do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2330/00 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. German backdated pensions tax.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, application of EU law, discrimination on the basis of nationality, self-employed person, tax law, tax on employment income, teacher

C 113 E/86

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

If Member States so wish, the Commission will gladly examine (cid:129) in the context of Member States(cid:146)
5.
annual forest-fire protection plans and within the limits of the appropriations available (cid:129) proposals for
improving forest-fire protection measures, and particularly forest-fire monitoring, in storm-affected areas at
risk. The Commission has just developed a new system for daily notification of the forest-fire risk level.
The system, which uses satellites to identify risks, is undergoing trials from 15 June to 30 September 2000.
On the basis that parameters relating to plant stress and evapotranspiration of wooded areas play a
predominant role, the system constitutes a highly reliable instrument.

(1) OJ L 327, 21.12.1999.
(2) Within the meaning of Article 2 of the Regulation.

(2001/C 113 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2330/00

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 July 2000)

Subject: German backdated pensions tax

The German Government has recently requested of freelance teachers that they backpay 19,5 % of their
income for the past four years into the state pension fund.

While recognising that it should be up to Member States to determine their own tax rates, can the
Commission confirm whether in its opinion:

1.

2.

freelance teachers have been discriminated against unfairly in this process, and

retrospective taxation rises are not in breach of Community law?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(12 October 2000)

The Commission was not aware of the issue raised by the Honourable Member.

However, there is no prima facie evidence that Community law has been infringed. This could be the case
if this request for contributions was discriminatory, either on the grounds of nationality or of sex.

It should be noted that the German authorities are requesting the payment of pension contributions which
should give rise to benefit entitlements.

(2001/C 113 E/085)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2366/00

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Economic viability of Spata airport

(13 July 2000)

According to Greek press reports, the Vice-President of the European Investment Bank which is co-funding
the construction of Spata airport has expressed his concern about the economic viability of the project in
letters to the management of Athens International Airport.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2300/00 by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission. The Commission's port package and fishing ports.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common ports policy

C 72 E/192

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.3.2001

The current European patent system is not only complex for the various Member States to administer, but
also expensive. Furthermore, the high cost of patents is generally seen as one of the main obstacles to their
widespread use in Europe. It should be noted that more than 45 % of the patents issued in Europe are of
US origin and 15 % of those issued in the United States are of European origin.

Can the Commission say what measures it proposes to remedy this situation and, if it can, how and when
it envisages implementing them?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(13 September 2000)

The Community patent is a priority issue for the Commission. Further to the conclusions of the Heads of
State and Government at the Lisbon and Feira European Councils the Commission adopted its proposal for
a regulation on the Community patent (1) on 5th July 2000. The proposed regulation aims at creating a
Community patent which is affordable and which provides full legal security to industry. The Commission
proposal on these aspects is both ambitious and balanced.

The final timetable for the introduction of the Community patent will depend on many factors, not least
on the success of the revision of the EC Treaty concerning the establishment of a new, centralised
Community jurisdiction to deal with litigation on validity and infringement of Community patents.
An integrated jurisdictional system that provides maximum legal certainty for the unitary Community
title is one of the most essential requirements for the success of the Community patent.

(1) COM(2000) 412 final.

(2001/C 72 E/247)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2300/00

by Rosa MiguØlez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: The Commission(cid:146)s (cid:145)port package(cid:146) and fishing ports

(11 July 2000)

The Commission has announced that it will present a (cid:145)port package(cid:146) this year to clarify the rules of
competition for port services and State aids. The aim is to ensure that independent firms have proper
access to the port services markets.

Will the provisions of this (cid:145)package(cid:146) include fishing ports as well as commercial ports and ports handling
oil?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(28 July 2000)

The Commission has indeed the intention to publish a (cid:145)Ports Package(cid:146) towards the end of this year. It is
furthermore its intention to include in this package a draft legal instrument on access to port services.

