do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1391/99 by Jannis Sakellariou (PSE) to the Commission. Use of ERDF/EAGGF funds.
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EAGGF, European Regional Development Fund, co-financing, credit, hydraulic works, water supply

20.6.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 170 E/3

regional and local or other level, in order to promote inter alia sustainable development, through the
integration of environmental protection and improvement requirements.

The new Regulation also provides for a whole series of measures to prevent infringements,
including
strategic environmental assessments of regional development plans and programmes (detailed ex ante
evaluation covering strict compliance with environmental obligations and impact requirements), the use of
environmental indicators, the introduction of stricter monitoring and a mid-term environmental evalu-
ation.

5.
Lastly, if prevention is not enough, Article 39 of the new Regulation lays down that where a Member
State has not dealt with an irregularity detected in the implementation of a project the Commission may
suspend the interim payments in question and, after having received the Member State(cid:146)s comments, make
any appropriate financial corrections.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
(2) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994.
(3) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2000/C 170 E/003)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1391/99

by Jannis Sakellariou (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Use of ERDF/EAGGF funds

ERDF/EAGGF funds have been provided by the European Commission for the purpose of extending and
improving irrigated areas in the Guaro region. However, in sectors 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the right section the
water pipes have not been laid.

Could the Commission state why the funds for this section have not been used appropriately and

1.
where the money has gone?

Is the Commission aware of complaints concerning the failure to lay water pipes in this section and,

2.
if so, what measures have been taken by the Commission?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(12 October 1999)

According to the information received from Spain, apart from the part-financing of the construction of the
body of the Viæuela dam, the projects part-financed under measure 6.1.1 of the operational programme
for the region of Andalusia for 1994-1999 are all located on the left bank of the river VØlez. The work in
question has now been practically completed.

The national authorities have officially notified the Commission that the projects to which the Honourable
Member refers will probably be implemented during a later phase. At present, no request for part-financing
in respect of these projects has been made. Moreover,
the Commission would point out that any
subsequent application for assistance could be taken into consideration only if it followed the procedure
laid down and was submitted officially by the Member State.

No official complaint has been made. The information received from the Spanish Government does not
allow the Commission to conclude that Community funds have been fraudulently diverted.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1379/99 by Xaver MAYER Protection of beavers - flood damage
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, MAYER XAVER
Subjects: EU environmental policy, Germany, building safety, competence of the Member States, engineering structure, flood, protected species, rodent

29.1.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 27 E/33

(2000/C 27 E/036)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1379/99

by Xaver Mayer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Protection of beavers (cid:129) flood damage

In connection with the flooding of the banks of the Rivers Isar and Danube in Germany in the spring of
this year it has been discovered that beavers have undermined flood protection dams. This has endangered
the stability of the dams. The question is whether possible threats to the safety of the dams should be
eliminated by management of the beaver population.

Can the Commission say what protection beavers enjoy under the directive on the protection of

1.
species?

Can the Commission say what action could be taken under the present rules on protection to prevent

2.
beavers from undermining flood protection dams and to make dams already undermined secure again?

Does the Commission see a need to call for a study that enables the possible dangers to be assessed

3.
and measures to avert them to be developed?

Answer given by Mrs Bjerregaard on behalf of the Commission

(10 September 1999)

The Commission is aware that successfully reintroduced beaver (1) populations (presumably Castor fiber)
exist on the rivers Isar and Danube (Donau) in Germany.

Even if in this case destruction of flood protection dams by beavers can not be excluded, damage by
similar rodents such as the coypu (2) (Myocastor coypus) or the muskrat (3) (Ondatra zibethica) might be
taken into consideration too. These two last mentioned species do not fall under European nature
protection legislation.

1.
As far as species protection is concerned the European beaver (Castor fiber) is protected pursuant to
Article 12 of the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC (4)), which means that Member States have to establish a
system of strict protection prohibiting all forms of deliberate capture or killing of specimens of this species
in the wild, as well as deliberate disturbance or deterioration or destruction of breeding sites.

However, under the conditions given in Article 16 Member States may derogate from the provisions
2.
in Article 12 in the interest of public safety. The question of which measures are most appropriate to
guarantee on the one hand efficient flood protection and on the other hand sufficient species protection,
has to be addressed by the authorities of the Member State.

These authorities have to decide under their own responsibility whether in a particular case a specific

3.
examination for an assessment of dangers and measures is necessary.

