do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 749/98 by Allan MACARTNEY to the Commission. Public capital investment programmes
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: European Parliament, MACARTNEY
Subjects: European accounting system, financing, public investment, public sector













EUR-Lex - 91998E0749 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0749

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 749/98 by Allan MACARTNEY to the Commission. Public capital investment programmes  


Official Journal C 402 , 22/12/1998 P. 0028 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0749/98by Allan Macartney (ARE) to the Commission(18 March 1998)Subject: Public capital investment programmesWhich public capital investment programmes in Member States are not counted against the Public Sector Borrowing Requirement?Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission(12 May 1998)Public sector borrowing requirement is a concept which is neither used in the European system of integrated economic accounts (ESA) nor as a criterion in the EC Treaty. Also, this concept is not harmonised within the Community due to difficulties in drawing the borderline for the inclusion of public enterprises into the public sector.If the question, however, is meant to refer to the net borrowing of general government it concerns the well defined term in the ESA which is used as the deficit criterion in the EC Treaty. This latter concept comprises only institutional units producing non-market services and excludes public enterprises.As a rule, investment programmes (i.e. gross fixed capital formation of the general government) are of a non-financial character and are therefore taken into account for the net borrowing of general government. In cases, however, where large public infrastructure programmes are developed with the help of the private sector, the accounting guidelines to record such operations are more complex and have to take due account of the specific conditions in which the investment is carried out. This applies foremost to aspects like the financing scheme, concession rights granted to the enterprise and the time dimension of these operations. If, for instance, instead of the government buying an asset and operating it, the government buys services from a private sector operator who built and pre-financed the investment, only the annual payments of the government to the enterprise should have an impact on the deficit of the general government.In this context, Eurostat the statistical office of the Community, had recently to make specific accounting decisions concerning several investment programmes in different Member States, like the construction of the bridge between Sweden and Denmark, the bridge built over the Tagus river in Portugal, the private finance initiatives (PFI) in the United Kingdom and the pre-financing of roads in Germany and Spain.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 771/98 by Jan SONNEVELD , Bartho PRONK to the Commission. Use of PESCA funding by the Member States
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: European Parliament, PRONK, SONNEVELD
Subjects: Community budget, EU Member State, EU programme, European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, FIFG, budget appropriation, distribution of aid, implementation of the budget, use of aid













EUR-Lex - 91998E0771 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E0771

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 771/98 by Jan SONNEVELD , Bartho PRONK to the Commission. Use of PESCA funding by the Member States  


Official Journal C 323 , 21/10/1998 P. 0071 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0771/98 by Jan Sonneveld (PPE) and Bartho Pronk (PPE) to the Commission (18 March 1998)Subject: Use of PESCA funding by the Member StatesThe PESCA information bulletin says that the PESCA funds have been largely exhausted. However, in the Netherlands it appears that some of the appropriations available have not yet been utilised.1. Can the Commission provide a breakdown of the utilization of PESCA funding in the various Member States?2. Can the Commission indicate why utilization of appropriations in some Member States, including the Netherlands, has been under the expected level?3. Can the Commission state the total funding remaining per Member State for the projects submitted in 1995 and for the second tranche of projects?Answer given by Mrs Bonino on behalf of the Commission (22 April 1998)1. The table below summarises the budgetary execution of PESCA at 31 December 1997.(ECU millions)>TABLE>2. One of the main ideas of PESCA has been that projects should be created in the regions themselves by the parties involved. It seems that this new approach created certain difficulties in the Member States as it implied new forms of collaboration and cooperation between the various parties, particularly in the Netherlands.The multi-fund character of PESCA with the financial participation of up to three structural funds (European regional development fund, European social fund, Financial instrument for fisheries guidance) which also involved in the Member States the participation of various authorities, may also partially explain the rather low level of implementation.The Commission has expressed its concern on this in a recent letter to the Member States with a low level of implementation by asking them for up-dated information on the programmes. In the light of the results obtained from this exercise the Commission will, if necessary, make proposals regarding any possible reallocation between Community initiatives at Community level in mid-1998.3. On 8 May 1996 the Commission decided to strengthen the financial support to Community initiatives, including PESCA. Several Member States were given additional allocations for PESCA. Member States had consequently to modify their PESCA programme to integrate this additional financial allocation.The Member States which still have to integrate the additional allocation (in MECU at 1995 prices) into their programme are:>TABLE>
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 708/98 by Amedeo AMADEO , Salvatore TATARELLA to the Commission. Food legislation - consumer health
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament, TATARELLA
Subjects: approximation of laws, consumer information, consumer protection, food inspection, foodstuffs legislation, labelling, mutual recognition principle, public health

