do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0014/00 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Breach of Directive 89/391/EEC on the improvement of health and safety of workers.
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, competence of the Member States, infringement of EU law, occupational health, occupational safety, type of business

C 280 E/158

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.10.2000

(2000/C 280 E/179)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0014/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: Breach of Directive 89/391/EEC on the improvement of health and safety of workers

Following complaints to the responsible Greek and Community bodies from the Works Council of
Andersen (Consulting) B.P.M. Hellas S.A. in Greece that the company was in breach of the basic provisions
of Framework Directive 89/391/EEC (1), the competent Greek authorities carried out an investigation which
established that such breaches had occurred.

In view of the fact that the company has failed to resolve the problems and that no review has been
carried out, as requested by the Works Council, will the Commission say what measures it will take to
ensure effective monitoring and compliance with the provisions of the Directive in order to protect the
health and safety of workers employed by the company concerned?

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(1 March 2000)

In accordance with Article 4 of the Council Framework Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989, on the
introduction of measures to improve the safety and health of workers at work (1), it is the responsibility of
the Member States to ensure adequate control and supervision of the national provisions implemented by
this directive. Consequently, any possible breach of the provisions of Directive 89/391/EEC must be
brought to the attention of the Greek authorities.

In this particular case these authorities must be informed once again by the parties concerned if the health
and safety conditions at work are not remedied in the company in question.

The Commission would not hesitate to take necessary action if it was given reliable information that the
Greek authorities were not monitoring the implementation of the provisions of Directive 89/391/EEC.

(1) OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.

(2000/C 280 E/180)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0016/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: News concerning the rules on state aid to undertakings in deprived urban areas

With reference to OJ Notice No 97/C 146/08 and to my previous question P-3945/97 (1), can the
Commission say:

1. which European countries have taken advantage of the above regulation to grant aid to undertakings

in deprived urban areas?

2. whether there are any surveys or reports on this matter?

3. whether there any examples of good practice in this regard?

(1) OJ C 187, 16.6.1998, p. 99.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0035/00 by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission. Rearing of grouse and pheasants.
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal welfare, directive (EU), game animal, hunting, livestock farming

C 330 E/72

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

Moreover, when a decision is taken, a review report with the most important information (overall
conclusion, particular use or risk management conditions, major endpoints on identity, physico-chemistry,
toxicology and environment) is made publicly available.

The Commission has also co-financed under the second and third framework programmes for research and
technical development (RTD) two projects dealing with glyphosate. In one project the interaction of humic
acids and glyphosate was examined in three field sites under long term monocultures (hops, vineyard,
citrus). Another project aimed to assess the soil and water quality as affected by glyphosate under three
different tillage systems. The results of these projects are available at the Research Directorate general.

(1) OJ L 366, 15.12.1992.
(2) OJ L 230, 19.8.1991.

(2000/C 330 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0035/00

by Robert Evans (PSE) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: Rearing of grouse and pheasants

Would the Commission inform me whether regulations governing the welfare of farmed animals also
apply to the rearing of grouse and pheasants when they are farmed for the purpose of being shot for
sport?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2000)

The minimum requirements concerning the protection of animals kept for farming purposes are provided
by Council Directive 98/58/EC of 20 July 1998 (1).

In Article 1 paragraph 2 of the above mentioned Directive it is stated that it shall not apply to (cid:145)((cid:133))
animals intended for use in competitions, shows, cultural or sporting events or activities(cid:146). Furthermore the
Directive does not apply to animals living in the wild.

In conclusion pheasants and grouse farmed for subsequent release into the wild for the purpose of the
sport or activity of shooting are not covered by the Directive.

(1) OJ L 221, 8.8.1998.

(2000/C 330 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0042/00

by Alexander de Roo (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

Subject: Harmonisation of bans on night flights

(19 January 2000)

The Belgian transport minister, Mrs Isabelle Durant, recently announced that, as from the middle of
1.
2003, night flights will no longer be permitted at Zaventem national airport between the hours of 1 and
5 a.m.

