do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3740/98 by Anita POLLACK to the Commission. Battery hens
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: EU aid, animal disease, animal health, animal welfare, health legislation, intensive livestock farming, laying poultry, research programme, veterinary medicine, zoology

15.10.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 297/97

the Council has not so far been called upon to encourage the Member States to proceed with the ratification of
this convention.

(1999/C 297/130)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3738/98

by Amedeo Amadeo (NI) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Abolition of duty-free sales

In anticipation of a review of the entire European tax system, the 1992 directives decreed that duty-free sales in
the European Union would come to an end in June 1999. The decision in favour of abolishing duty-free sales,
which was taken by the Ministers of Finance, can be changed only by a symbolic use of unanimity, which it is
difficult to achieve in this area.

In view of the fact that the sector employs 140 000 people, and that the profits made on such sales enable all of
Europe’s biggest airports to absorb a range of costs and finance works and investment, and in view of the by
now spasmodic quest for job creation:

Can the Commission indicate the logic behind the decision to abolish a sector which makes such a positive
contribution to Community employment?

Does it intend to call a halt, as a matter of urgency, to the procedures for abolishing the sector, and initiate a
study to examine the results of such abolition and its impact on industrial production and employment?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(4 March 1999)

The rationale behind the ending of intra-Community duty-free sales is that of a single market. With the
elimination of import and export formalities, the possibility has been created for all citizens to purchase goods,
tax included, in the Member State of their choice. The changes to the tax system implicitly put an end to duty-
free sales to travellers within the Community. With the sole purpose of alleviating any economic and social
problems that might arise from such legislative changes, the Ecofin Council in 1991 unanimously decided to
introduce a specific measure, limited in time, allowing for the phasing out of that activity.

Regarding the employment aspect, the Commission has adopted on 17 February 1999 a communication to
the Parliament and the Council concerning the employment aspects of the decision to abolish tax and duty-free
sales for intra-Community travellers (1).

This communication is the follow-up to the request by the Vienna European Council in December 1998 to
examine by March 1999, the problems that could arise with regard to employment following the abolition of
intra-Community duty-free sales.

(1) COM(99) 65.

(1999/C 297/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3740/98

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Battery hens

Will the Commission indicate what research it has put in hand or undertaken on practical alternative methods
to the battery system for producing eggs?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3707/98 by Hiltrud BREYER Human stem cells and tissue engineering
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: BREYER, European Parliament
Subjects: United Kingdom, United States, code of conduct, courts and tribunals, cytology, embryo and foetus, ethics, experiment on humans, genetically modified organism, scientific research

C 289/74

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

11.10.1999

(1999/C 289/097)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3699/98

by Gerhard Hager (NI) to the Council

(4 December 1998)

Subject: Studies on transitional periods

In the run-up to the Pörtschach summit Austria’s Federal Chancellor referred to a study which had been
commissioned from research institutes in agreement with the heads of government of the candidate countries
and ‘is to contain the data needed for the calculation of the transitional periods’.

1.

2.

Is the Council aware of this?

Does it have any information on whether and where these studies have been commissioned?

Have tenders been invited, or are they being invited, for these studies throughout the Union, or is this a

3.
purely Austrian initiative?

4.

Is the Council cooperating in these studies with the material at its disposal?

Reply

(29 March 1999)

The Council is unaware of the study referred to by the Honourable Member on the data needed for the
calculation of the transitional periods.

The European Union’s general position is that accession presupposes complete acceptance of the Union’s
acquis. Accession to the Union implies full acceptance of the actual and potential rights and obligations
attaching to the Union system and its institutional framework, known as the ‘acquis’ of the Union. Acceptance
of these rights and obligations may give rise exceptionally to transitional measures to be defined during the
accession negotiations. Accordingly, transitional measures can be granted only exceptionally, will be limited in
time and scope and will have to be coupled with a plan incorporating clearly defined stages for implementing
the acquis.

It is for the Intergovernmental Conferences on accession to negotiate on the desirability of any transitional
periods and their conditions and length. It will be recalled that, in those Conferences, the common position of
the Union is adopted by the Council.

(1999/C 289/098)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3707/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Council

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Human stem cells and tissue engineering

Recent reports state that US and British research institutions are involved in the cloning and redesign of
‘master’ stem cells obtained from human embryos in order to produce body components.