11.12.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 386/33

As a preliminary remark, it would emphasise that, in its opinion, current Community legislation in no way
prejudices the possibility for Member States to apply non-harmonised indirect
the
fundamental principles laid down in the in the Treaty and in Community secondary legislation are complied with.

taxes provided that

However, when it examined the matter, the Commission noted that the relevant Austrian legislation does not
comply with all the principles of taxation set out in Directive 92/12/EEC on the general arrangements for products
subject to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products, (2) and in particular the
principles contained in Article 3(2), in that the tax does not, in the Commission(cid:146)s opinion, pursue a specific
purpose within the meaning of that Article.

The Commission also noted that exemption from the tax for direct sales of wine by growers cannot be considered
compatible with Article 95 of the EC Treaty.

Lastly, it does not rule out the possibility that similar taxes are levied in other Member states. If this proved to be
the case and if some aspects of incompatibility came to light, the Commission would, as in the case of Austria,
have recourse to the instruments available to it under the Treaty to ensure that Community law was observed.

(1) OJ C 323, 21.10.1998, p. 60.
(2) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992.

(98/C 386/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0708/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Food legislation › consumer health

In connection with (cid:145)The General Principles of Food Law in the European Union(cid:146) (Commission Green Paper) and
(cid:145)Consumer Health and Food Safety(cid:146) (Commission Communication) (COM(98) 176 final and COM(97) 183 final),

can the Commission ensure the simplification and rationalization of food law, in so far as this does not prejudice
essential safety standards?

(98/C 386/042)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0709/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Food legislation › consumer health

In connection with (cid:145)The General Principles of Food Law in the European Union(cid:146) (Commission Green Paper) and
(cid:145)Consumer Health and Food Safety(cid:146) (Commission Communication) (COM(97) 176 final and COM(97) 183 final),

can the Commission consider recourse to fundamentally non-binding instruments before the creation of
legislative provisions and give thought to the principle of mutual recognition in the sphere of optional
instruments too?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 713/98 by Amedeo AMADEO , Salvatore TATARELLA to the Commission. Food legislation - consumer health
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament, TATARELLA
Subjects: approximation of laws, consumer information, consumer protection, food inspection, foodstuffs legislation, labelling, mutual recognition principle, public health

C 386/34

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.12.98

(98/C 386/043)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0710/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Food legislation › consumer health

In connection with (cid:145)The General Principles of Food Law in the European Union(cid:146) (Commission Green Paper) and
(cid:145)Consumer Health and Food Safety(cid:146) (Commission Communication) (COM(97) 176 final and COM(97) 183 final),

can the Commission ensure, by amending Directive 83/89/EC, that it is the task of the Member States to specify
that national laws do not constitute barriers to the internal market?

(98/C 386/044)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0711/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Food legislation › consumer health

In connection with (cid:145)The General Principles of Food Law in the European Union(cid:146) (Commission Green Paper) and
(cid:145)Consumer Health and Food Safety(cid:146) (Commission Communication) (COM(97) 176 final and COM(97) 183 final),

can the Commission ensure that only purely technical questions are dealt with by means of Committee
procedures, whilst fundamental questions continue to be the subject of political decisions?

(98/C 386/045)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0712/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Food legislation › consumer health

In connection with (cid:145)The General Principles of Food Law in the European Union(cid:146) (Commission Green Paper) and
(cid:145)Consumer Health and Food Safety(cid:146) (Commission Communication) (COM(97) 176 final and COM(97) 183 final),

can the Commission ensure that HACCP principles are valid for the whole food chain (from producer to
consumer), irrespective of the type and size of firm concerned?

(98/C 386/046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0713/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Food legislation › consumer health

In connection with (cid:145)The General Principles of Food Law in the European Union(cid:146) (Commission Green Paper) and
(cid:145)Consumer Health and Food Safety(cid:146) (Commission Communication) (COM(97) 176 final and COM(97) 183 final),

can the Commission ensure that quality rules are harmonized only as regards health questions, whereas the
barriers to trade created by national quality requirements should be tackled by consistently applying the principle
of mutual recognition?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 697/98 by Amedeo AMADEO , Salvatore TATARELLA to the Commission. Pollution-related diseases
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament, TATARELLA
Subjects: EU action, action programme, data collection, disease prevention, dissemination of information, health policy, health risk, pollution

2. 10. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 304/147

3.  whether it has been decided what type of project will receive funding, and

4.  whether funding will be provided for projects on public land only or on privately owned land as well?

