do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2203/00 by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Involvement of the Flemish Region in the European Greenlight programme.
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU programme, Flanders (Belgium), lighting, pollution control measures, region-EU relationship

C 103 E/88

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

As regards the possibility of support to be drawn from the Community Structural Funds, the operational
programme for the Sicilia region for 2000-2006 offers scope for supporting activities aimed at defining
and providing airport structures. Financing feasibility studies for such action may be contemplated against
this backdrop.

(1) OJ L 228, 9.9.1996.
(2) OJ L 228, 23.9.1995.

(2001/C 103 E/095)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2203/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Involvement of the Flemish Region in the European Greenlight programme

In February 2002 the Commission launched the Greenlight programme. It reflects the Kyoto objectives and
seeks to reduce the adverse effect of lighting on the living environment. The Commission(cid:146)s booklet (http://
www.eu-greenlight.org) lists 15 national agencies which have undertaken to promote the initiative.

For the Belgian federation the booklet refers only to the region of Wallonia. The person responsible for the
Greenlight programme apparently also contacted the other regions, which appear not to have responded
to the request to promote the Greenlight programme.

Has the Flemish Region officially requested to become a promoter (agency) of

1.
Greenlight programme? If so, when and by whom?

the European

2.
Has the Flemish Region responded to the Commission(cid:146)s request to be a partner in the Greenlight
programme? If so, when, how and who gave a positive response to the Commission(cid:146)s offer? If not, why is
the Flemish Region not interested in the Commission(cid:146)s Greenlight programme? What are the reasons put
forward by the Flemish Region for not participating in the programme?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2000)

In early 1999 the Spanish energy agency Instituto para la Diversification y Ahorro de la Energ(cid:237)a (IDAE)
took the lead in an initiative together with other national and regional energy agencies in order to submit
a proposal for a SAVE project to promote the greenlight programme. In this context the Commission
provided IDAE with a list of European agencies, including the two regional agencies in Belgium. Most of
the energy agencies that have been addressed by IDAE replied to this call. However, this was not the case
for the two Belgian agencies.

Later in 1999, the Commission itself contacted the two Belgian regional agencies, as well as other national
energy agencies that did not join this SAVE project in order to encourage their participation, but the
Commission did not receive a reply from the Flemish agency. The Commission continues to be very
interested in having an official promoter in the Flemish Region and to this end it will continue to seek a
positive reaction from the Flemish agency.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2220/00 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Pelagic trawls.
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, EU waters, deep-sea fishing, fishing net, fishing rights

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/165

If the Greek Government wishes to grant such aid at national level, it must notify the relevant statutory
provisions at the draft stage in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 88(3) of the Treaty
(formerly Article 93). The Community rules set no deadline for notification but, without a specific
justification, the Commission does not approve applications for aid schemes submitted more than three
years after the causal event.

(1) OJ C 28, 1.2.2000.

(2001/C 89 E/186)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2220/00

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Pelagic trawls

Will the Commission list the Member States which authorise the use of pelagic trawls in EU waters?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

All Member States except Spain allow pelagic trawling in Community waters. However, Greece has no
vessels equipped with mid-water otter trawls or pair trawls. Luxembourg and Austria have no fishing fleets.

(2001/C 89 E/187)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2231/00

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 July 2000)

Subject: The Colombian government(cid:146)s request for support for the (cid:145)Colombia Plan(cid:146)

Can the Commission confirm that the Colombian government has asked the EU for help in implementing
the (cid:145)Colombia Plan(cid:146)?

Is the Commission aware that the CGTD trade union in Colombia is of the opinion that the plan will not
contribute to peace, social justice or sustainable development in Colombia?

