do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation amending for the fourth time Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 laying down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean and for the fourth time Regulation (EC) No 850/98 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms  (COM(1999) 552 — C5-0040/2000 — 1999/0222(CNS))
Date: 2000-03-02
Institutions: Committee on Fisheries, European Parliament
Subjects: Mediterranean Sea, conservation of fish stocks, fishing regulations

4.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 346/79

Thursday 2 March 2000

5. Protection of juveniles of marine organisms *

A5-0035/2000

Proposal for a Council regulation amending for the fourth time Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 laying
down certain technical measures for the conservation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean
and for the fourth time Regulation (EC) No 850/98 for the conservation of fishery resources
through technical measures for the protection of juveniles of marine organisms (COM(1999) 552
- C5-0040/2000 - 1999/0222(CNS))

The proposal was approved.

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation amending for
the fourth time Regulation (EC) No 1626/94 laying down certain technical measures for the con-
servation of fishery resources in the Mediterranean and for the fourth time Regulation (EC)
No 850/98 for the conservation of fishery resources through technical measures for the protection
of juveniles of marine organisms (COM(1999) 552 - C5-0040/2000 - 1999/0222(CNS))

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

(cid:22) having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(1999) 552),

(cid:22) having been consulted by the Council pursuant to Article 37 of the EC Treaty (C5-0040/2000),

(cid:22) having regard to Rule 67 of its Rules of Procedure,

(cid:22) having regard to the report of the Committee on Fisheries (A5-0035/2000),

1.

Approves the Commission proposal;

2.
ment;

3.

4.

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament should it intend to depart from the text approved by Parlia-

Asks to be consulted again if the Council intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 481/2000 of 2 March 2000 fixing the maximum export refund on rye in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1758/1999
Date: 2000-03-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, rye, third country

3. 3. 2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 58/11

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 481/2000

of 2 March 2000

fixing the maximum export refund on rye in connection with the invitation to tender issued in
Regulation (EC) No 1758/1999

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30
June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in
cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1253/
1999 (2),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of
29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the
application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the
granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be
taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3),
as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2513/98 (4), and in
particular Article 7 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the refund and/or the tax for
the export of rye to all third countries was opened
pursuant
to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1758/
1999 (5).

Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 provides that
the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders noti-
fied,
in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix
a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria

referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95.
In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund, as
well as to any tenderer whose bid relates to an export
tax.

(3)

(4)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the
current market situation for the cereal in question results
in the maximum export refund being fixed at
the
amount specified in Article 1.

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 25 February to 2 March 2000,
pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC)
No 1758/1999, the maximum refund on exportation of rye
shall be EUR 65,49/t.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 3 March 2000.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 2 March 2000.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 18.
(3) OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7.
(4) OJ L 313, 21.11.1998, p. 16.
(5) OJ L 210, 10.8.1999, p. 3.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council. Staff dismissals and wage costs.
Date: 2000-03-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: administration of the Institutions, dismissal, personnel administration, social-security contribution, wage cost

21.11.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 330 E/187

Belgium & Luxembourg

Denmark

Germany

Greece

Spain

France

Ireland

Italy

Netherlands

Austria

Portugal

Finland

Sweden

United Kingdom

EU-15 weighted Mean

Import penetration

Direct

Indirect

5,8

3,3

1,2

2,4

1,6

1,7

4,4

1,4

5,5

3,4

2,9

3,7

6,2

0,6

1,8

11,6

23,0

3,8

23,7

5,7

9,8

27,9

6,5

10,7

10,2

18,5

24,6

8,4

11,0

8,5

(in %)

Total

17,3

26,3

5,0

26,1

7,3

11,5

32,3

7,9

16,2

13,6

21,4

28,3

14,6

11,6

10,3

The indicator does not provide figures with a sufficient degree of reliability to measure bilateral cross
border procurement between specific Member States. The estimate at the Community level is more reliable
but figures for individual Member States should also be treated with some caution, due to the sample size
(2000 companies surveyed). The figures represent all procurement, above and below the directives(cid:146)
thresholds, within the selected sectors.