(1)  Debates of the European Parliament (October 1996).

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 1998)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its findings as
soon as possible.

(98/C 304/219)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0695/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(10 March 1998)

Subject: Pollution-related diseases

In  connection  with  the  proposal  for  a  European  Parliament  and  Council  Decision  adopting  a  programme  of
Community action 1999-2003 on pollution-related diseases in the context of the framework for action in the field
of health (COM(97) 266 final › 97/0153 (COD)) (1) and in order to avoid pointless duplication of effort, can the
Commission check the consistency and complementarity between the proposed measures and those envisaged in
the  Community  action  programme  on  health  monitoring  and  other  measures  concerning  pollution-related
diseases?

(1)  OJ C 214, 16.7.1997, p. 7.

(98/C 304/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0696/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Pollution-related diseases

In  connection  with  the  proposal  for  a  European  Parliament  and  Council  Decision  adopting  a  programme  of
Community action 1999-2003 on pollution-related diseases in the context of the framework for action in the field
of  health  (COM(97)  266  final  ›  97/0153  (COD)) (1),  can  the  Commission  present  at  least  an  outline  of  the
financial  requirements  for  the  period  2000-2003  and  ensure  that  the  budgetary  authority  meets  these
requirements?

(1)  OJ C 214, 16.7.1997, p. 7.

(98/C 304/221)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0697/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Pollution-related diseases

In  connection  with  the  proposal  for  a  European  Parliament  and  Council  Decision  adopting  a  programme  of
Community action 1999-2003 on pollution-related diseases in the context of the framework for action in the field
of  health  (COM(97)  266  final  ›  97/0153  (COD)) (1),  as  regards  the  first  specific  objective  of  the  action
programme  ((cid:146)improvement  of  information(cid:146))  can  the  Commission  demonstrate  the  importance  of  collecting
scientific  data  on  the  causal  links  between  pollution  and  illness  and  the  comparison  and  assessment  of  the
available data on causation in collaboration with the Member States?

(1)  OJ C 214, 16.7.1997, p. 7.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 718/98 by Amedeo AMADEO , Salvatore TATARELLA to the Commission. The VAT Committee
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament, TATARELLA
Subjects: VAT, application of EU law, committee (EU), tax harmonisation

11.12.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 386/37

(98/C 386/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0718/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: The VAT Committee

In connection with the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 77/388/EEC on the common system
of value-added tax (the Value-added Tax Committee) (COM(97) 325 final › 97/0186 CNS) (1), could the
Commission ensure that the proposals that are to be submitted to the VAT Committee are published in advance?
At present amendments to Community legislation on VAT require a directive or a regulation, and their
publication in draft form offers all those concerned the opportunity to make comments on the subject. This
public safeguard should also apply to the proposals submitted to the VAT Committee.

(1) OJ C 278, 13.9.1997, p.6.

(98/C 386/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0719/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) and Salvatore Tatarella (NI) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: The VAT Committee

In connection with the proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 77/388/EEC on the common system
of value-added tax (the Value-added Tax Committee) (COM(97) 325 final › 97/0186 CNS) (1), could the
Commission ensure that the opinions drawn up by the VAT Committee, irrespective of whether it is acting as a
regulatory committee or as an advisory committee, are published in the Official Journal?

(1) OJ C 278, 13.9.1997, p. 6.

Joint answer to Written Questions
E-0718/98 and E-0719/98
given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(6 May 1998)

When implementing powers are conferred on the Commission, it exercises these powers pursuant to the
procedures laid down by Council Decision 87/373/EEC of 13 July 1987 (1), in which case the Commission
submits draft measures to a regulatory body composed of the representatives of the Member States.

The Commission does not publish the draft measures. It may, however, consult interested parties.

It follows from the Commission(cid:146)s proposal on the VAT committee (2) that any decision taken by the Commission,
assisted by the VAT committee as a regulatory body, will be a legal act and as such, it will be published.

