do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3622/98 by Ulf HOLM Discriminatory checks within the Schengen area
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: European Parliament, HOLM
Subjects: EU Member State, European Union, Sweden, anti-discriminatory measure, communications profession, foreign national, free movement of persons, police checks, racial discrimination, television

6.11.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 320/61

There has been no request from the Portuguese authorities, nor from the Spanish or French authorities, to
exempt fighting bulls from the provisions. This question needs careful examination in the light of the inherent
risks to human and animal health, the safeguards provided and the feasibility of the indicated controls.
However, any changes in Commission Decision 98/653/EC would need a qualified majority in the standing
veterinary committee. In the case that no such majority can be obtained, the proposal has to be sent to the
Council for further examination.

(1) OJ L 311, 20.11.1998.

(1999/C 320/081)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3622/98

by Ulf Holm (V) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Discriminatory checks within the Schengen area

A programme was recently broadcast on Swedish television in which two TV reporters with foreign
backgrounds travelled through the EU to test freedom of movement for individuals. It turned out that they
were subjected to systematic checks both at borders and after they had entered the country where they
intended to stay, the apparent reason being that they were originally of a non-European background. They
were subjected to visual discrimination even though they were born in Sweden and are Swedish citizens.
Human rights organizations throughout the Schengen area confirm this discrimination.

1.

Is it the Commission’s view that such systematic discrimination is the price to be paid for Schengen?

2. What does the Commission intend to do to prevent the visual discrimination that results from having no
checks at borders within Schengen?

Does the Commission consider that a ‘non-European appearance’ is sufficient grounds for checks on

3.
individuals within the Schengen area?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

1.

No.

I would refer the honourable Member to the answer from the Commission to Written Question

2.
P-2892/98 by Mrs Waddington (1).

3.

No.

(1) OJ C 118, 29.4.1999, p. 161.

(1999/C 320/082)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3636/98

by Peter Truscott (PSE) to the Commission

(3 December 1998)

Subject: Rights of the disabled in the Member States

Are disabled people treated equally in all Member States in respect of disability living allowances? In particular,
do totally deaf people qualify for disability allowances in every Member State?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3425/98 by Dietrich ELCHLEPP to the Commission. Breakdown of EU subsidies for Baden-Württemberg
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: ELCHLEPP, European Parliament
Subjects: Baden-Württemberg, EU aid, EU programme, distribution of aid, financial aid, regional aid

14.5.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 135/187

As far as trends and policies in the other Member States are concerned, the Commission publishes
3.
comparative tables of social security schemes in a general context (MISSOC), but these do not refer
specifically to pilots or cabin crew.

(1) OJ L 6, 10.1.1979.
(2) OJ L 225, 12.8.1986.
(3) OJ L 46, 17.2.1997.
(4) Regulations (EEC) 1408/71 and 574/72 (as updated by Regulation (EC) 118/97 − OJ L 28, 30.1.1997).

(1999/C 135/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3425/98

by Dietrich Elchlepp (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Breakdown of EU subsidies for Baden-Württemberg

1. What subsidies from EU programmes flowed to Baden-Württemberg in 1995-1997?

2. What amounts were involved, for what projects and in what places?

Answer given by Mr Santer on behalf of the Commission

(30 November 1998)

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

(1999/C 135/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3428/98

by Hugh McMahon (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Budget Item A-3029

Can the Commission indicate which organisations receive grants from budget item A-3029 and the sums
available to each organisation?

Can it also inform Parliament of the criteria applied when projects/organisations are selected under this
item?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(14 December 1998)

The list of organisations receiving grants in 1998 from budget item A-3029 ‘Assistance for non-
governmental international youth organisations’, showing the amounts allocated to each, has been sent
directly to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament’s Secretariat-General.

The eligibility and selection criteria for beneficiary organisations were published in the Official
Journal (1).

(1) OJ C 374, 10.12.1997.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3430/98 by Jaime VALDIVIELSO DE CUÉ to the Commission. Fisheries
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: European Parliament, VALDIVIELSO DE CUE
Subjects: European Union, Japan, fishing area, fishing regulations, fishing rights, regions of France, sea fish

C 182/84

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.6.1999

(1999/C 182/108)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3429/98

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Subsidies to the wine industry

I refer to the answer given by Commissioner Fischler (E-2198/98 (1)) on the above topic.