Can the Council please confirm that no EU funds are being used, either directly or indirectly, in such

1.
research?

2. Will the Council also please indicate in which EU Member States such research is permitted and what
legal and ethical controls exist?
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3770/98 by Susan WADDINGTON Biodiversity - Honey Bees
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: European Parliament, WADDINGTON
Subjects: UN convention, United Kingdom, animal breeding, animal disease, apiculture, conservation of resources, health control, import, marketing, national law

C 325/24

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.11.1999

(1999/C 325/028)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3708/98

by Hiltrud Breyer (V) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Human stem cells and tissue engineering

Recent reports state that US and British research institutions are involved in the cloning and redesign of
‘master’ stem cells obtained from human embryos in order to produce body components.

Can the Commission please confirm that no EU funds are being used, either directly or indirectly, in such

1.
research?

2. Will the Commission also please indicate in which EU Member States such research is permitted and
what legal and ethical controls exist?

Answer given by Mrs Cresson on behalf of the Commission

(4 February 1999)

The Community is not funding any research project on the use of embryonic stem cells to produce body

1.
parts under the current framework programme.

Research involving the use of embryonic stem cells is part of the wider issue of human embryo research,
2.
which is regulated differently in the individual Member States. Information on the legal situation regarding
human embryo research in Member States, as known to the Commission from available sources, is being sent
direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.

The Commission shares Parliament’s reservations concerning research on human embryos, which raises some
very complex issues. Rapid advances are being made in knowledge and technologies, and the interests of
couples and the sick must be taken into account. However, there are obviously certain limits that should not be
crossed.

(1999/C 325/029)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3770/98

by Susan Waddington (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Biodiversity 4 Honey Bees

Bee breeders in the United Kingdom are increasingly concerned about the importation of bees into the UK
from other Member States and countries around the world. They are concerned that a combination of
hybridisation and infection from the varroa and Kashmir viruses will lead to the extinction of the indigenous
Apis Mellifera Mellifera honey bee population.

Breeders have therefore called for imports to be banned, on the grounds that such action would be justified
under the Habitats Directive and the International Convention on Biological Diversity. The UK Government
argues, however, that any such ban would contravene existing EC law, namely Directive 92/65/EC (1)
concerning the free trade in bees.

Does the Commission agree with the UK Government that Directive 92/65/EC takes precedence in this case
and that any ban designed to protect the indigenous sub-species would be illegal? Is the Commission aware of
any other similar cases or legal challenges in other Member States?

(1) OJ L 268, 14.9.1992, p. 54.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3748/98 by Glyn FORD to the Commission. Voting rights in referenda
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: European Parliament, FORD
Subjects: EU Member State, EU national, European citizenship, competence of the Member States, local election, referendum, residence, right to stand for election, right to vote

C 182/122

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

28.6.1999

(1999/C 182/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3748/98

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Voting rights in referenda

Does the Commission take the view that the voting rights enjoyed by EU citizens living and residing in
Member States of the EU other than their own should extend to cover referenda on European issues?

Can the Commission indicate the current state of legislation in respect of the above for those Member States
that allow referenda?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(29 January 1999)

Article 8b of the EC Treaty lays down that every citizen residing in a Member State of which he is not a national
shall have the right to vote and to stand as a candidate at municipal and European Parliament elections in the
Member State in which he resides, under the same conditions as nationals of that State.

Given that citizens of the Union enjoy the rights conferred by the Treaty under Article 8, there can be no
question of the interpretation of the right to vote granted as part of the new citizenship of the Union being
extended to include the plebiscites mentioned by the Honourable Member. However, Community law does not
prevent a Member State from deciding to grant citizens of the Union (or non-EU countries) resident in their
country the right to vote in elections other than those laid down in Article 8b.

As regards the Honourable Member’s inquiry as to the current state of legislation on this matter in the Member
States, the Commission regrets that it does not have sufficient information at its disposal in order to answer the
question.

(1999/C 182/166)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3750/98

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Shipment of euros

Given that there will be euro coins with ‘national symbols’ on one side, and allowing for the enormous
movement of people around the EU, can the Commission estimate, without involving some absurd system of
shipping ‘foreign coins’ back to the country of origin, how long it will be before the coins are effectively
randomly distributed across the EU?