Is the Commission aware that NGOs and the civil society are not
implementing the plan?

involved in drawing up and

What is the Commission(cid:146)s opinion of the (cid:145)Colombia Plan(cid:146) and does the Commission intend to support it,
despite the criticism?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

The Colombian government has asked the international community to support (cid:145)Plan Colombia(cid:146) in its
various components, as well as its peace efforts. While expressing wide support for the peace efforts of
President Pastrana, the Commission has put emphasis on the need to tackle the root causes of the current
conflict, namely social inequalities, and the lack of respect for the rule of law. The Commission is aware of
the negative stance taken by several non governmental organisations (NGOs) both in Colombia and in the
Union on (cid:145)Plan Colombia(cid:146), particularly on its military component.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1455/2000 of 3 July 2000 on issuing A2 export licences for fruit and vegetables
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: citrus fruit, export licence, fruit vegetable, grape, pip fruit, stone fruit

L 163/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

4.7.2000

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1455/2000

of 3 July 2000

on issuing A2 export licences for fruit and vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(3)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2190/96 of
14 November 1996 on detailed rules for implementing Council
Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 as regards export refunds on fruit
and vegetables (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No
298/2000 (2), and in particular Article 3(4) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1321/2000 (3) set the
indicative refund rates and the indicative quantities for
A2 export licences, other than those applied for in the
context of food aid.

For oranges, lemons, table grapes, apples, peaches and
nectarines, in view of the economic situation and taking
account of information received by operators via their
applications for A2 licences, the definitive refund rates
should be set at a different rate from the indicative rates.
The percentages for the issuing of licences for the quant-
ities applied for should also be set. The definitive rates
may not be more than 50 % more than the indicative
rates.

Pursuant to Article 3(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2190/96,
applications for rates in excess of the corresponding
definitive rates shall be considered null and void,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.
For A2 export licences for which applications have been
submitted pursuant to Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1321/
2000 the actual date of application referred to in the second
subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2190/96 is
hereby set at 4 July 2000.

2.
The licences referred to in the first paragraph shall be
issued at the definitive refund rates and at the percentages for
the quantities applied for as indicated in the Annex to this
Regulation.

3.
Pursuant to Article 3(5) of Regulation (EC) No 2190/96,
applications referred to in the first paragraph for rates in excess
of the corresponding definitive rates set out in the Annex shall
be considered null and void.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 4 July 2000.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 3 July 2000.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 292, 15.11.1996, p. 12.
(2) OJ L 34, 9.2.2000, p. 16.
(3) OJ L 149, 23.6.2000, p. 11.

4.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 163/31

Product

Tomatoes

Oranges

Lemons

Table grapes

Apples

Peaches and nectarines

ANNEX

Definitive
refund rates
(EUR/t net)

18

40

50

20

19

19

Percentages
for the issuing of
licences

100 %

81 %

95 %

66 %

61 %

96 %
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2216/00 by Jo Leinen (PSE) to the Commission. Formal investigation concerning planned factory outlet mall in Zweibrücken, Saarland (Germany).
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU control, State aid, application of EU law, direct selling, reduced price, supermarket

13.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 81 E/175

The Commission is however not in a position to take other measures to assist European companies that
are faced with American sanctions. Under the principle of subsidiarity, such assistance is a matter for each
Member State to consider, provided that Community rules on state aids and competition are complied
with.

(2001/C 81 E/223)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2216/00

by Jo Leinen (PSE) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Formal investigation concerning planned factory outlet mall in Zweibr(cid:252)cken, Saarland (Germany)

In September 1997 Helwin Peter MEP put a question (E-2966/97) (1) to the Commission asking if it
intended to initiate a formal investigation into the planned factory outlet mall in Zweibr(cid:252)cken.

In his answer of 15 December 1998 to a further written question (E-3497/98) (2), Commissioner Van Miert
said that the Commission would address to the complainants (Europaverband der Selbst(cid:228)ndigen Bundes-
verband Deutschland e.V. (cid:129) German branch of the European association of self-employed persons) a letter
stating what further action the Commission would take.

No such letter has yet been received.

Can the Commission answer the following:

1.

2.

Is the matter ready for a decision?

If so, what decision has been taken?

3. When will the complainants receive a communication on the subject?

(1) OJ C 134, 30.4.1998, p. 46.
(2) OJ C 289, 11.10.1999, p. 53.

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2000)

During the investigations of the case by the Commission it emerged that the facts as presented by the
complainants, which are either based on an article in the press or have been given without providing any
source, are incorrect. The correct presentation of the facts gives the Commission no reason to raise any
doubts concerning state aid.