Although no final decision on the details has yet been taken, it is currently not intended to include fishing
ports in this measure but only commercial ports through which international trade is carried out.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/2000 of 11 July 2000 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2505/96 regarding an increase of certain autonomous Community tariff quotas
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agricultural product, chemical product, industrial product, tariff quota

12.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 172/11

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1501/2000

of 11 July 2000

amending Council Regulation (EC) No 2505/96 regarding an increase of certain autonomous
Community tariff quotas

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(2)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2505/96 of 20
December 1996 opening and providing for the administration
of autonomous Community tariff quotas for certain agricultural
and industrial products (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC)
No 775/2000 (2) and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

The quota amount for certain autonomous Community
tariff quotas is insufficient to meet the needs of the
Community industry. Consequently, the quota amount
for oscillators (order No 09.2939) and kraft paper (order
No 09.2959) should be increased taking into account
the provisions of Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 2505/
96. That Regulation should be amended accordingly,
with effect from 1 January 2000, so as to insure uninter-
rupted use of these quotas.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of
the Customs Code
Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the quota period from 1 January to 31 December 2000,
Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 2505/96 shall be amended as
follows:

— order number 09.2939: the amount of the tariff quota shall

be altered to 202 000 000 units,

— order number 09.2959: the amount of the tariff quota shall

be altered to 65 000 tonnes.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its
publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

It shall apply from 1 January 2000.

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

Done at Brussels, 11 July 2000.

For the Commission

Frederik BOLKESTEIN

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 345, 31.12.1996, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 95, 15.4.2000, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2311/00 by Marco Cappato (TDI) to the Council. The European Union's Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of Europe, European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights, crime against individuals, powers of the institutions (EU), theft

C 103 E/114

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

(2001/C 103 E/128)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2311/00

by Marco Cappato (TDI) to the Council

(11 July 2000)

Subject: The European Union(cid:146)s Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia

Speaking to the European Parliament(cid:146)s Committee on Citizens(cid:146) Rights and Freedoms on 21 June 2000
Mrs Beate Winkler, Director of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna,
talked about the atmosphere of insecurity and intimidation in which she and the staff of the Observatory
have to work, and said that staff had been the victims of theft both in their offices and at home.

Can the Council give the European Parliament more information about this, stating what thefts have
occurred, who were the victims, when and where they occurred and what possessions or information were
stolen? Furthermore, can it say whether and in which cases the thefts were reported to the Austrian
authorities? Finally, can it assess the security situation with regard to the European Monitoring Centre and
its staff?

Reply

(7 November 2000)

The Council has no information on the questions raised by the Honourable Member nor has it competence
to deal with these questions.

(2001/C 103 E/129)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2312/00

by Marco Cappato (TDI) to the Council

(11 July 2000)

Subject: European Police Chiefs(cid:146) operational Task Force

The scoreboard drawn up by the Commission and added to by the French presidency envisages the
creation of a (cid:145)European Police Chiefs(cid:146) operational Task Force(cid:146) aimed at developing operational cooperation
between police forces and the training of people carrying out public security duties at EU level. It would
appear that the Council has launched discussions on the basis of a document submitted by the United
Kingdom, whilst the Commission envisages a Council decision based on a Commission proposal or the
initiative of a Member State. In its scoreboard the French presidency talks about (cid:145)a structure linking the
authorities responsible for European police forces(cid:146) responsible for discussing and devising strategic guide-
lines, and announces a second meeting for 14/15 September 2000, since apparently an initial meeting was
held in April.

Can the Council answer the following questions:

(cid:129) how exactly did this structure come into being and what are its actual aims;

(cid:129) what is the legal basis for its institutionalisation;

(cid:129) how many and what kind of meetings has it held so far;

(cid:129) what are the rules governing its operation and organisation;

(cid:129) who has taken part or is taking part in the meetings;

(cid:129) does it have a secretariat;

(cid:129) what working languages are used;

(cid:129) what were or will be the items on the agenda;
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2295/00 by Jaime Valdivielso de Cué (PPE-DE) to the Council. Trade.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Japan, anti-dumping duty, extra-EU trade, recording equipment

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/111

(2001/C 103 E/122)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2295/00

by Jaime Valdivielso de CuØ (PPE-DE) to the Council

(11 July 2000)

Subject: Trade

In May this year a proposal to establish definitive anti-dumping rights over specific TV camera parts from
Japan was put forward in the Council of Europe. After more than 2 years of research by the Commission
with the assistance of European manufacturers of these products, the former proposed introducing these
anti-dumping measures.