Answer given by Mr de Silguy on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 1999)

According to Article 105 A2 of the EC Treaty, Member States retain the responsibility for issuing coins. Both
Member States and the Commission exclude the idea of organising any system of repatriation to bring ‘foreign’
euro coins back to their Member State of origin. In the absence of such a system of repatriation, one can
imagine that a mixing of the euro coins with different national symbols will occur throughout the euro area
over time.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3732/98 by Bryan CASSIDY Council Directive of 18 June 1991 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: CASSIDY, European Parliament
Subjects: EC Directive, EU Member State, application of EU law, arms control, national implementing measure, personal weapon, report

6.11.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 320/71

The evaluation of the extent to which the objectives of the operational programme have been achieved will
begin during the first quarter of 1999.

(1) OJ C 180, 1.7.1994.

(1999/C 320/095)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3713/98

by Carlos Carnero González (PSE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Underground placement of the railway line running through Cadiz (Spain)

Will the Commission confirm whether or not it has received an official request, on the basis of the possibilities
afforded by existing legislation, for funding for the underground placement of the railway line running
through Cadiz, given the various reports to this effect circulating in Cadiz (Spain)?

In any event, should a request of this kind be made through the Spanish Government? Has this indeed been the
case?

Should such a request have been made, would it be feasible for the Commission to accept it, and if so, in what
form and at what cost?

Answer given by Mr Kinnock on behalf of the Commission

(23 February 1999)

In 1998, the Community provided financing of 0,5 million euro, under budget heading (B5-700 (TEN)-
transport, for design studies on rail integration in the urban area and the doubling of tracks in the city of Cadiz.

The studies will be finished later in 1999. However, with regard to the specific project to which the
Honourable Member refers, the Commission has received no request from the Spanish authorities for
Community co-financing under either TENS or the European regional development fund, or the Cohesion
fund.

Until such time as the Spanish authorities submit a request, the Commission cannot make any assessment of
potential Community funding.

(1999/C 320/096)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3732/98

by Bryan Cassidy (PPE) to the Commission

(11 December 1998)

Subject: Council Directive of 18 June 1991 on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons

Article 17 of the Directive 91/477/EEC (1) states that:

Within five years from the date of transposition of this Directive into national law, the Commission shall
submit a report to the European Parliament and to the Council on the situation resulting from the
application of the Directive, accompanied, if appropriate, by proposals.’

In view of the widely differing ways in which Member States apply the Directive and the problems encountered
by hunters and competition shooters:

? when will the Commission produce the report referred to in Article 17, and

? when will it give the names of Member States who are failing to apply the Directive correctly?

(1) OJ L 256, 13.9.1991, p. 51.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2687/98 of 11 December 1998 fixing the maximum aid for concentrated butter for the 194th special invitation to tender opened under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EEC) No 429/90
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: aid system, award of contract, butter, concentrated product

L 337/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

12. 12. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2687/98

of 11 December 1998

fixing the maximum aid for concentrated butter for the 194th special invitation
to tender opened under the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regula-
tion (EEC) No 429/90

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 804/68 of
27 June 1968 on the common organisation of the market
in milk and milk products (1), as last amended by Regula-
tion (EC) No 1587/96 (2), and in particular Article 7a(3)
thereof,

Whereas,
in accordance with Commission Regulation
(EEC) No 429/90 of 20 February 1990 on the granting by
invitation to tender of an aid for concentrated butter
intended for direct consumption in the Community (3), as
last amended by Regulation (EC) No 417/98 (4), the inter-
vention agencies are opening a standing invitation to
tender for the granting of aid for concentrated butter;
whereas Article 6 of that Regulation provides that in the
light of the tenders received in response to each special
invitation to tender, a maximum amount of aid is to be
fixed for concentrated butter with a minimum fat content
of 96 % or a decision is to be taken to make no award;
whereas the end-use security must be fixed accordingly;

in the light of

the
Whereas,
maximum aid should be fixed at the level specified below
and the end-use security determined accordingly;

the tenders

received,

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are
the Management
in accordance with the opinion of
Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 194th special
invitation to tender under the
standing invitation to tender opened by Regulation (EEC)
No 429/90, the maximum aid and the amount of the
end-use security shall be as follows:

