ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1481/99

by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Pollution resulting from the war in Kosovo

During the war in Kosovo, NATO bombing attacks were deliberately targeted on refineries and chemical plants, in other words industries which pose a serious risk to the environment.

The levels of pollution caused are extremely high on account of the strong concentrations of nitrogen and sulphur oxide and other toxic chemicals which have polluted the air, the ground water and all the rivers in the region, including the Danube which is now full of toxins which are discharged into the Black Sea. The use of impoverished uranium weapons (containing 97,8 % Uranium 238) has created clouds of radioactive dust which give off radiation and may lead to the development of tumours.

1. Has the Commission prepared a specific emergency aid plan to combat the environmental pollution which has affected all of the region's inhabitants indiscriminately?

2. What sum of money has it set aside for the implementation of such a plan?

3. What urgent action has it taken to monitor air flows which are capable of transporting the radioactive dust?

4. What urgent action does it intend to take to clean up sources of drinking water?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(22 October 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the replies it gave to Oral Questions H-429/99 by Mr Alavanos and H-431/99 by Mr Papayannakis during question time at Parliament's September 1999 part-session(1).

The Commission would add that it has taken a leading role in the broader international effort through actions carried out by its humanitarian office and the task force for reconstruction of Kosovo (TAFKO). The problem of polluted drinking water is recognised and being addressed in particular through the

Community's integrated rehabilitation programme for Kosovo where the financing of the repair and reconstruction of various water facilities, including a new pumping station at Gracanica is underway. Additional funds are earmarked for water projects especially in the area of Mitrovica. In addition a municipal development fund is planned, for the financing of local infrastructure projects, including water treatment.

The United Nations environment programme/United Nations centre for human settlements (habitats) (UNEP/UNHCS) Balkans task force has conducted a technical mission to assess the environmental situation in Kosovo and a full report is expected in September 1999. The Commission will examine the findings. It is, therefore, too early to say at this stage what intervention may be envisaged in the field of environment.

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (September 1999).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1441/99

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

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Support for Galician dairy producers in the context of aid to family farms

Galician agriculture has, over the last few decades, been increasingly oriented towards specialisation in dairy farming. Its development has, however, been set back by the allocation of a milk quota of a Malthusian nature, which is in itself in flagrant contradiction of the right to agricultural modernisation along the lines existing in the Union's central Member States.

This obstacle is accentuated by the serious de facto discrimination affecting Galician agriculture as regards EC aids. In 1998, Galicia's agricultural sector, which accounts for 18,5 % of the active agricultural workforce in Spain, received only 1,2 % of the ESP 852 903 million allocated to Spanish agriculture in EAGGF (Guarantee) monies, under a system which is biased towards large farms and tends, in addition, to encourage abuse of the Union's Structural Funds.

Given these circumstances, can the Commission state whether it intends to propose a system of special aids for family livestock farms, and, in particular, dairy farms, as a means of compensating for the significant under-funding of countries such as Galicia by the application of a system of EAGGF (Guarantee) aids which is clearly inadequate and, indeed, unfair in relation to their agricultural economy.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(5 October 1999)

The Council introduced milk quotas in 1984 to deal with a costly imbalance in the milk sector. As part of the Agenda 2000 reform it recently decided to apply them until 2008. At the same time it provided for increases for the Member States with continuing problems. In the case of Spain there will be two successive increases, of 350 000 tonnes in 2000 and 200 000 tonnes in 2001 (a total of + 10 %), which should take account of particular situations, such as that of Galicia described by the Honourable Member. These increases are in addition to those for Spain in 1987 and 1993/94, totalling over 20 % altogether.

In addition, farmers, and family farms in particular, can take advantage of Community measures to improve their structural efficiency. This aid, which includes aid for investments, is at present granted under the agriculture part of the Objective 1 programme for Galicia. In 1998 the Guidance Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) spent ESP 4 153 million on such measures, which represents 19 % of the Fund's expenditure for Objective 1 regions in Spain.

In the future the new rural development policy, the second pillar of the common agricultural policy, will ensure that family farms continue to be supported. Furthermore, the new framework gives the regional authorities even more scope to adapt measures to the specific needs and conditions in their regions. So individual problems, like that raised by the Honourable Member, can be dealt with appropriately.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1991/99

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(9 November 1999)

Subject: Transport of horses

On 11 October 1999, the German TV channel, ZDF, broadcast a programme produced by Manfred Karremann about the transport of live horses from the Baltic States to Italy.