It indicates that a proposal for a Council regulation (EC) on the common organisation of the market in wine
does provide for expenditure higher than the average over the last few wine years. Is this in addition to the aid
which is envisaged under the Agenda 2000 proposals?

(1)

See page 3.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 December 1998)

The initial forecasts of expenditure in the wine sector under Agenda 2000 (1) as presented on 15 July 1997 did
not take into account the draft proposal for reforming the sector. These forecasts were based on estimated
expenditure as a result of expected production in the following wine year and the legislation in force.

The draft proposal for reforming the common organisation of the wine market presented by the Commission
on 16 July 1998 (2) (a year after Agenda 2000) provides for schemes to redirect wine-growing to adjust to
market requirements and eventually avoid surpluses. The expenditure on this conversion effort will put up
spending slightly in the first years after the reform but will produce a rationalisation of the market over the
medium term.

The financial framework for Agenda 2000 is being updated as more precise information becomes available.
This also applies to the market organisation for wine, which will be included in the new financial perspective
covering Agenda 2000.

(1) COM(97) 2000 final.
(2) OJ C 271, 31.8.1998.

(1999/C 182/109)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3430/98

by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (PPE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Fisheries

The first round of high-level fisheries consultations between the EU (represented by António Cavaco, Director-
General for Fisheries at the Commission) and Japan took place on 17 July 1998. One of the specific matters
dealt with was the dispute with Japan over fish aggregation devices used to catch tuna in the Bay of Biscay.
Furthermore, a large number of Basque families remain dependent on these fishing grounds, in which Basque
fishermen have used traditional vessels and equipment for some time past.

Will the Commission provide information on the overall outcome of the said consultations, with specific
reference to their impact on the Basque fishermen who depend on the aforementioned fishing grounds?

Answer given by Ms Bonino on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 1998)

As far as the Commission is aware, the Japanese fleet does not use fish aggregation devices for tuna fishing in
the Bay of Biscay.
Opinion of the European Central Bank at the request of the Council of the European Union under Article 109c(3) of the Treaty establishing the European Community on a proposal for a Council Decision (EC) on the detailed provisions concerning the composition of the Economic and Financial Committee
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European Central Bank, appointment of staff, economic activity, financial management, financial occupation

20.3.1999

EN

Official  Journal  of  the  European  Communities

C  77/9

OPINION  OF  THE  EUROPEAN  CENTRAL  BANK

at  the  request  of  the  Council  of  the  European  Union  under  Article  109c(3)  of  the  Treaty  estab(cid:220)
lishing  the  European  Community  on  a  proposal  for  a  Council  Decision  (EC)  on  the  detailed
provisions  concerning  the  composition  of  the  Economic  and  Financial  Committee

(1999/C  77/06)

1.(cid:217)The  European  Central  Bank  (ECB)  received  a  request
from  the  Council  of  the  European  Union  for  an  ECB
opinion  on  a  proposal  for  a  Council  Decision  (EC)  on
the  detailed  provisions  concerning  the  composition  of
the  Economic  and  Financial  Committee  (EFC)  (here(cid:220)
inafter  referred  to  as  the  "proposed  Decision’).

2.(cid:217)The  ECB’s  competence  to  deliver  an  opinion  is  based
on  Article  109c(3)  of  the  Treaty  establishing  the
European  Community.  In  accordance  with  Article
17(5),  first  sentence,  of  the  Rules  of  Procedure  of  the
ECB,  this  ECB  opinion  has  been  adopted  by  the
Governing  Council  of  the  ECB.

3.(cid:217)The  objective  of  the  proposed  Decision  is  to  address
in  detail  the  question  of  the  composition  of  the
Economic  and  Financial  Committee.  The  ECB
the  qualifications
welcomes 
necessary 
the  EFC.  This
requirement,  which  already  existed  for  members  of
the  Monetary  Committee,  underlines  the  continuity
between  the  two  Committees  and  the  technical  nature
of  the  advice  given  by  the  EFC.

the 
for  appointment 

specification  of 
to 

4.(cid:217)The  proposed  Decision  appropriately  provides  that
Member  States,  the  Commission  of  the  European
Communities  and  the  ECB  each  appoint  two  members
to  the  EFC,  reflecting  the  decision  taken  by  the
European  Council  meeting  in  Luxembourg.  However,
the  ECB  would  prefer  to  state  explicitly  in  Article  3
that  the  two  members  appointed  by  each  Member
State  shall  be  selected  from  among  senior  officials  in
the  national  administration  and  at  the  national  central
bank  respectively,  and  that  the  alternates  shall  be
selected  under  the  same  conditions.