By contrast, the Commission cannot take legal responsibility for publishing opinions which have no legal value
because they only result from discussions in an advisory committee which has no powers to interpret Community
legislation or to approve specific rules of application.

(1) OJ L 197, 18.7.1987.
(2) OJ C 278, 13.9.1997.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 608/98 of 18 March 1998 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit

19. 3. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 82/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 608/98

of 18 March 1998

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain
fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/
94 of 21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the applica-
the import arrangements for fruit and veget-
tion of
ables (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2375/
96 (2), and in particular Article 4 (1) thereof,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 3813/92
of 28 December 1992 on the unit of account and the
conversion rates to be applied for the purposes of the
common agricultural policy (3), as last amended by Regu-
lation (EC) No 150/95 (4), and in particular Article 3 (3)
thereof,

Whereas Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down,
pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilat-
eral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commis-

sion fixes the standard values for imports from third
countries, in respect of the products and periods stipu-
lated in the Annex thereto;

Whereas, in compliance with the above criteria, the stand-
ard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of
Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in
the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 March 1998.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member
States.

Done at Brussels, 18 March 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 337, 24. 12. 1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 325, 14. 12. 1996, p. 5.
(3) OJ L 387, 31. 12. 1992, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 22, 31. 1. 1995, p. 1.

L 82/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

19. 3. 98

to the Commission Regulation of 18 March 1998 establishing the standard import values for
determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0709 10 00

0709 90 70

0805 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50

0805 30 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(ECU/100 kg)

204
212
624
999
220
999
052
204
999
052
204
212
600
624
999
052
600
999
052
060
388
400
404
508
512
524
528
720
999
052
388
400
512
528
999

58,0
108,7
189,5
118,7
166,5
166,5
104,1
102,9
103,5
59,6
33,8
44,7
55,3
48,4
48,4
79,4
75,7
77,5
42,3
40,7
109,4
100,8
102,6
93,3
101,9
77,1
103,3
72,9
84,4
137,7
68,3
102,2
83,2
71,6
92,6

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2317/97 (OJ L 321, 22. 11. 1997, p. 19). Code

‘999' stands for ‘of other origin'.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 796/98 by Katerina DASKALAKI to the Commission. Threat to traditional train service on the Diakofto- Kalavrita rack railway in the Peloponnese
Date: 1998-03-18
Institutions: DASKALAKI, European Parliament
Subjects: EU aid, Peloponnese, co-financing, heritage protection, operational programme, rail transport, tourist infrastructure, traditional technology

21. 10. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 323/75

3. What specific projects were carried out for the following target groups:

›  women

›  young people

› 

the long-term unemployed,

and what amount of aid was granted for each?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(5 June 1998)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(98/C 323/98)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0796/98

by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Threat to traditional train service on the Diakofto-Kalavrita rack railway in the Peloponnese

One of the oldest railway lines in Europe, the rack railway between Kalavrita and Diakofto in the Peloponnese,
which has been operating for over a century is now threatened with closure because the relevant authorities no
longer consider it economically viable.

Given the historical and traditional character of this train service which passes through a gorge of unique natural
beauty  with  a  wealth  of  flora  and  fauna  and  given  also  its  importance  for  the  local  tourist  industry,  will  the
Commission take measures to save and protect this small train which keeps alive the technology and traditions of
a bygone era?

Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission

(27 April 1998)

The  Commission  is  providing  part-financing  to  cover  75%  of  the  cost  of  purchasing  two  engines  for  the
traditional railway line between Kalavrita and Diakofto. The project, which is estimated to cost ECU 1.72 mil-
lion,  has  been  approved  by  the  Monitoring  Committee  for  the  operational  programme  for  western  Greece
(subprogramme 2, measure 3, project 12).

Decisions on whether or not to maintain railway lines is a matter for the national authorities. The funding of this
project, however, demonstrates the willingness of the authorities concerned to keep the line in question alive.

(98/C 323/99)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0797/98

by Katerina Daskalaki (UPE) to the Commission

(18 March 1998)

Subject: Putting guides on a par with tour operators

The European Union has a number of Member States with very ancient civilizations and archaeological remains
which  attract  large  numbers  of  tourists.  Guided  tours  of  archaeological  sites  are  conducted  in  a  responsible
manner by guides with a university eduction who are frequently trained archaeologists, well able to provide an
expert commentary on Europe(cid:146)s unique cultural heritage.