The Commission has already informed the complainants on 14 July 2000.

(2001/C 81 E/224)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2221/00

by Manuel PØrez `lvarez (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Ill-treatment

Alleged ill-treatment in all kinds of families is reported in the media with depressing regularity.

Such cases of violence, perhaps particularly those involving physical violence and ill-treatment, demon-
strate the need for an immediate response and for means of defence, which are frequently not available to
the weakest side in the troubled family.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2185/00 by Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Possible fishing agreements with the Polisario Front.
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Morocco, UN Security Council, Western Sahara, fishing agreement, fishing area, settlement of disputes

C 81 E/170

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

(2001/C 81 E/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2185/00

by Struan Stevenson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Possible fishing agreements with the Polisario Front

(3 July 2000)

In view of Morocco(cid:146)s continuing delays with regard to the EU fishing agreements on Moroccan and
Western Saharan waters and its obstruction of the UN referendum in Western Sahara, would the European
Commission consider it a positive step to conclude fishing agreements with the Polisario Front as the
legitimate and sovereign representative of the people of Western Sahara?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(1 August 2000)

The Polisario Front is one of the parties involved in the plan for settling the Western Sahara conflict
adopted and applied by the United Nations Security Council.

The Union, to date, has expressed its support for the implementation of this plan and for the efforts
undertaken currently by Mr Baker, the United Nations Secretary-General(cid:146)s representative for this conflict.

The Commission,
in the fisheries sector with Morocco, and
consequently at the time of any possible negotiations, will refer to (cid:145)Morocco(cid:146)s fishing zone(cid:146), this area
being defined as (cid:145)the waters coming under the sovereignty and/or the jurisdiction of Morocco(cid:146).

in the event of a future arrangement

Consequently, currently the only interlocutor with a view to a possible arrangement in the fisheries sector
remains Morocco.

(2001/C 81 E/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2190/00

by Gerard Collins (UEN) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Availability of veterinary medicine

In reply to my Oral Question H-0062/00 (1), the Commission stated that it would be prepared to consider
adapting the approach adopted in the regulation on orphan medicinal products to the development of
veterinary medicinal products.

Could the Commission state whether it has been sufficiently satisfied that such a development would
stimulate the availability of veterinary medicines for minor species?

Could it indicate a definitive date when it intends carrying out and completing an assessment of the issue
of whether public financing for developing these products can be permitted and/or made available?

(1) Written answer delivered on 15 February 2000.

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(22 September 2000)

The Commission is examining the various possible options to respond, in the current circumstances, to the
problem posed by the non-availability of veterinary medicinal products for certain species or indications.
The European Agency for Medicinal Products and the Committee for Veterinary Medicinal Products, in
particular, are involved in this exercise.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2193/00 by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Commission. Revision of the Programme of specific options to the remote and insular nature of the Canary Islands (Poseican) and the drawing up of permanent statute for the ultra-peripheral regions of the European Union.
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Canary Islands, EU regional policy, common agricultural policy

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46 E/217

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written E-1062/00 by Mr von
Wogau (1).

(1) OJ C 26 E 26.1.2001, p. 150.

(2001/C 46 E/262)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2034/00

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

Subject: Direct aid to the farming sector

(21 June 2000)

JosØ Manuel Silva, the Commissioner Director-General of Agriculture and Rural Development recently took
part in the presentation of a university study claiming that Galician agricultural productivity is a mere
16 % of the European average. In statements reported in the Galician press, Mr Silva said that the Galician
agricultural sector (cid:145)does not receive large quantities of direct aid, because its basic products, namely milk
and meat, are subject to a market system rather than subsidy arrangements(cid:146). What perverse mechanism is
therefore responsible for the fact that Community subsidies, especially via the EAGGF (cid:129) guarantee,
particularly benefit the richest areas and farming communities, to the detriment of others which,
like
Galicia, are perfectly capable of developing a multi-purpose agriculture really based on the land?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(13 July 2000)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.