— maximum aid:
— end-use security:

ECU 134/100 kg
ECU 148/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 12 December
1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 11 December 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 148, 28. 6. 1968, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 206, 16. 8. 1996, p. 21.
(3) OJ L 45, 21. 2. 1990, p. 8.
(4) OJ L 52, 21. 2. 1998, p. 18.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2682/98 of 11 December 1998 concerning tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender for the export to certain third countries of wholly milled long grain rice issued in Regulation (EC) No 2566/98
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export, rice, third country

L 337/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

12. 12. 98

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2682/98

of 11 December 1998

concerning tenders submitted in response to the invitation to tender for the
export to certain third countries of wholly milled long grain rice issued in
Regulation (EC) No 2566/98

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 of
22 December 1995 on the common organization of the
market in rice (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No
2072/98 (2), and in particular Article 13 (3) thereof,

Whereas an invitation to tender for the export refund on
rice was issued under Commission Regulation (EC) No
2566/98 (3);

Whereas Article 5 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No
584/75 (4), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 299/
95 (5), allows the Commission to decide, in accordance
with the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation
(EC) No 3072/95 and on the basis of
the tenders
submitted, to make no award;

Whereas on the basis of the criteria laid down in Article
13 of Regulation (EC) No 3072/95 a maximum refund
should not be fixed;

Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation are
the Management
in accordance with the opinion of
Committee for Cereals,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

No action shall be taken on the tenders submitted from 7
to 10 December 1998 in response to the invitation to
tender for the export refund on wholly milled long grain
rice falling within CN code 1006 30 67 to certain third
countries issued in Regulation (EC) No 2566/98.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 12 December
1998.

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

Done at Brussels, 11 December 1998.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 329, 30. 12. 1995, p. 18.
(2) OJ L 265, 30. 9. 1998, p. 4.
(3) OJ L 320, 28. 11. 1998, p. 49.
(4) OJ L 61, 7. 3. 1975, p. 25.
(5) OJ L 35, 15. 2. 1995, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3729/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS Delays in completing Athens underground rail system
Date: 1998-12-11
Institutions: ALAVANOS, European Parliament
Subjects: Central Greece, Community support framework, EU financing, European Regional Development Fund, contract, entrepreneur, large-scale construction, underground railway













EUR-Lex - 91998E3729 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91998E3729

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3729/98 by Alexandros ALAVANOS Delays in completing Athens underground rail system  


Official Journal C 289 , 11/10/1999 P. 0080 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-3729/98by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission(11 December 1998)Subject: Delays in completing Athens underground rail systemIn November 1998, the letters of guarantee to the Greek Government signed by the company contracted to build the Athens underground rail system came into force, as November was specified as the month for completion of the work. The penalty is Drs 15 billion. The consortium is now asking the Government not to invoke the clauses concerning failure to complete the work on the specified date and to agree to a total revision of the schedule, changing the completion date to 2002, and to its additional financial demands for Drs 53 billion because of the extra geological problems it has encountered.The Greek Government and the consortium have reportedly reached a gentlemen's agreement to break the deadlock.Will the Commission say:1. what its position is on this gentlemen's agreement in the light of the objectives of the 2nd CSF, for which the Commission is also responsible;2. whether the budget for the project has been revised and, if so, how many times;3. whether the Union's funding for the project has been revised and for which measures and what sums were involved?Answer given by Mrs Wulf-Mathies on behalf of the Commission(28 January 1999)The Greek Government has confirmed to the Commission that it has not concluded any gentleman's agreement with the consortium building the Athens underground rail system.It has informed the Commission of recent negotiations covering a range of technical problems with this large-scale project. These negotiations, held under the provisions of the contract in force, resulted in an agreement between the two parties involving no modification whatsoever of the contract.The original contract for construction of the system, signed in 1991, was adjusted in 1994. This revision incorporated a 14,64 % increase in the contract budget. The revised 1994 contract is still in force and it is under its terms that an additional amount of 5 % has been granted to the consortium for additional work to boost the safety of the system itself and the buildings of Athens, including construction of trial tunnels. A further amount of 1 % has also been granted for various improvements to the project.Community funding for the project under the Community support framework for Greece for 1994-99 is EUR 783 million from the European Regional Development Fund. This amount has not been raised since the CSF was approved.