5.(cid:217)This  ECB  opinion  will  be  published  in  the  Official

Journal  of  the  European  Communities.

Done  at  Frankfurt  am  Main  on  24  November  1998.

The  President  of  the  ECB

Willem  F.  DUISENBERG
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3439/98 by Roberta ANGELILLI to the Commission. Hygiene standards at the Prima Porta cemetery
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: ANGELILLI, European Parliament
Subjects: Italy, cemetery, health legislation, infringement of EU law, occupational health, occupational safety

28.6.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 182/85

The matter was not therefore discussed at the high-level meeting between the EU and Japan on 14 and 15 July.
The Commission is forwarding the press release issued on the outcome of this meeting direct to the
Honourable Member and the Parliament Secretariat.

(1999/C 182/110)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3439/98

by Roberta Angelilli (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Hygiene standards at the Prima Porta cemetery

Clear infringements of health rules and of other proper practices have been observed at the Prima Porta
cemetery. These include liquid discharges from corpses (mopped up with the use of newspaper and sawdust)
and the lack of a disinfector for the mortuary, in which approximately 200 coffins have been waiting for
months to be interred.

In view of the above, could the Commission say:

1. whether, in addition to the infringement of Italian health and hygiene rules, there is any evidence that EU

directives or regulations have been contravened? If so, which ones?

2. whether there are any Commission studies or documents on this subject?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(28 January 1999)

1.
As far as the protection of workers is concerned, the measures provided by the Community legislation on
health and safety at work, such as Council Directives 80/1107/EEC (1), 89/391/EEC (2), 89/654/EEC (3),
89/655/EEC (3), 89/656/EEC (3), 90/394/EEC (4), 90/679/EEC (5), 98/24/EC (6) are relevant. These lay down
minimum requirements under Article 118A of the EC Treaty which are to be applied in the workplace in order
to ensure that all the necessary steps have been taken to prevent or adequately control the workers’ exposure.

2.

There are no Commission studies or documents available on the subject.

(1) OJ L 327, 3.12.1980.
(2) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.
(3) OJ L 393, 30.12.1989.
(4) OJ L 196, 26.7.1990.
(5) OJ L 374, 31.12.1990.
(6) OJ L 131, 5.5.1998.

(1999/C 182/111)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3452/98

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Slaughter of baby seals in the White Sea

Following my question E-2693/97 (1) concerning the slaughter of baby seals in the White Sea in Russia, can
the Commission inform me whether it has yet received any response from the Russian authorities on the
outcome of the scientific studies on sealing operations which were to be carried out in 1995?

If not, will the Commission once more approach the Russian authorities asking for the results of this research
programme?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3450/98 by Amedeo AMADEO to the Commission. Removal of obstacles to trade
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: European Commission, free movement of goods, single market, trade restriction

21.7.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 207/71

Once formally adopted this measure will become part of the ‘acquis’ with the resulting obligations for
countries applying for membership of the European Union.

(1) OJ L 76, 23.3.1992.

(1999/C 207/093)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3450/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Removal of obstacles to trade

With reference to the proposal for a Council regulation (EC) creating a mechanism whereby the Commission
can intervene in order to remove certain obstacles to trade (COM(97) 619 final . 97/0330 CNS) (1), will the
Commission say why the proposal should be restricted to the free movement of goods instead of also including
the other three freedoms which are features of the internal market, i.e. the free movement of services, capital
and persons?

(1) OJ C 10, 15.1.1998, p. 14.

Answer by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(14 January 1999)

The honourable Member is certainly aware that the Community has had to deal with serious disruptions to the
free movement of goods. These disruptions have been pointed out by Parliament on numerous occasions .
the honourable Member is referred to the Commission’s answers to Written Questions E-2254/93 by
Mrs Domingo Segarra (1), E-1477/95 by Mr Cabezon Alonso and others (2), E-2023/97 by Mr Gasoliba i Böhm
and others (3) and E-3592/97 by Mr Macartney (4) . and were the subject of a Court of Justice ruling on
9 December 1997 in case C-265/95.