(2001/C 46 E/263)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2193/00

by Isidoro SÆnchez Garc(cid:237)a (ELDR) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Revision of the Programme of specific options to the remote and insular nature of the Canary
Islands (Poseican) and the drawing up of permanent statute for the ultra-peripheral regions of the
European Union

With regard to the Council decision establishing a programme of options specific to the remote and
insular nature of the Canary Islands (Poseican), what is the current state of affairs as regards the reform of
the programme and what measures are being taken in respect of the report adopted by the Commission
concerning the application of Article 299 (2) of the EC Treaty with a view to establishing a permanent
statute for the ultra-peripheral regions and the budgetary implications thereof?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(11 July 2000)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the reply it gave to his oral question H-0468/00
during question time at Parliament(cid:146)s May 2000 part-session (1).

(1) Debates of the European Parliament (May 2000).
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1448/2000 of 3 July 2000 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, stone fruit

L 163/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

4.7.2000

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1448/2000

of 3 July 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 4 July 2000.

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

Done at Brussels, 3 July 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.

4.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 163/13

to the Commission Regulation of 3 July 2000 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry
price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0707 00 05

0709 90 70

0805 30 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0809 10 00

0809 20 95

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
999
052
999
388
524
528
999
064
388
400
508
512
528
720
804
999
052
064
999
052
060
066
068
400
999

103,8
103,8
58,2
58,2
51,8
74,8
70,2
65,6
129,9
82,0
84,8
70,0
94,3
87,5
73,4
74,8
87,1
173,4
122,9
148,2
272,3
130,3
130,3
63,4
246,6
168,6

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2543/1999 (OJ L 307, 2.12.1999, p. 46). Code ‘999’ stands for ‘of

other origin’.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2227/00 by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Use of headlights to reduce accidents.
Date: 2000-07-03
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common transport policy, road safety, signalling device

C 103 E/92

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

The four motor directives (3) established the principle of compulsory cover on the basis of a single
premium for civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles and stipulated the minimum content.
This compulsory insurance applies throughout Community territory and for the entire duration of the
contract as long as the vehicle remains registered in the country of origin.

(1) OJ L 105, 23.4.1983.
(2) Proposal for a Council Directive governing the tax treatment of private motor vehicles moved permanently to
another Member State in connection with a transfer of residence or used temporarily in a Member State other than
that in which they are registered (OJ C 108, 7.4.1998).

(3) Directives 72/166/EEC (OJ L 103, 2.5.1972), 84/5/EEC (OJ L 8, 11.1.1984), 90/232/EEC (OJ L 129, 19.5.1990) and

2000/26/EC (OJ L 181, 20.7.2000).

(2001/C 103 E/100)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2227/00

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(3 July 2000)

Subject: Use of headlights to reduce accidents

A recent study carried out by various American universities and followed up by a research centre in Paris
has shown that the constant use of dipped headlights by vehicles at all times (including during daylight
hours) would reduce accidents by 16 %.

Is the Commission aware of these findings and will it say whether any such studies have been conducted
or are planned?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(11 September 2000)

The Commission is continuously reviewing the available research evidence concerning the effectiveness of
daytime running lights as an accident reduction measure. The results of the considerable amount of
research in this field are not conclusive, but they do indicate that for all road users daytime running lights
would be a positive road safety measure and that the effects are directly proportional to ambient daylight
levels. Estimates of the accident reduction effect vary widely and are still the subject of unresolved
academic debate. The study mentioned by the Honourable Members contributes to this assessment.

The Commission concludes that daytime running lights are likely to be a cost-effective road safety measure
but not to be as significant, for example, as the benefits to be obtained from speed reduction, less drinking
and driving, or increased seat belt wearing. The Commission view on the significance of these measures is
described in greater detail in the latest road safety communication (1).

in the form of higher fuel
It should also be noted that daytime running lights will have a cost,
fuel consumption, and
consumption. The Commission has estimated that
consequent CO2 emissions, is between 1,5 % to 2,0 %, although this depends to some extent upon the
technical specification for daytime running lights.

the maximum additional

(1) COM(2000) 125.