After the Council(cid:146)s Working Party on Trade Questions met on 8 May this year the proposal was rejected.

Can the Council state the reasons for this decision?

Reply

(9 November 2000)

At its meeting on 11 April 2000, the Working Party on Trade Questions noted that:

(cid:129) six delegations could support the Commission proposal to impose a definitive anti-dumping duty on

imports of certain parts of television camera systems originating in Japan,

(cid:129) eight delegations opposed this proposal because they were of the opinion that in this case there was

no evidence that:

(cid:129) Japan was dumping these camera parts on the Community market,

(cid:129) there was injury to the Community industry,

(cid:129) there was a causal link between the allegedly dumped imports and the alleged injury,

(cid:129) and finally, the Community interest called for intervention,

(cid:129) one delegation did not take a position.

At its meeting on 8 May 2000, the Council confirmed the absence of a simple majority in favour of the
Commission proposal, which therefore could not be adopted.

(2001/C 103 E/123)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2301/00

by Carlos Ripoll y Mart(cid:237)nez de Bedoya (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Water treatment plants in the Balearics

(11 July 2000)

Mr Joan Mateu Horrach, Director of the Institut Balear de Sanejament (Ibasant), a body answerable to the
environment office of the Government of the Balearics, told the local press on 21 June 1999 that the
Balearic Regional Government had asked the EU for PTA 17 billion to invest in purification plants and that
the EU replied that it would not receive any money from the Cohesion Fund, since major investment was
not needed in view of the fact that a large number of such plants had already been built in the Balearics.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2291/00 by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission. European production of mercury soap.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Africa, EU control, Spain, United Kingdom, cosmetic product, environmental protection, illicit trade, mercury, public health

C 81 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.3.2001

(2001/C 81 E/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2291/00

by Glenys Kinnock (PSE) to the Commission

(11 July 2000)

Subject: European production of mercury soap

Is the Commission aware that soap containing high levels of mercury is being produced in Europe, and is
being smuggled to African countries where it is being used to bleach hair and skin? The soap is linked to
serious medical disorders as well as environmental pollution.

Would the Commission support the introduction of a Europe-wide ban on the production of mercury
soap?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(19 September 2000)

Council Directive 76/768/EEC on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic
products (1), annex II no. 221 b., states, as a general principle, that any cosmetic product sold on the
European market may not contain mercury. In spite of this prohibition, recent inspections in Denmark,
Finland, Sweden and Norway have found soaps containing mercury on their home market. These soaps
were surprisingly produced in either Spain or the United Kingdom. The existence of these products has
been notified to all Member States.

In addition, the Commission has asked both Spain and the United Kingdom to take action against the
production of these soaps in their Member States. This will prevent any export of mercury soap from
Europe into Africa. Colipa, the association for cosmetic producers, has also been asked to take action and
to inform its members about the findings.

The Commission is monitoring closely the implementation of the ban on the production of these soaps.

(1) OJ L 269, 27.9.1976.

(2001/C 81 E/237)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2303/00

by Carmen Cerdeira Morterero (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: The EQUAL programme and Ceuta

(11 July 2000)

Can the Commission estimate the amount of funding to be assigned to the Spanish region of Ceuta under
the EQUAL programme in the next programming period?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 2000)

It is not possible at this stage to estimate the amount of funding to be assigned to the Spanish region of
Ceuta under the Community initiative EQUAL. It will be necessary to wait until the Spanish Community
initiatives programme has been approved and the projects have been selected.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2333/00 by Gunilla Carlsson (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Transport of animals.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: animal welfare, competence of the Member States, eligibility criteria, export refund, infringement of EU law, transport of animals

C 103 E/122

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

(2001/C 103 E/136)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2333/00

by Gunilla Carlsson (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(11 July 2000)

Subject: Transport of animals

In its reply to my former colleague, Ivar Virgin (Question H-0324/97) (1), the Commission admitted that
animals were not being protected during transport. The Commission indicated that it was considering
asking the Court of Justice to examine whether certain Member States were not implementing directives as
required. What measures has the Commission taken against those Member States who are not complying
with Community directives? Can the EU not terminate payment of subsidies to the offending carriers who
mistreat animals and fail to abide by EU legislation?