Fr.:Castor / D: Biber.
Fr.:Ragondin/ D: Nutria.
Fr.:Rat musquØ / D: Bisamratte.

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4) OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1887/1999 of 1 September 1999 fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 5th partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1489/1999
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Norway, anti-dumping duty, countervailing charge, import, originating product, sea fish

2. 9. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 232/3

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1887/1999

of 1 September 1999

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 5th partial invitation to tender issued
within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No
1489/1999

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 of 30
June 1981 on the common organisation of the markets in the
sugar sector (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation
(EC) No 1148/98 (2), and in particular the second subparagraph
of Article 17(5) (b) thereof,

(1) Whereas Commission Regulation (EC) No 1489/1999 of
7 July 1999 on a standing invitation to tender to deter-
mine levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (3),
requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the
export of this sugar;

(2) Whereas, pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No
1489/1999 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as
the case may be, account being taken in particular of the
state and foreseeable development of the Community
and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to
tender in question;

(3) Whereas,

following an examination of
the tenders
invitation to
submitted in response to the 5th partial
tender, the provisions set out in Article 1 should be
adopted;

(4) Whereas the measures provided for in this Regulation
are in accordance with the opinion of the Management
Committee for Sugar,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 5th partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued
pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1489/1999 the maximum
amount of the export refund is fixed at 52,477 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 2 September 1999.

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

Done at Brussels, 1 September 1999.

For the Commission

Neil KINNOCK

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 177, 1.7.1981, p. 4.
(2) OJ L 159, 3.6.1998, p. 38.
(3) OJ L 172, 8.7.1999, p. 27.
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1443/99 by Camilo NOGUEIRA ROMÁN Introduction of a pilot job creation scheme in Galicia pursuant to the Treaty of Amsterdam
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, NOGUEIRA ROMAN Camillo
Subjects: EU employment policy, Galicia, job creation

C 27 E/70

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.1.2000

(2000/C 27 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1443/99

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

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Introduction of a pilot job creation scheme in Galicia pursuant to the Treaty of Amsterdam

Although the unemployment rate in Galicia stands at 17 % of the active population, neither the regional
government nor the central government of the Spanish state has instituted a job creation plan for Galicia
under the policy enshrined in the Treaty of Amsterdam and agreed by the Luxembourg European Council.
Both governments have merely submitted (cid:145)job creation plans(cid:146) to the EU which simply re-present budget
headings already accounted for, relabelling them to bring them into apparent line with the Union(cid:146)s
requirements while introducing no significant innovations which might entail any real change in policy on
a matter of crucial importance for the Galician economy.

In view of this, does the Commission consider it possible to introduce a pilot job creation scheme in
Galicia for 2000-2006, pursuant to the Treaty of Amsterdam?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(24 September 1999)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to his oral question H-442/99
during question time at Parliament(cid:146)s September 1999 part-session (1).

(1) Debates of the Parliament (September 1999).

(2000/C 27 E/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1444/99

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

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Cultural development of the less-used European languages

Actions in the cultural field contribute to the promotion of cultural pluralism in Europe, as well as to its
diversity and variety. The so-called minority languages are, however, still badly served by the EU budget.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s position regarding the need for equitable budget treatment of the cultural
programmes based on the EU(cid:146)s less-used languages?

Answer given by Mr Oreja on behalf of the Commission

(16 September 1999)

Learning and disseminating minority languages does of course help to maintain linguistic and cultural
diversity of the Community. The Commission has contributed to the promotion of regional and minority
languages in the Community by the implementation until 1998 of an action (cid:129) Promotion and safeguard
of regional and minority languages and culture (cid:129) funded by a specific item (B3-1006). The budget for this
item rose from 100 000 € in 1993 to 4 million € in 1988. The main activities involved in promoting
these languages were funding for projects presented by the language minorities concerned and for
information activities (Mercator information network), language research and funding for the European
Bureau for Lesser Used Languages (EBLUL).
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1889/1999 of 1 September 1999 altering the export refunds on white sugar and raw sugar exported in the natural state
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: export refund, raw sugar, white sugar

L 232/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

2. 9. 1999

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1889/1999

of 1 September 1999

altering the export refunds on white sugar and raw sugar exported in the natural state