Horses are transported in lorries and spend 100 hours travelling in conditions that fly in the face of all animal welfare principles.

Is the Commission aware of such transport operations, and can it intervene to put a stop to what is an infringement of EU rules on the transport of animals?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1991/99 and P-2144/99 given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 1999)

The Commission is aware of the problems in relation to animal welfare reported in the German television broadcast. Reports by its veterinary inspectorate and complaints from various animal welfare organisations also indicate that problems continue to exist in this domain.

When animals arrive at the frontier of the Community in a condition where they are clearly not fit for further transport, it is however the Member State concerned which is obliged to take the necessary action to protect the welfare of the animals involved by giving them proper care and attention with a sufficient resting period.

Concerning the activities of the Commission, several veterinary inspection missions have been carried out in Gorizia and Prosecco where the horses normally enter the territory of the Community. Following the missions, detailed recommendations were submitted to the Italian authorities and some improvements have been noted. Unfortunately recent complaints and the images shown by the German television indicate that these improvements may not have been permanent.

The Commission is still in the process of recruiting inspection personnel and a number of new staff have specific responsibilities for monitoring the implementation of animal welfare legislation which applies in the Member States. The Commission is aware of the increasing importance attached to animal welfare by consumers and will continue to ensure that, amongst its other responsibilities, animal welfare will be given corresponding importance.

The Commission is reviewing the matter and will not hesitate to initiate the procedure provided in Article 226 (ex-Article 169) EC Treaty, should this prove necessary.

The Commission believes that the most effective way to achieve a widespread improvement in animal welfare standards is to work towards an international consensus on this issue. For this purpose, in the World trade organisation negotiating round, the Commission will be trying to ensure that the issue of animal welfare is addressed on a multilateral basis.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2147/99

by Patrick Cox (ELDR) and Brian Crowley (UEN) to the Commission

(24 November 1999)

Subject: Wine and beer taxation

With regard to taxation per unit of alcohol, Ireland's taxation regime is arguably one of the most neutral, in fiscal terms, in the EU, with the rates for beer, wine and spirits corresponding most closely to their respective alcohol strength by volume. The wine to beer relationship is 1 to 3.3, and this corresponds to the prevailing alcoholic strength by volume of 4o for beer to 12o for wine. The wine to beer excise relationship operating in the UK is 1 to 3.4. Seven countries in the EU have no excise tax on wine.

Can the Commission explain its case against Ireland and justify its arguments which are based on theoretical wines of 5o and 6o, wines which are simply not available in Ireland, or, indeed, even in very small quantities in other Member States of the Union?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2000)

In follow-up to Petition No 1229/97, forwarded to it by the Committee on Petitions, suggesting that wine was being taxed less favourably than beer, the Commission contacted the Irish authorities for further explanations.

After almost five months without any substantial reply from the Irish authorities the Commission decided on 1 July 1999 to deliver a reasoned opinion under Article 226 (formerly Article 169) of the EC Treaty.

On 22 October 1999 the Irish government replied to the Commission's reasoned opinion. The Commission is now considering this reply, which is subject to the confidentiality imposed by infringement proceedings with regard to the Member State concerned.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2376/99

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 December 1999)

Subject: Esperanto

Would the Commission give consideration to the inclusion of Esperanto as one of the EU working languages?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2000)

In accordance with Article 290 of the EC Treaty, The rules governing the languages of the institutions of the Community shall [mldr] be determined by the Council, acting unanimously. That Article does not provide for any proposal on the part of the Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1910/99

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 October 1999)

Subject: Progress in implementing the Community's small and medium-sized enterprise initiative in Greece

Will the Commission say what progress has been made in implementing the Community's small and medium-sized enterprise initiative in Greece in terms of payment of scheduled appropriations? Does it consider that progress has been satisfactory and, if not, to what does it believe any delays are attributable?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(25 November 1999)

The delay in implementing the Community's small and medium-sized enterprise programme (SMEs) in Greece was produced by the need to coordinate the 125 measures in favour of SMEs incorporated in Greece's various national and regional operational programmes and other Community Initiatives.