Could the Commission give an overview of the current situation regarding bans on commercial

2.
flights (both passenger and freight flights) at the main airports in the 15 EU Member States?

3. Would the Commission be willing to propose a directive with a view to harmonising bans on night
flights, in order to create a level playing field and to improve the situation with regard to the effects of
noise pollution at night and in the morning on the health of citizens?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0003/00 by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission. Excise duties on wine in Ireland.
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Ireland, beer, excise duty, infringement procedure (EU), wine

C 330 E/66

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

Directive 96/92/EC obliges transmission system operators (TSOs) either to publish the tariffs for
3.
access to the network, where regulated third party access exists, or to publish indicative tariffs for the use
of the network in the case of negotiated third party access.

4.
The Commission agrees with the Honourable Member and insists on fees being non-discriminatory.
Under Article 7,5 of the Directive TSOs may not discriminate between users of the network, particularly in
favour of their shareholders or subsidiaries.

The Commission agrees and has pointed out this risk of abuse of dominant position on the part of

5.
the incumbent German electricity utilities in the letters that have been sent.

6.
As mentioned under 1) the Commission has outlined its doubts as to the conformity of some aspects
of the Verbaendevereinbarung with the Electricity Directive, and its doubts as to compatibility with the
competition rules of the EC Treaty. It is clear the VV must guarantee a free and transparent market access
to all players.

(2000/C 330 E/072)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0003/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: Excise duties on wine in Ireland

With reference to the answers given by Nino Gemelli, chairman of the Committee on Petitions, and by the
Commission on the subject of Petition No 1229/97 submitted by Mr Paris Cugini, an Italian citizen, on
excise duties on wine in Ireland, can the Commission say:

1. whether it has questioned the Irish authorities;

2. whether there have been any new developments?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 2000)

In response to Petition No 1229/97 submitted by Mr Paris Cugini, raising the possibility that Irish excise
duties discriminate against wine and in favour of beer, the Commission contacted the Irish authorities to
request clarification of this matter.

Subsequently, in the context of infringement proceedings as defined in article 226 (formerly article 169) of
the EC Treaty, the Commission sent a reasoned opinion to the Irish government on 25 August 1999.

In October 1999, the Irish government replied to the Commission(cid:146)s reasoned opinion. This reply is
presently being studied by the Commission, and its contents are confidential, as infringement procedures
against a Member State require.

(2000/C 330 E/073)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0008/00

by Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(13 January 2000)

Subject: CITES-negotiations 2000

The next Conference of Parties (COP) of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
(CITES) will take place in Nairobi in April 2000.

1.
A topic that will most likely be discussed at the COP 10 of CITES concerns elephant poaching related
to trade in ivory in Asian and African countries. Contradictory information on this issue exists, and
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0038/00 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. New Poseima measures in the field of agriculture in the Autonomous Region of the Azores.
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Azores, common agricultural policy

C 303 E/130

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

24.10.2000

Commission is considering an action to assist reconstruction in the area, for which an expert mission is
being prepared, to carry out an evaluation and to identify specific actions.

The Commission, depending on the findings of the expert mission, will decide on a medium-term plan for
the reconstruction of Venezuela. The Commission will closely co-operate with other donors in order to
encourage a co-ordinated international action, and a clear definition of the priorities.

(2000/C 303 E/133)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0038/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: New Poseima measures in the field of agriculture in the Autonomous Region of the Azores

The Commission does not make any mention of new measures to assist agriculture in the Autonomous
Region of the Azores (as opposed to other very remote regions) in its report on measures to implement
Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty in respect of the outermost regions of the European Union.

In what form and when will the Commission present details of the proposal concerning new measures in
the field of agriculture for the Autonomous Region of the Azores?