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 of 30
June 1981 on the common organisation of the markets in the
sugar sector (1), as last amended by Commission Regulation
(EC) No 1148/98 (2), and in particular the second subparagraph
of Article 19(4) thereof,
(1) Whereas the refunds on white sugar and raw sugar
exported in the natural state were fixed by Commission
Regulation (EC) No 1840/1999 (3), as amended by Regu-
lation (EC) No 1875/1999 (4);

(2) Whereas it

follows from applying the detailed rules
contained in Regulation (EC) No 1840/1999 to the
information known to the Commission that the export

refunds at present in force should be altered to the
amounts set out in the Annex hereto,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The export refunds on the products listed in Article 1(1)(a) of
Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81, undenatured and exported in
the natural state, as fixed in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No
1840/1999 are hereby altered to the amounts shown in the
Annex hereto.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 2 September 1999.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 1 September 1999.

For the Commission

Neil KINNOCK

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 177, 1.7.1981, p. 4.
(2) OJ L 159, 3.6.1998, p. 38.
(3) OJ L 225, 26.8.1999, p. 4.
(4) OJ L 231, 1.9.1999, p. 11.

2. 9. 1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 232/7

to the Commission Regulation of 1 September 1999 altering the export refunds on white sugar and raw sugar
exported in its unaltered state

ANNEX

Product code

1701 11 90 9100
1701 11 90 9910
1701 11 90 9950
1701 12 90 9100
1701 12 90 9910
1701 12 90 9950

Amount of refund

— EUR/100 kg —

43,51
42,47

43,51
42,47

(1)
(1)
(2)
(1)
(1)
(2)

1701 91 00 9000

0,4730

— EUR/1 % of sucrose × 100 kg —

1701 99 10 9100
1701 99 10 9910
1701 99 10 9950

— EUR/100 kg —

47,30
46,30
46,30

1701 99 90 9100

0,4730

— EUR/1 % of sucrose × 100 kg —

(1) Applicable to raw sugar with a yield of 92 %;

if the yield is other than 92 %,
the refund applicable is calculated in accordance with the provisions of Article 17a
(4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81.

(2) Fixing suspended by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2689/85 (OJ L 255, 26. 9.
1985, p. 12), as amended by Regulation (EEC) No 3251/85 (OJ L 309, 21. 11. 1985,
p. 14).
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1527/99 by Stephen HUGHES Position of the Somalia people in Somalia
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, HUGHES STEPHEN
Subjects: EU policy, European Development Fund, Somalia, accession to an agreement, development aid, fourth Lomé Convention

29.1.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 27 E/111

The Commission has not considered until now the creation of a rapid environmental intervention body.
However, in the Commission communication on implementing Community environmental law of October
1996 (3), several mechanisms to improve effective implementation were envisaged such as guidelines on
minimum criteria for environmental inspections (the Parliament gave its opinion on 16 September 1999
to a proposal
for a Parliament and Council recommendation providing for minimum criteria for
inspections in the Member States (4)) and the setting up of complaints mechanisms at
environmental
Member States(cid:146) level, together with improved access to justice in environmental matters. This latter issue is
being considered in the broader context of the ratification of the Aarhus Convention.

(1) OJ C 341, 29.11.1999.
(2) OJ C 142, 21.5.1999.
(3) COM(96) 500 final.
(4) COM(98) 772.

(2000/C 27 E/136)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1527/99

by Stephen Hughes (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Position of the Somalia people in Somalia

What steps is the Commission taking to promote creative solutions to the problem which will:

a)

b)

allow for nominal inclusion of Somalia within the ACP group of countries, with a provision for formal
accession should a recognised government emerge? and

allow European Development Funds to be channelled to the Somali people in the absence of a
recognised government?

Answer given by Mr Pinheiro on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 1999)

In order to ensure nominal inclusion of Somalia within the African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group of
countries, a special article (364a) for Somalia was included in the last LomØ convention, allowing it to
accede to the convention at the request of a new government (should this emerge) and after a decision of
the Council of Ministers.

In the absence of a recognized government, the balance remaining (47 million €) on the European
development fund (EDF) 5 and 6 was combined for Somalia(cid:146)s second rehabilitation programme. As these
funds have all been committed now, a 15 % ceiling increase has been requested (7 million €) for further
funding. All projects are being implemented by non-governmental organisations and United Nations
organisations. The Commission also manages Italian cofinancing and administers humanitarian aid.