(1) Debates of the European Parliament 4-500 (May 1997).

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(28 September 2000)

Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty requires the Commission to give a Member State alleged to
have committed an infringement of Community law the opportunity of submitting its observations before
the Commission issues a reasoned opinion in accordance with that article. It is only after the failure of a
Member State to comply with the Commission(cid:146)s reasoned opinion within the time specified that the matter
may be taken before the Court of Justice.

The Commission has already opened infringement proceedings against several Member States for
inadequate enforcement of the requirements of Council Directive 91/628/EEC of 19 November 1991 on
the protection of animals during transport and amending Directives 90/425/EEC and 91/496/EEC (1) as
amended by Directive 95/29/EC of 29 June 1995 (2) The Commission will need to take a decision in the
near future on the issue of a reasoned opinion in these cases.

Commission Regulation (EC) No 615/98 of 18 March 1998 laying down specific detailed rules of
application for the export refund arrangements as regards the welfare of live bovine animals during
transport (3) implementing Article 33 (9) of Council Regulation (EC) 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the
common organisation of the market in beef and veal (4) does link the payment of export refunds on live
cattle to the observance of Council Directive 91/628/EEC during the journey up to the first place of
unloading in the country of destination.

If exporters fail to respect the provisions of Regulation 615/98 in respect of specific export consignments,
it is for the Member States to take the appropriate action in relation to any claims for export refunds.

(1) OJ L 340, 11.12.1991.
(2) OJ L 148, 30.6.1995.
(3) OJ L 82, 19.3.1998.
(4) OJ L 160, 20.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2310/00 by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Council. Community aid for hazelnuts and chestnuts.
Date: 2000-07-11
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, nut

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/113

Likewise it is too early to say what amounts will be allocated to the region under the Community
Initiatives Interreg and Urban.

In the case of Objective 1 the Commission sent each Member State a proposal for distribution of the
available appropriations among the regions concerned. These proposals are based on the Commission(cid:146)s
method of distributing Objective 1 appropriations among the Member States. The Commission is sending
a copy of the proposal for Spain direct to the Honourable Member and Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

It must be stressed however that these are merely indicative proposals. The actual allocation is agreed by
the Member State and the Commission when the Community support framework or single programming
document is adopted.

(2001/C 103 E/127)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2310/00

by Raffaele Costa (PPE-DE) to the Council

(11 July 2000)

Subject: Community aid for hazelnuts and chestnuts

In the last three years the European Union has granted compensatory aid to nut producers in order to
mitigate the effects of competition from producers outside the Community.

Many producers in Piedmont were able to benefit from the aid in respect of hazelnuts and chestnuts,
which are among those covered.

The legislation has now expired.

In view of this, can the Council say whether it intends to renew the provisions in question and what
prospects there are of implementing Community plans for the structural
improvement of the above-
mentioned products?

Reply

(7 November 2000)

Although the Council currently has no proposals before it on the production of hazelnuts and chestnuts, it
is aware of the problems affecting this sector. Consequently, at its meeting on 17 July 2000, it invited the
Commission to propose that the payments to nut growers be continued within the budget for 2001 for
those programmes which would otherwise expire in 2000.

Moreover, in the context of the report which it will submit on the fruit and vegetables regime before the
end of 2000, the Commission will study the situation of the nut sector.

The Council would draw the Honourable Member(cid:146)s attention to Mr Fischler(cid:146)s reply, on behalf of the
Commission, to Written Question E-0524/00 (1), in which the Commission mentions the possibility of
social and environmental support measures for this sector i.e. within the framework of the regulations on
rural development.

(1) Reply not yet published in the OJ.