(2000/C 303 E/134)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0043/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(20 January 2000)

Subject: Cologne process: Milk quotas in ultraperipheral regions

At the 23 November 1999 partnership meeting between the Commission and the ultraperipheral regions,
at which views and information were exchanged in connection with drawing up the report on the regions
concerned, Commissioner Fischler(cid:146)s representative, Agriculture Director-General Guy Legras, referred to the
need for a more flexible application of the milk quotas in the Azores, given the need to prevent market
imbalances.

Unlike RØunion, Guyana, Martinique and Guadalupe, milk quotas in the Azores Autonomous Region are
applied without any special exemptions whatever.

Can the Commission therefore explain why the report on the measures to implement Article 229(2) of the
treaty in the ultraperipheral regions fails to mention this fact?

How and when does it intend to give practical expression to the remark made by Commissioner Fischler(cid:146)s
representative?

(2000/C 303 E/135)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0044/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(20 January 2000)

Subject: Cologne process: adjustment of the Poseima programme with regard to the supply of cereals as

agricultural raw materials in the various islands of the Azores

Article 3 of Regulation (EEC) No 1600/92 (1) establishes a supply system which, in the case of agricultural
raw materials, has a very significant impact on farm costs.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 115/2000 of 19 January 2000 on the issue of import licences for certain products falling within CN codes 1701, 1702, 1703 and 1704 and qualifying as ACP/OCT originating products
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: ACP countries, import licence, molasses, originating product, overseas countries and territories, sugar

L 14/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20. 1. 2000

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 115/2000

of 19 January 2000

on the issue of import licences for certain products falling within CN codes 1701, 1702, 1703 and
1704 and qualifying as ACP/OCT originating products

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Decision 91/482/EEC of 25 July
1991 on the association of the overseas countries and terri-
tories with the European Community (1), (hereinafter referred
to as ‘OCT Decision’), as last amended by Decision 97/803/
EC (2),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2553/97 of
17 December on rules for issuing import licences for certain
products covered by CN-Codes 1701, 1702, 1703 and 1704
and qualifying as ACP/OCT (3), originating products, and in
particular Article 5(3) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

Article 108b(1) of the OCT Decision allows ACP/OCT
cumulation of origin in the case of products falling
within CN codes 1701, 1702, 1703 and 1704 up to an
annual quantity of 3 000 tonnes of sugar;

two applications have been submitted to the national
authorities in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 2553/
97 for the issue of import licences covering a total
quantity exceeding the 3 000 tonnes allowed under the
OCT Decision;

Article 5(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2553/97 provides
that, where licence applications cover annual quantities
in excess of 3 000 tonnes of sugar, the Commission is to

adopt a regulation fixing a single reducing coefficient to
be applied to each application submitted and suspend
the submission of further applications during the year in
progress;

(4)

the Commission must therefore fix the reducing coeffi-
cient
licences and suspend
import
submission of further licence applications for 2000,

for the issue of

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Import licences covered by applications submitted under Artile
108b of the OCT Decision on 3 January 2000 for a quantity of
732,300 tonnes of sugar falling within CN code 1701 11 90
and on 6 January for a quantity of 3 000 tonnes of sugar
falling within CN code 1701 99 10 shall be issued for
80,37939 % of the quantity applied for.

Article 2

The submission of further applications for 2000 is suspended.

Article 3

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publica-
tion in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

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

Done at Brussels, 19 January 2000.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 263, 19.9.1991, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 329, 29.11.1997, p. 50.
(3) OJ L 349, 19.12.1997, p. 26.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0040/00 by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission. Cuts in the Poseima budget.
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Azores, Community budget, EU regional policy, aid to agriculture, peripheral region

28.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 374 E/19

Thus the Regional Development Plan presented by the Portuguese authorities on 13 October 1999
proposed allocating to the autonomous region of the Azores, under the regional operational programme
to be applied, a total of EUR 848 million from the Structural Funds, plus a sum still to be determined for
aid from Cohesion Fund. The Commission has no objection to the Portuguese proposal.

