WRITTEN QUESTION P-2057/99 by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission. Fifth framework programme (Energy).
Date: 1999-11-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Structural Funds, non-commercial sector

18.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 203 E/125

The Commission does not currently have specific information concerning the risk presented by di-octyl
phthalate (DOP) in orthodontic applications. Phthalates used as plasticizers in polyvinyl chloride (PVC) toys
and childcare articles are other than DOP. Nevertheless, the Commission has proposed, that all relevant
phthalates that could be used as plasticizers in PVC toys, of which di-octyl phthalate is one, should be
banned for use in toys intended to be put in the mouth by small children.

The Commission will seek further information, from amongst others the Finnish authorities, and ask the
scientific committee(cid:146)s advice if it appears necessary.

(1) OJ L 169, 12.7.1993.

(2000/C 203 E/159)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2056/99

by Eryl McNally (PSE) to the Commission

(29 October 1999)

Subject: Local Exchange Trading Systems

What is the EC doing to promote the growth of LETS (Local Exchange Trading Systems) by including them
in Structural Fund possibilities and by disseminating good practice in Member States?

Answer given by Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 1999)

As regards the dissemination of information about local exchange trading schemes (LETS), the Commission
would inform the Honourable Member that it is currently preparing a series of events in the Member
States to demonstrate (cid:145)best practices(cid:146) which have been tested in certain businesses and are considered likely
to be able to improve the competitiveness of other businesses. If the Honourable Member would kindly
send details of the LETS of which she has knowledge, and provided that these do not consist of barter and
can be demonstrated to have satisfied the requirements of the tax authorities, the Commission will
consider including them in the best practices to be exhibited as described above.

The Structural Fund problems attached to LETS may, subject to the reservations already mentioned, be
taken into account as part of the support for local development and employment activities, whether these
are a matter of new sources of jobs, or of new forms of business, craft industry or tourism.

(2000/C 203 E/160)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2057/99

by Pat Gallagher (UEN) to the Commission

(5 November 1999)

Subject: Fifth framework programme (Energy)

Will the Commission state what steps are being taken to achieve the target set by the European Parliament
as regards renewable energy?

Answer given Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(23 November 1999)

In its commentary on the 1999 budget for the Fifth research and technological development (RTD)
framework programme, the budgetary authority, at the initiative of the Parliament, requested that 60 % of

C 203 E/126

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2000

credits for non-nuclear energy should be allocated to renewable energies, of which 75 % should be
allocated to renewable demonstration projects. The Commission agrees that there is an urgent need to
encourage the demonstration of solutions which favour the use of innovative renewable energy resources
and would like to satisfy the commentary as far as practicable.

The first call for proposals for the Energie programme (energy component of the energy, environment and
sustainable development specific RTD programme) gave considerable prominence to renewable energies.
Indeed, within the constraints of the work programme, almost all renewables sectors were covered by the
call.

While the final decision on 1999 projects has not yet been formally made, it can already be said that the
share represented by projects dedicated to renewables and demonstration in renewables in the commit-
ment of the available budget for the non-nuclear energy sub-programme will be very close to the target
indicated in the budget commentary.

(2000/C 203 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2060/99

by Ioannis Mar(cid:237)nos (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 November 1999)

Subject: Turkey(cid:146)s eligibility for EU membership

The Commission has recommended to the Council and Parliament that Turkey should be accepted as an
applicant member of the Union and, in so doing, it did not consider that the country(cid:146)s controversial
geographical position (mainly in Asia) or its failure to fulfill the Copenhagen criteria (human rights,
democratic institutions, treatment of minorities etc.) should be a barrier to that.

Why is it then the case, as President Prodi has stated, that if Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia or FYROM (cid:129) which
are indisputably European countries (cid:129) submit applications for membership, the Commission will accept
them as eligible only if they fulfill the Copenhagen criteria? Why is there such discrimination and on what
principles and legal basis is this dual-approach, two-tier policy based? When and by whom was it decided
to override the principles on which the European Union was founded and developed, when such a
measure serves the economic and strategic interests of some of the Member States while undermining the
corresponding interests of other countries in the Union?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 1999)

The Commission has indeed taken the view that Turkey should be considered as a candidate country to
Union membership. By applying for Union membership in 1987, Turkey has since a long time expressed
its wish to become a member of the Union. Furthermore, the Ankara Agreement (notably its Article 28)
and various Union statements clearly envisage the possibility of Turkey(cid:146)s accession.

The Commission applies the Copenhagen accession criteria in the same way to all candidate countries.
These criteria must be met before a candidate country becomes a member of the Union. The same goes for
Turkey. Moreover, there can be no question of opening negotiations with Turkey before this country fulfils
the Copenhagen political criteria.

As to the other European countries, the Commission has recommended on 13 October 1999 that the
Union (cid:145)should confirm that the countries of the former Yugoslavia and Albania have the ultimate vocation
to become members of the Union(cid:146). It has recommended also to (cid:145)further develop accession criteria, building
on those defined at Copenhagen, which would make Union membership conditional not only upon the
principles of Article 6 TEU, but upon mutual recognition of each other(cid:146)s borders, settlement of all
outstanding issues relating to the treatment of national minorities, establishment of a regional organisation
for free trade and economic cooperation as a basis for closer integration into the Union(cid:146).