(2000/C 27 E/137)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1528/99

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Waste tip in Dos Aguas, Valencia (Spain)

(1 September 1999)

In September 1998 a large-scale waste tip was opened in Dos Aguas, a village in Valencia near the river
Jœcar. The waste tip is situated in a natural ravine on a 35 % gradient, only 400 metres from the river and
WRITTEN QUESTION No. 1451/99 by Herbert BÖSCH Financing of projects in Ischia (Italy)
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: BOESCH, European Parliament
Subjects: EU financing, Italy, regional planning

29.1.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 27 E/75

(2000/C 27 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1449/99

by Rainer Wieland (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Breakdown of Commission staff by grade and Member State

Is the Commission aware that on 27 April 1999 the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (FAZ) published a
table showing the breakdown of Commission staff by grade and country?

The source given is (cid:145)European Commission, position on 1 March 1999(cid:146). The statistics published in the FAZ
contain a number of inaccuracies, in particular in the following areas:

A figure of 275 instead of 273 for Austria, 3 884 instead of 4 074 for Belgium, 517 instead of 1 326 for
Germany (!), 1 882 instead of 2 069 for Italy etc. This gives a total of 15 696 instead of the figure
indicated: 16 861. Adding up the last column gives a figure of 14 966 instead of the 16 861 shown.

What is the Commission(cid:146)s attitude towards the figures published in the FAZ and towards the obvious
inaccuracies in the light of the source quoted by the FAZ? Can the Commission make available the original
on which the publication is allegedly based?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 1999)

The Commission had not been informed that the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung would be publishing the
table to which the Honourable Member refers.

The table is indeed taken from the monthly statistical bulletin on the Commission(cid:146)s staff, produced by the
Commission, which is being forwarded directly to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament
Secretariat.

The table shows the officials and temporary staff paid from the administrative budget.

Without knowing the source of the data proffered by the Honourable Member, the differences between the
two figures could be explained by the fact that those provided by the Honourable Member do not include
the officials in the language services. The correct figure for staff of German nationality is 1 581 (517 refers
to Danish staff).

(2000/C 27 E/092)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1451/99

by Herbert B(cid:246)sch (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Financing of projects in Ischia (Italy)

Three projects on Ischia (cid:129) two in the port of Ischia and one to do with the untapped medicinal spring of
Nitrodi outside the town of Ischia (cid:129) are to be supported by the European Union. Construction has not yet
started.

Can the Commission explain:

1.

In what form are these projects being supported by the European Union?

2. How is the overfall financing being planned and what system will be used for the breakdown of

funding between the EU and the region?

3. What is the timescale envisaged for completion of these projects?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1565/99 by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Audits of Community RTD projects.
Date: 1999-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: audit, research and development, research project

C 219 E/10

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

1.8.2000

(2000/C 219 E/013)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1565/99

by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Audits of Community RTD projects

For years the Court of Auditors has been asking for a substantial increase in the number of audits in the
RTD field.

Why has the Commission not complied with the Court(cid:146)s repeated exhortations?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(15 October 1999)

In the past three years, the Commission has continuously increased the number of checks on the spot as
well as the number of audited research and technological development (RTD) contracts, as shown in the
table below.

Number of audits completed

Cumulative % increase 1996

Number of audited contracts

Cumulative % increase 1996

1996

42

100 %

55

100 %

1997

59

140 %

117

213 %

1998

69

164 %

132

240 %

Audit plans have been based on a selection procedure making use of a new risk analysis method, taking
into account audits on request. Furthermore, this increase in the number of audits will be enhanced by the
implementation of a new framework agreement signed with an external audit firm. These measures will
increase the audit capacity so as to cover 10 % of contractors in the framework of the 5th framework
programme.

(2000/C 219 E/014)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1585/99

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 1999)

Subject: Mackerel Box

In view of the fact that 30 000 tonnes of mackerel are caught in or around the South West Mackerel Box,
does not the Commission feel it would be best for economic and vessel safety to allow this fish to be
caught closer to the shore, with adequate safety being provided for the handliners who can be given their
own area? Bearing in mind that 50 000 tonnes of juveniles per annum are caught off the West Coast of
Ireland and that substantial tonnages are also caught by Scottish, Norwegian and Danish vessels, would the
Commission consider providing a limited fishery closer to the shore in an amended Mackerel Box with no
increase in tonnage, i.e. 30 000 tonnes?