According to the information sent to the Commission by the Greek authorities, rapid progress has been made since the launch of the above programme. The Greek authorities have been able to commit the total allocation, with 56 % of payments made so far. On the basis of expenditure actually incurred, the Commission believes that it will be able to commit its total financial contribution by the end of this year.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2234/99

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 December 1999)

Subject: Pressure against offshore centres

What are currently the direct and indirect measures applied against offshore centres suspected of inadequate implementation of the money-laundering provisions (for example, administrative guidance given by G7 banking supervisors or other authorities to stop banking transfers to certain jurisdictions)? Is there any reason of principle why similar measures might not be applied against centres which failed to implement a withholding tax or enter into reporting agreements on non-resident investments?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(17 January 2000)

The Commission is not aware of any cases in which banking supervisors of the Group of seven most industrialised countries (G7) or other authorities have actually stopped banking transfers to offshore centres considered to have inadequate defences against money laundering. There have, however, been cases where administrative guidance has been given.

The Financial action task force on money laundering (FATF), the foremost world body active in this area, can publicly call on financial institutions to give special attention to business relations and transactions with people, companies and financial institutions, from countries which do not or insufficiently apply the relevant standards.

Such action was taken in 1996 against the Seychelles, whose Economic Development Act appeared to provide a safe haven for criminal money. As a result of this, and diplomatic action, the Act was not implemented.

In April 1999 both the United States and United Kingdom authorities issued a formal notice to financial institutions warning them about financial transactions involving Antigua and Barbuda.

On a more general level, the FATF is currently engaged, on the basis of a mandate from the G7, in a major initiative to identify those countries and territories which provide insufficient co-operation in the global fight against money laundering.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1999/99

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(9 November 1999)

Subject: Abolition of duty-free sales

How many jobs in the relevant sectors does the Commission estimate have been lost (or gained) in each Member State since the abolition of duty-free sales?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(6 December 1999)

Considering that intra-Community duty-free sales were only abolished on 1 July 1999, the Commission is not at this stage in a position to estimate the employment impact of this measure. As it predicted, however, the initiatives taken by operators to adopt a strategy aimed at keeping customers will largely have alleviated any negative effects that the abolition might have entailed.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2237/99

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 December 1999)

Subject: Language of first draft documents

Please indicate the language of the first draft of Commission working documents in each of the last five years.

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 2000)

The Commission is sending direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat a table containing the information requested.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1859/99

by Emmanouil Mastorakis (PSE) to the Commission

(14 October 1999)

Subject: Map of the European Union

The Official Publications Office has published a brochure (Luxembourg, 1999) entitled The customs policy of the European Union in several languages. I have seen the English, French and Greek editions.

On page five of the brochure, there is a colour map of Europe showing the Member States of the European Union in yellow and the applicant countries in brown. Included among the applicant countries is Turkey.

Will the Commission monitor the procedure for officially providing such information and will it withdraw the brochure concerned immediately?

Answer given Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(8 December 1999)

The map shows all the countries which have applied for Community membership. Turkey's application was submitted on 14 April 1987. The Commission does not, therefore, consider that withdrawal of the brochure is necessary.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2180/99

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 November 1999)

Subject: Conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean

Article 2(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1626/94(1) laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean provides that The use of encircling and towed nets set from a boat and operated from the shore (shore seines) shall be prohibited as from 1 January 2002 unless the Council (mldr) decides otherwise in the light of scientific data providing that their use does not have a negative impact on resources.

This ban prompts questions about the survival of this particular method of fishing along many parts of the Mediterranean littoral, and especially in the Adriatic. Since this technique differs significantly from both trawling and encircling, it does not pose any risk to the environment or to marine resources, because it complies with relevant criteria such as the minimum and maximum dimensions of net meshes, wings, bunts and codends, periods and hours of use, etc.

Can the Commission state what measures it intends to adopt in future to help safeguard the various fishing traditions which form part of the historic cultural heritage of many regions throughout the Mediterranean?

In particular, does the Commission not consider that the criteria and procedures for granting exemptions from the ban on shore seine fishing provided for by the above Regulation (Article 2(3)) may prove to be unduly rigid?