A larger scale survey is planned in order to improve the accuracy of this indicator and to monitor
progress. The Commission is pursuing the possibility of incorporating this survey within the framework of
the structural business statistics programme carried out by Eurostat together with the Member States(cid:146)
statistical institutes.

(1) COM(98) 143 final.

(2000/C 330 E/214)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0568/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(2 March 2000)

Subject: Staff dismissals and wage costs

How many members of the Council(cid:146)s staff have been dismissed in each of the last five years, and what
proportion does this represent of the total staff establishment in each year? What was the total wage bill
for the institution, and what was the average amount paid to each employee in each year?

Reply

(2 May 2000)

The Council would inform the Honourable Member that over the last five-year period, out of a total
average staff complement of 2 400 officials, one person in the General Secretariat was removed from his
post under Article 86(2)(f) of the Staff Regulations and one person was not established at the end of his
probationary period pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 34(2) of the Staff Regulations.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0571/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council. Accountability.
Date: 2000-03-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, transparency in decision-making

26.1.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 26 E/63

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(11 April 2000)

At the moment, the Commission is not able to cite the data requested by the Honourable Member.

However, following a mandate of the Council, the Commission is currently undertaking a study on the
effective level of company taxation in the Member States. This study will be finalised in the second half of
the current year. The report will contain information concerning the effective levels of corporate taxation
in the Member States. These rates will be compared to the statutory rates.

As far as other recent estimates are concerned, the Dutch government commissioned three studies in 1999
on the effective tax burden in the Community. These studies contain tables concerning the statutory rates
and the effective rates and are available through Internet at http://www.minfin.nl/,select British flag, select
(cid:145)tax competition in the European Union(cid:146).

(2001/C 26 E/077)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0569/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(2 March 2000)

Subject: Council secrecy

Will the Council please name any other legislative body in any other state or legislative area, other than
itself, which meets in secret with the results that those affected by a decision are unable to know the
considerations that led to a decision, or which representatives on the legislature took which point of view?
If it agrees that the only two such legislatures are those of Cuba and North Korea, how does it justify its
practices being placed in the same category as two pariah states?

(2001/C 26 E/078)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0571/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(2 March 2000)

Subject: Accountability

Does the Council agree that it is an essential part of the democratic process for those affected by decisions
to know how their representatives voted when such decisions were taken so that their electorates can hold
them to account?

(2001/C 26 E/079)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0572/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(2 March 2000)

Subject: Transparency

How does the Council intend to implement the various commitments which it has given concerning EU
transparency, particularly with regard to its own decisions?
Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 3448/93 laying down the trade arrangements applicable to certain goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products'
Date: 2000-03-02
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: agro-industry, competitiveness, export refund, trading operation

26.4.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 117/51

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation
amending Regulation (EEC) No 3448/93 laying down the trade arrangements applicable to certain
goods resulting from the processing of agricultural products’

(2000/C 117/10)

On 22 February 2000 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Articles
37 and 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the above-mentioned
proposal.

The Economic and Social Committee decided to appoint Mr Espuny Moyano as rapporteur-general to
prepare its work on the subject.

At its 370th plenary session on 1 and 2 March 2000 (meeting of 2 March), the Economic and Social
Committee adopted the following opinion by 61 votes to one with two abstentions.

1. Summary of the proposal

2. General comments

1.1.
The proposal to amend Regulation (EEC) No 3448/93
follows on from the agreement on agriculture reached in the
Uruguay Round which limited the total amount of payments
in the form of refunds.

The ceiling is EUR 475 million for 2000, falling to

1.2.
EUR 415 in 2001.

1.3.
Given these ceilings, provision is made for the present
inward processing arrangements (IPA) to continue so as to
ensure that EU industry remains competitive.

1.4.
So that the amount allocated to refunds is used in the
best possible way, a management committee on ‘horizontal
questions concerning trade in agricultural products not listed
in Annex I’ is to be set up.

Brussels, 2 March 2000.

The Committee welcomes the proposal and agrees that

2.1.
a management committee should be set up.

