do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 553/99 by Anita POLLACK Age limits for staff recruitment
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: European Parliament, POLLACK
Subjects: European Commission, anti-discriminatory measure, competition (EU), recruitment

C 341/128

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.11.1999

investigation, the Gibraltar tax schemes have not been notified. The examination will determine whether the
measures concerned constitute state aid under Article 92(1) and if so, whether or not they can be considered
compatible under one of the derogations of Article 92(3).

(1)

SEC(98) 1800 final.

(1999/C 341/180)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0553/99

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Age limits for staff recruitment

When the Commission reviews its staff procedures in the next few months, can we have an assurance that the
present discriminatory age limits for staff recruitment will be abolished?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(8 April 1999)

On 21 January 1998 the Commission decided to gradually abolish age limits in competition notices (1). It
began by setting an age limit of 45 for all staff recruitment competitions, following the approach adopted by
the Parliament’s Bureau on 20 October 1997. During interinstitutional discussions on the reflection group
report on personnel policy the other institutions expressed their willingness to raise the age limit to 45. But
this does not mean that the other institutions necessarily share the Commission’s views regarding the gradual
abolition of age limits in competition notices.

The question of age limits will be raised during interinstitutional discussions in autumn 1999.

(1)

SEC(97) 2416 and SEC(97) 2417.

(1999/C 341/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0554/99

by Anita Pollack (PSE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Public health and the urban environment

Has the Commission given any thought to the need to create an EU-wide network of city health departments
for the purpose of exchanging best practice on the social and urban aspects of health policy?

Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission

(12 April 1999)

The Commission does indeed pursue a broad approach to health policy, involving social and urban aspects.
Under the current set of public health programmes developed in the context of the Commission’s 1993
framework for action in the field of public health (1), the Commission is already providing support to a number
of city networks, including a European network for public health in capital cities and regions.

Within the framework of the European sustainable cities & towns campaign, the Commission is also
supporting activities by the World health organisation (WHO) healthy cities project, a long-term international
development project that aims to place health high on the agenda of decision-makers in the cities of Europe.
Approximately 1 100 cities and towns are linked with 26 national and several regional and thematic healthy
cities networks in Europe. Activities include the preparation and dissemination of case studies and the
development of multi-city action plans.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 543/1999 of 12 March 1999 fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled round grain, medium grain and long grain a rice in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2564/98
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, rice, third country

13. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 66/3

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 543/1999

of 12 March 1999

fixing the maximum export refund on wholly milled round grain, medium grain
and long grain A rice in connection with the invitation to tender issued in
Regulation (EC) No 2564/98

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 organisation 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 pursuant to Commission Regulation (EC)
No 2564/98 (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 fix, in accordance with
the procedure laid down in Article 22 of Regulation (EC)
No 3072/95 and on the basis of the tenders submitted, a
maximum export
this
maximum, the criteria provided for in Article 13 of Regu-
lation (EC) No 3072/95 must be taken into account;
whereas a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
tender is equal to or less than the maximum export
refund;

refund; whereas

in fixing

Whereas the application of the abovementioned criteria
to the current market situation for the rice in question
results in the maximum export refund being fixed at the
amount specified in Article 1;

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The maximum export refund on wholly milled round
grain, medium grain and long grain A rice to be exported
to certain third countries pursuant to the invitation to
tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2564/98 is hereby
fixed on the basis of the tenders submitted from 8 to 11
March 1999 at EUR 120,00 per tonne.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 March 1999.

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

Done at Brussels, 12 March 1999.

