barriers to services. Implementing this strategy will enable any additional action required in all service sectors to be identified.

Moreover, in the context of the recognition of professional qualifications, consideration is being given to improving the conditions for service provision compared with those for freedom of establishment.

The Commission would also like to point out that access to professional services by recipients of services might be considered restricted because some regulated professions have to observe rules concerning the organisation of the profession, professional ethics, supervision and liability.

Under Articles 43 (ex Article 52) and 49 (ex Article 59) of the EC Treaty, those restrictions are justified only if they are to ensure that consumers are provided with the necessary guarantees in the general interest, in particular, as regards integrity and professional expertise, and if they are not disproportionate in relation to the objective pursued.

The Commission would also like to point out that it is closely involved in the abolition of restrictive practices in the liberal professions. It is pursuing an active policy to apply the competition rules aimed at eliminating collective price fixing and advertising restrictions. It considers that in this way it can contribute to improving the information and choice available to users concerning the services available and the prices of these services. For each of the liberal professions, it is also trying to draw a clear distinction between professional ethics, to which the competition rules of the EC Treaty do not apply, and restrictive rules, to which they do.

The Commission is also trying to ensure that Member States repeal legislation which authorises or reinforces the effects of restrictive practices in the liberal professions.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0641/00

by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Council

(25 February 2000)

Subject: Austria and EU enlargement

After 30 years of Socialist participation in government in Austria, a centre-right coalition has now been formed which is supported by a stable 57 % of Members of the Austrian Parliament. Moreover, more than 70 % of the population did not vote for the Social Democratic Party (SPÖ).

Thirteen EU Member States, acting on the initiative of, and coordinated by, the Council President and President of the Socialist International, have decided on common measures in their relations with Austria.

It is at precisely this juncture that 11 candidate countries are endeavouring to adapt their legal systems and develop market economies to enable themselves to join the European Union.

Does the Council consider that the decision referred to above will strengthen the positive views of the candidates for accession, and especially the smaller States, regarding the advantages of EU membership and respect for their national identities (as is actually guaranteed in Article 6(3) of the Treaty on European Union)?

What is the Council's view of this way of proceeding in the light of Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union?

Have the mechanisms for determining a possible breach of EU principles been complied with?

If so, can the Council give the date on which the Austrian Government was invited to submit its observations?

Reply

(10 November 2000)

The measures to which the Honourable Member is referring were set out in a declaration by the Portuguese Prime Minister on behalf of the governments of 14 Member States. This declaration is not binding on the Council.

The Council has not taken a view on this issue, and is not therefore in a position to respond to any of the points raised in the Honourable Member's question.