2.2.
The Committee is concerned about the competition to
Community agricultural producers from third countries and
about supplies of raw materials to the agri-foodstuffs industry
at international prices, necessary for it to remain competitive
and retain its place in world trade.

3. Specific comments

3.1.
The Committee considers that SMEs may find them-
selves disadvantaged not only in finding it more difficult to
obtain information and deal with administrative procedures
under these trade arrangements, but also because the decrease
and concentration in refunds may prevent them from gaining
access to both the refund and inward processing arrangements.

3.2.
The Committee urges that its views be taken into
consideration and that particular attention be paid to SMEs to
avoid discrimination against them.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Beatrice RANGONI MACHIAVELLI
Commission Regulation (EC) No 480/2000 of 2 March 2000 fixing the maximum export refund on barley in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1701/1999
Date: 2000-03-02
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, barley, export refund, third country

L 58/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

3. 3. 2000

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 480/2000

of 2 March 2000

fixing the maximum export refund on barley in connection with the invitation to tender issued in
Regulation (EC) No 1701/1999

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30
June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in
cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1253/
1999 (2),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of
29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the
application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the
granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be
taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3),
as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2513/98 (4), and in
particular Article 4 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the refund and/or the tax for
the export of barley to all third countries was opened
pursuant
to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1701/
1999 (5), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 2322/
1999 (6).

Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 provides that
the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders noti-
in accordance with the procedure laid down in
fied,
Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix

a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria
referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95.
In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund, as
well as to any tenderer whose bid relates to an export
tax.

(3)

(4)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the
current market situation for the cereal in question results
in the maximum export refund being fixed at
the
amount specified in Article 1.

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

For tenders notified from 25 February to 2 March 2000,
pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC)
No 1701/1999, the maximum refund on exportation of barley
shall be EUR 27,00/t.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 3 March 2000.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 2 March 2000.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 18.
(3) OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7.
(4) OJ L 313, 21.11.1998, p. 16.
(5) OJ L 201, 31.7.1999, p. 27.
(6) OJ L 280, 30.10.1999, p. 77.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0573/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council. Council staff.
Date: 2000-03-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, administration of the Institutions, personnel administration, staff

C 330 E/188

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.11.2000

(2000/C 330 E/215)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0573/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(2 March 2000)

Subject: Council staff

Will the Council please indicate the number of its staff in post, including all services such as interpretation
and translation, in each of the last five years?

Reply

(2 May 2000)

The Honourable Member will find attached a table showing the number of staff in post in the Council
General Secretariat over the last five years.

Number of staff in post in the council general secretariat
(Officials and temporary staff 1995-1999)

Category/Service

1995

1996

A

L/A (1)

B

C

D

246

509

190

1 205

127

Total

2 277

261

554

192

1 246

128

2 381

Year

1997

280

588

188

1 246

131

2 433

1998

1999

283

581

196

1 253

134

2 447

290

616

202

1 260

132

2 500

(1)

There are no interpreters employed as permanent officials in the Council General Secretariat. These tasks
are carried out by JICS (Commission).

(2000/C 330 E/216)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0577/00

by Niall Andrews (UEN) to the Commission

(24 February 2000)

Subject: Spring and MCI WorldCom merger

In 1998, the Commission reviewed the proposed merger between MCI and WorldCom and estimated that
this
the combined company would control 50 % or more of
concentration would have an adverse anti-competitive impact on European carriers, ISPs and Internet
users. As a result, the Commission forced the divestiture of the MCI Internet backbone business.

the US backbone.

It concluded that

Is the Commission now aware of the proposed merger between Sprint and MCI WorldCom and that
1.
it would result in the largest market capitalisation in the world and domination of the global Internet and
would have a consequent anti-competitive impact throughout Europe?

Is it further aware that such a merger between the number one and number two US backbone

2.
providers would lead to an 80 % US market share with significant European and transatlantic capacity?

3.
European IP-networks are configured in such a way that intra-European traffic is frequently routed
via the United States. MCI WorldCom, with its major Internet switching facility in Washington DC handles
85 % of all intra-European Internet traffic. Sprint owns the only other switching facility on the east coast.