As requested by the Cologne European Council, the Commission will submit to the Council a report on
measures to implement the new Article 299(2) (ex Article 227) of the EC Treaty concerning the outermost
regions. This report should be submitted to the Council during the Portuguese Presidency and will also be
forwarded to Parliament.

(2000/C 374 E/022)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0040/00

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(19 January 2000)

Subject: Cuts in the Poseima budget

In its letter of amendment No 4 to the PDB for 2000, the Commission increases the appropriations for
other programmes to the detriment of Poseima, claiming that budgetary requirements for the latter are
declining. However, according to the report on the outermost regions which it adopted on 22 December
1999, spending on Poseima in 1999 exceeded the initial budget. What are the Commission(cid:146)s grounds for
cutting this budget?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2000)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the Commission(cid:146)s answers to his Written Question
E-0038/00 (1) and to Written Question E-2403/99 by Mrs Fiqueiredo (2).

(1) OJ C 303 E, 24.10.2000.
(2) OJ C 225 E, 8.8.2000, p. 125.

(2000/C 374 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0059/00

by Avril Doyle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 January 2000)

Subject: The relationship between the Structural Funds and the non-implementation of EU environmental

legislation by a Member State

Given that, on 23 June 1999, Mrs Wulf-Mathies and Mrs Bjerregaard, then Commissioners, wrote to
Member State governments warning them of possible delays in approval of programmes and projects if, in
particular, notifications of protected sites under the Habitats and Wild Bird Directives had not been
received, that Court proceedings had been started against Ireland in February 1999 because of unsatisfac-
tory notification and delays in Ireland(cid:146)s designation of protected sites under the Habitats Directive and that
the Commission was also considering infringement proceedings against Ireland under the Wild Birds
Directive, what is the likelihood that the Commission will not proceed with the approval of plans and
operational programmes from Ireland, and/or what is the likelihood that EU funding will be suspended, in
part or in whole, as a result of Ireland(cid:146)s perceived non-compliance on these issues?
Information from the Commission - Extension of the validity of the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: State aid, aid to agriculture, environmental protection

C 14/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

19.1.2000

Extension of the validity of the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection

(2000/C 14/07)

In 1994 the Commission adopted the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection (1),
which were to expire on 31 December 1999. On 22 December 1999 it decided to extend the validity of
the guidelines until 30 June 2000, except in respect of agricultural products. On 24 November 1999 the
Commission adopted guidelines for state aid in the agricultural sector, which also apply to environmental
aid in agriculture.

(1) OJ C 72, 10.3.1994, p. 3.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 110/2000 of 19 January 2000 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2000-01-19
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit

20. 1. 2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 14/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 110/2000

of 19 January 2000

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and
vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(2)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

in compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of
21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the
last
import arrangements
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98 (2), and in particular
Article 4 (1) thereof,

fruit and vegetables (1), as

for

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Whereas:

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the
outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade nego-
tiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the
standard values for imports from third countries,
in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto;

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regula-
tion (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex
hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 20 January 2000.

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

Done at Brussels, 19 January 2000.

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.

L 14/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

20. 1. 2000

to the Commission Regulation of 19 January 2000 establishing the standard import values for determining the
entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 10 00

0709 90 70

0805 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50

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

(EUR/100 kg)

052
204
624
999
052
628
999
220
999
052
204
999
052
204
212
624
999
204
999

052
204
624
999
052
600
999
400
404
524
720
728
999
064
400
720
999

94,2
56,5
156,8
102,5
97,2
152,7
124,9
165,5
165,5
124,9
116,1
120,5
39,0
37,5
42,7
65,3
46,1
59,0
59,0

66,6
76,1
92,5
78,4
47,9
58,1
53,0
90,5
87,1
108,5
71,3
60,0
83,5
64,3
102,0
111,3
92,5

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2645/98 (OJ L 335, 10.12.1998, p. 22). Code ‘999’ stands for ‘of

other origin’.