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. 43.
(4) OJ L 61, 7. 3. 1975, p. 25.
(5) OJ L 35, 15. 2. 1995, p. 8.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 579/99 by José BARROS MOURA EU- Switzerland negotiations
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: BARROS MOURA, European Parliament
Subjects: Portugal, Switzerland, agreement (EU), free movement of workers, migrant worker, residence, seasonal worker, social security, unemployment insurance













EUR-Lex - 91999E0579 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91999E0579

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 579/99 by José BARROS MOURA EU- Switzerland negotiations  


Official Journal C 341 , 29/11/1999 P. 0134 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0579/99by José Barros Moura (PSE) to the Commission(12 March 1999)Subject: EU-Switzerland negotiationsWith reference to the reply of 8 February 1999 to my question E-4022/98(1) and taking into account the situation of Portuguese workers, large numbers of whom work in Switzerland on a seasonal basis, would the Commission shed some light on the practical implications of the exception to the Community rules on unemployment benefit, pursuant to which workers will not be able, during the interim period, to aggregate periods of employment in other Member States for the purpose of achieving the minimum period of employment required in order to qualify for unemployment benefit?Answer given by Mr Flynn on behalf of the Commission(12 April 1999)The draft agreement with Switzerland concerning social security for migrant workers provides in general for the full application of Regulation (EEC) 1408/71 to nationals of third countries(2) working in Switzerland. A specific exemption regarding unemployment allowances is provided during the interim period. This exemption relates to people who have worked less than one year in Switzerland. In such cases, periods of employment in other Member States are not aggregated for the waiting period which has to be fulfilled in order to be entitled to Swiss unemployment benefits (currently six months). This exemption should not under normal circumstances concern Portuguese seasonal workers as, under the terms of Regulation 1408/71, seasonal workers are those who do not reside in the country of their employment and are therefore entitled to unemployment benefits in their country of residence (Portugal in this example).Under this agreement seasonal workers are also entitled to take up residence in Switzerland, which will enable them to apply for Swiss unemployment benefits once the national waiting period is fulfilled.(1) OJ C 320, 6.11.1999, p. 109.(2) OJ C 6, 10.1.1998.
Commission opinion of 12 March 1999 concerning the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the operation of the Interim Storage North located in Mecklenburg- Vorpommern in the Federal Republic of Germany in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty (Only the German text is authentic)
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, environmental protection, public health, radioactive effluent, storage

9.4.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 97/9

COMMISSION OPINION

of 12 March 1999

concerning the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the operation of the Interim
Storage North located in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern in the Federal Republic of Germany in
accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty

(Only the German text is authentic)

(1999/C 97/06)

On 15 September 1998, the European Commission received
from the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany, in
accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty, general data
relating to the plan for disposal of radioactive waste resulting
from the operation of
in
Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.

the Interim Storage North (ZLN)

On the basis of
these data and clarifications subsequently
provided by the German Government, and following consul-
tation with the group of experts, the Commission has drawn
up the following opinion.

(a) The distance between the plant and the closest State border
(with the Republic of Poland) is 45 km, the nearest terri-
tories of Member States being about 120 km (Denmark)
and 135 km (Sweden).

(b) Under normal operating conditions, the discharges of liquid
and gaseous effluents will not cause an exposure of the
population in other Member States significant from the
health point of view.

(c) Low and medium radioactive waste conditioned in the

installation will be stored on site.

(d) In the event of unplanned discharges of radioactive waste
which may follow an accident of the type and magnitude
considered in the general data,
the doses likely to be
received by the population in other Member States would
not be significant from the health point of view.

(e) The general data do not contain information with regard to
a programme for radioactivity monitoring in the marine
environment but it is understood that such monitoring is
carried out in the Baltic Sea; the Commission recommends
that this be part of the statutory federal requirements and
that the results of such monitoring be made available to the
Commission,
to neighbouring Member States and to
Poland.

the opinion that

the Commission is of

the
In conclusion,
implementation of
the plan for the disposal of radioactive
waste from the operation of the Interim Storage North, both
in normal operation and in the event of an accident of the type
and magnitude considered in the general data, is not liable to
result in the radioactive contamination, significant from the
point of view of health, of
the water, soil or airspace of
another Member State.
Resolution on the Communication from the Commission - Towards a European Union strategy for relations with the Independent States of Central Asia (COM(95)0206 C4-0256/96)
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: Committee on Foreign Affairs, European Parliament
Subjects: Central Asia, EU relations