(1) OJ L 171, 6.7.1994, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1999)

The measure to which the Honourable Member refers was adopted by the Council in 1994 in order to preserve juvenile fish from the impact of fishing gear used very close to the sea shore, where fish spend a part of their cycle.

A temporary derogation has been granted in order to allow fishermen to adapt to this new situation. The derogation is expected to end on 31 December 2001 unless scientific evidence shows that its continuation will have no negative impact on fish resources.

The Commission, on the basis of the most recent scientific studies, will prepare a proposal to the Council on whether the derogation should or should not continue. The decision is to be taken by the Council by qualified majority.

This procedure is not particularly rigid or exceptional. In fact, similar procedures have been foreseen in a number of similar situations (as an example, see Articles 3(1) and 6(1) of the Regulation to which the Honourable Member refers).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2037/99

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 November 1999)

Subject: The European Commission and tourism

Could the Commission explain why the tourism portfolio does not figure explicitly in the responsibilities of any of the members of the new Commission?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(20 December 1999)

Each Member of the new Commission has been given a simple, brief, generic title to cover his areas of responsibility (e.g. Commissioner for the Internal Market, Commissioner for Enterprise and the Information Society). As a result, the constituant parts of the portfolio are not made explicit in the title.

Mr Liikanen is the Commissioner for Enterprise and the Information Society. Tourism, handled by the Enterprise Directorate General, is part of his portfolio.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1709/99

by Hervé Novelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(29 September 1999)

Subject: Inconsistency between European regional policy and the French authorities' decisions

The department of Indre-et-Loire is currently under consideration as regards the new zones for application of the reform of European regional policy. The commune of Nouâtre in the canton of Sainte-Maure, which used to be eligible under ERDF Objective 5(b), could now come under Objective 2.

However, at the same time, the French authorities have decided to close a large part of the Nouâtre military base, which employs about 400 people, including 250 civilians, which will be a severe blow to the local economy. For instance, the Nouâtre secondary school, which takes the children of employees at the base, may be threatened with closure in the fairly near future.

1. Does not the Commission think that there is an unacceptable contradiction between its regional policy objectives in Indre-et-Loire and the French authorities' decision, taken without any consultation, concerning a commune in the same department?

2. Does not the Commission think that it should intervene with the French Government to resolve this inconsistency?

3. More generally, does the Commission know of other, similar cases and what measures will it take to prevent contradictions of this kind in the future?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(17 November 1999)

It is not up to the Commission to intervene in the decisions of the French authorities concerning the location of military bases or, more generally, to express views about the restructuring of the defence sector.

According to Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds(1), Objective 2 of the Funds is to support the economic and social conversion of areas facing structural difficulties. Article 4 of the Regulation goes on to stipulate that Community assistance under this Objective may extend to areas mldr facing or threatened by serious structural problems on account of relevant, verifiable characteristics, or a high level of unemployment arising from an ongoing or planned restructuring of one or more activities in the agricultural, industrial or service sector. This determining activity can be a military base, the closure of which would have a substantial negative impact on the area in terms of jobs.

Envisaging eligibility for Objective 2 for this type of area does not therefore run counter to the terms of the Regulation. It is, however, up to the national authorities to propose to the Commission the areas which they wish to benefit from Objective 2. The Commission, acting in close co-operation with the Member State, will then draw up the list of the areas eligible for this Objective for the period 2000-2006 and will ensure that these areas are the ones most affected by problems of socio-economic restructuring.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2340/99

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 December 1999)

Subject: Protection of the Elgin Marbles

For a fee, the British Museum in London makes available to wealthy and serious sponsors the room containing the Elgin Marbles for official banquets, requiring payment of security against possible damage. The Elgin Marbles however are known to belong to the Parthenon which has been designated by Unesco as part of the world heritage.

Since by this practice the British Museum is failing to show the respect due to a part of the world heritage and is actually placing the Marbles in danger, as evidenced by the security required by the British Museum against possible damage, what steps will the Commission take to meet its obligations under Article 128 of the EU Treaty requiring it to help in the conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance with a view to protecting the Elgin Marbles in the British Museum?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(13 January 2000)

Article 151 (ex-Article 128) of the EC Treaty gives the Community the power to encourage cooperation in the area of culture. The question raised by the Honourable Member is outside the Community's field of competence but, by virtue of the principle of subsidiarity, is the exclusive responsibility of the Member States.