Against this background, the Amsterdam European Council of 16 and 17 June 1997 requested the
Commission ‘to examine ways and means of guaranteeing in an effective manner the free movement of
goods, including the possibility of imposing sanctions on Member States’ and asked it to submit relevant
proposals. The Commission provided a prompt response to this specific request from the European Council
with its proposal for a Council Regulation creating a mechanism whereby the Commission can intervene in
order to remove certain obstacles to trade (5).

(1) OJ C 300, 27.10.1994.
(2) OJ C 230, 4.9.1995.
(3) OJ C 76, 11.3.1998.
(4) OJ C 187, 16.6.1998.
(5) OJ C 10, 15.1.1998.

(1999/C 207/094)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3458/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs)

1.

Does the Commission know to what extent EU citizens and the environment are exposed to POPs?

2. What measures has the Commission taken to ensure that the level of POPs in the environment and to
which citizens in the EU are exposed continues to be reduced?

Is the Commission aware of any national legislation concerning POPs and of how such legislation is

3.
implemented in the 15 Member States?

4. Who will lead the negotiations in the INC and in the Group of Experts, the Council or the Commission?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2517/98 of 24 November 1998 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

25. 11. 98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 315/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2517/98

of 24 November 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 1498/
98 (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 25 November
1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 24 November 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 337, 24. 12. 1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 198, 15. 7. 1998, p. 4.
(3) OJ L 387, 31. 12. 1992, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 22, 31. 1. 1995, p. 1.

L 315/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25. 11. 98

to the Commission Regulation of 24 November 1998 establishing the standard import values
for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0709 90 70

0805 20 10

0805 20 30, 0805 20 50, 0805 20 70,
0805 20 90

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
999
052
204
999
204
999

052
999
052
388
524
528
600
999
039
060
064
400
404
999
052
064
400
720
728
999

46,7
46,7
65,8
35,6
50,7
66,5
66,5

55,2
55,2
55,1
47,8
36,2
53,4
76,7
53,8
62,2
24,3
46,5
80,8
62,1
55,2
85,3
61,0
96,7
55,2
201,4
99,9

(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. 3420/98 by Amedeo AMADEO Cabin crews in civil aviation
Date: 1998-11-24
Institutions: AMADEO, European Parliament
Subjects: air transport, carrier, civil aviation, competence of the Member States, crew, population of working age, professional qualifications, transport regulations, transport safety

29.11.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 341/5

The proposal nevertheless recognises the different circumstances of self-employed drivers and has formulated
the definition of working time and the need for record-keeping accordingly.

However, to exclude self-employed drivers from such a sector-specific proposal would create unfair
competition.

(1) COM(98) 662 final.
(2) OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.
(3) OJ L 370, 31.12.1985.

(1999/C 341/006)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3420/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Cabin crews in civil aviation

With reference to the proposal for a Council Directive on safety requirements and attestation of professional
competence for cabin crews in civil aviation (COM(97) 0382 final 2 97/0212 SYN) (1), would the Commission
provide a more precise definition of the term ‘cabin crew’ (Article 1(1))? We consider that the ‘cabin crew’
consists of all the persons employed in providing cabin services on board an aircraft. The directive in question,
therefore, should apply without exception to all members of the cabin staff.

(1) OJ C 263, 29.8.1997, p. 5.

(1999/C 341/007)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3446/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(24 November 1998)

Subject: Cabin crews/civil aviation

With reference to the proposal for a Council directive on safety requirements and attestation of professional
competence for cabin crews in civil aviation (COM(97) 382 final 2 97/0212 SYN) (1), will the Commission set
the minimum age for persons who perform an executive or managerial role in the field of air transport at
21 years (Article 4(1)), as is the case in other sectors concerned with the carriage of persons? Cabin crew
members with more demanding tasks who are called upon to assume a significant degree of responsibility,
particularly in emergency situations, should have acquired reasonable experience of life and also practical
knowledge in cabin service.

(1) OJ C 263, 29.8.1997, p. 5.

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-3420/98 and E-3446/98
given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(4 February 1999)

The Commission proposal for a Directive on Safety Requirements and Attestation of Professional Competence
for Cabin Crews in civil aviation indeed would only apply to all crew members who perform duties in the
passenger compartment of an aircraft with the sole exception of additional on-board staff who are employed
solely for non safety duties such as to undertake commercial activities.

The extension of the provisions of this proposal to staff assigned solely to non-safety duties will continue to be
a decision that can only be made by national aviation authorities or the airline operators.