C 175/432

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.6.1999

Friday 12 March 1999

3.  Partnership  and  cooperation  agreement  with  Uzbekistan ***  −  Relations

with new independent states of Central Asia

(a)  A4-0071/99

Decision  on  the  proposal  for  a  Council  and  Commission  Decision  on  the  conclusion  of  the
Partnership and Cooperation Agreement between the European Communities and their Member
States, of the one part, and the Republic of Uzbekistan, of the other part (7652/96 − COM(96)0254 −
C4-0418/96 − 96/0151(AVC))

(Assent procedure)

The European Parliament,

−  having  regard  to  the  proposal  for  a  Council  and  Commission  decision  (COM(96)0254  −

96/0151(AVC)],

−  having  regard  to  the  Council’s  request  for  Parliament’s  assent  pursuant  to  Article  228(3),  second

subparagraph, of the EC Treaty (7652/96 − C4-0418/96),

−  having regard to the Interim Agreement between the European Community, the European Coal and
Steel Community and the European Atomic Energy Community, of the one part, and the Republic of
Uzbekistan,  of  the  other  part,  on  trade  and  trade-related  matters  [COM(96)0466  −  10521/96  −
C4-0082/97 − 96/0236(CNS)] (1),

−  having regard to Rule 90(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

−  having regard to the recommendation of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defence
Policy  and  the  opinions  of  the  Committee  on  Budgets,  the  Committee  on  External  Economic
Relations and the Committee on Research, Technological Development and Energy (A4-0071/99),

1.

Gives its assent to the proposal for a Council and Commission decision;

Instructs its President to forward this decision to the Council and Commission, and the governments

2.
and parliaments of the Member States and of Uzbekistan.

(1)  See Council Decision 98/138/EC of 26.1.98, OJ L 43, 14.2.1998, p. 1.

(b)  A4-0069/99

Resolution on the Communication from the Commission − Towards a European Union strategy for
relations with the Independent States of Central Asia (COM(95)0206 − C4-0256/96)

The European Parliament,

−  having regard to the Commission Communication, COM(95)0206 − C4-0256/96,

−  having regard to its resolution of 30 November 1995 on the proposal for a Council and Commission
Decision  on  the  conclusion  of  the  Partnership  and  Cooperation  Agreement  between  the  European
Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Kyrgyz Republic, of the other part (1),

−  having  regard  to  its  decision  of  13  March  1997  on  the  proposal  for  a  Council  and  Commission
Decision  on  the  conclusion  of  the  partnership  and  cooperation  agreement  between  the  European
Communities and their Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Kazakhstan, of the other
part (2),

(1)  OJ C 339, 18.12.1995, p. 51.
(2)  OJ C 115, 14.4.1997, p. 196.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 625/99 by Raimo ILASKIVI The Commission's replies to written questions
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: European Parliament, ILASKIVI
Subjects: EU publication, European Commission, European Parliament, Official Journal, interinstitutional relations (EU), liability, official language, operation of the Institutions, translation, written question

3.12.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 348/109

This information was transmitted to the complainant, who did not bring to the attention of the Commission
new elements helping to identify a breach of Community law in this case. In the light of the above, the facts
raised by the Honourable Members do not disclose a breach of Directive 92/43/EEC.

As no breach of Directive 92/43/EEC has been identified, the Commission does not consider it necessary to
open a special investigation about the way in which Community funds have been used. Nevertheless, as any
other Life-Nature project, this project is subject to regular technical and financial controls.

(1999/C 348/138)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0625/99

by Raimo Ilaskivi (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: The Commission’s replies to written questions

According to Rule 42 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament, the Commission is required to
reply to written questions from Members of the European Parliament within six weeks. In practice, however, it
often takes nearly 3 months for the Commission to reply.

Why is the Commission often unable to abide by the six-week deadline laid down in Parliament’s Rules of
Procedure?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(15 April 1999)

The Commission does its best to carry out its duty under Article 140 EC Treaty to reply to parliamentary
questions. It devotes considerable resources to giving replies which are as complete and rapid as possible.
These replies sometimes require extensive investigation or even enquiries of Member States.

The Commission replies to a large number of the questions inside the six week period set down in Parliament’s
internal rules, but is not able to do so in all cases. The average reply time of six weeks and four days in 1998 is
capable of improvement. The Commission is attempting to reply within the period identified by the
Parliament.

The Honourable Member will appreciate that recourse to the formal method of interrogating the Commission
provided by Article 140 EC Treaty implies certain consequences (use of 11 languages, coordination between
services, adoption in a way ensuring collegiate responsibility, publication in the official journal) which
inevitably take a certain time.

(1999/C 348/139)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0629/99

by Anne McIntosh (PPE) to the Commission

(12 March 1999)

Subject: Working-time Directive

Has the Commission assessed the impact on the transport industry of the proposed extension of the Working-
time Directive?

Does the Commission not consider that the cost involved would be prohibitive, and risk putting some road
hauliers out of business?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 549/1999 of 12 March 1999 suspending the buying-in of butter in certain Member States
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, award of contract, butter, intervention buying

13. 3. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 66/11

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 549/1999

of 12 March 1999

suspending the buying-in of butter in certain Member States

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 the first
subparagraph of Article 7a(1) and Article 7a(3) thereof,

Whereas Council Regulation (EEC) No 777/87 (3), as last
amended by the Act of Accession of Austria, Finland and
the circumstances under which the
Sweden, sets out
buying-in of butter and skimmed-milk powder may be
suspended and subsequently resumed and, where suspen-
sion takes place, the alternative measures that may be
taken;

Whereas Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1547/87 (4),
as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1802/95 (5), lays
down the criteria for opening and suspending the
buying-in of butter by invitation to tender in the Member
the United Kingdom and
States or,
Germany, in a region thereof;

in the case of

Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 328/1999 (6)
suspends buying-in of butter in certain Member States;
whereas information on market prices shows that the

condition laid down in Article 1(3) of Regulation (EEC)
No 1547/87 is no longer met in Germany, Italy, Ireland
and Spain; whereas the list of Member States in which
that suspension applies must be adjusted accordingly;

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Buying-in of butter by invitation to tender as provided for
in Article 1(3) of Regulation (EEC) No 777/87 is hereby
suspended in Belgium, Denmark, Greece, France, Luxem-
the Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland,
bourg,
Sweden, Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Article 2

Regulation (EC) No 328/1999 is hereby repealed.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 March 1999.

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

Done at Brussels, 12 March 1999.

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 78, 20. 3. 1987, p. 10.
(4) OJ L 144, 4. 6. 1987, p. 12.
(5) OJ L 174, 26. 7. 1995, p. 27.
(6) OJ L 40, 13. 2. 1999, p. 21.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 612/99 by Bernie MALONE Double taxation agreements
Date: 1999-03-12
Institutions: European Parliament, MALONE
Subjects: EU control, Ireland, United Kingdom, anti-discriminatory measure, application of EU law, bilateral agreement, discrimination on the basis of nationality, double taxation, national law, tax law













EUR-Lex - 91999E0612 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91999E0612

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 612/99 by Bernie MALONE Double taxation agreements  


Official Journal C 370 , 21/12/1999 P. 0072 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-0612/99by Bernie Malone (PSE) to the Commission(12 March 1999)Subject: Double taxation agreementsIs it the Commission's policy to scrutinise double taxation agreements to ensure that there is no discrimination on the basis of nationality? Is the Commission aware of the provision in the Ireland-UK double taxation convention dealing with taxation of a foreign income dividend? Does the Commission consider this position to be discriminatory?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission(27 April 1999)Member States are responsible for the negotiation and conclusion of bilateral double taxation agreements. Such agreements must respect Community law, in particular the basic freedoms and the non-discrimination principle. The Commission does not systematically scrutinise national tax legislation and double taxation agreements, but it examines their compatibility with Community law when a case is brought to its attention.It is understood that both the United Kingdom and Ireland have recently amended their laws concerning the tax treatment of dividends. It is also understood that a protocol to the Convention between Ireland and the United Kingdom entered into force from 1 January 1999 for corporation tax purposes and will come into force on 6 April 1999 for income tax purposes and that this includes a new article dealing with the tax treatment of dividends.