do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1555/2000 of 17 July 2000 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit, stone fruit

18.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 179/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1555/2000

of 17 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,

the standard
In compliance with the above criteria,
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
in
standard values for imports from third countries,
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 18 July 2000.

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

Done at Brussels, 17 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.

L 179/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

18.7.2000

to the Commission Regulation of 17 July 2000 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry
price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0709 90 70

0805 30 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

0809 10 00

0809 20 95

0809 40 05

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
999
388
508
524
528
999
388
400
508
512
528
720
804
999
388
512
528
720
800
804
999
052
064
066
999
052
061
400
616
999
064
624
999

57,8
57,8
56,2
29,9
45,8
62,9
48,7
90,3
94,0
89,4
87,5
87,9
76,2
94,4
88,5
88,4
76,5
79,0
134,3
70,7
102,3
91,9
185,8
114,5
86,9
129,1
275,4
285,0
275,1
230,1
266,4
60,5
169,4
115,0

(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-2409/00 by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Americans with Disabilities Act.
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European social policy, disabled person

C 89 E/194

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.3.2001

Accordingly, on the basis of the information supplied, the Commission is unable to identify an infringe-
ment of Community law in this particular case.

(2001/C 89 E/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2408/00

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Currency speculation

Would the Commission be prepared to take an initiative to form a global alliance of governments with the
objective of ending currency speculation?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2000)

Free movement of capital is a principle enshrined in the EC Treaty, of which the Commission is the
guardian. While it is involved in assessing the implications of the globalization of financial markets for the
financial sector of the Member States, the Commission along with other international organizations has
analyzed the idea of introducing capital controls to limit speculation.

Free capital movements contribute to an efficient allocation of resources in the world economy allowing
international investment to find the highest rate of return. In this way, liberalized capital flows foster a
higher level of economic growth and a more even distribution of growth around the world. Any measure
to limit the movement of capital must take account of these important considerations. Moreover, the scale
of international capital flows has grown enormously in the last 20 years, making it difficult to distinguish
between flows that might be termed purely speculative and those that occur for reasons of investment and
trade. Even if speculative flows could be readily identified, the experience of capital controls suggests that
they are rarely effective in the medium term, as investors find means to circumvent them.

Because of these considerations, any attempt to re-introduce capital controls or other measures impeding
the free movement of capital should not be supported.

(2001/C 89 E/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2409/00

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Americans with Disabilities Act

Is the Commission aware that the United States, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, judges must
take a person(cid:146)s disability into account when passing sentence? Does any Member State have similar
legislation? Would the Commission be prepared to put forward a proposal to encourage all Member States
to incorporate into their national legislation a measure similar to the (cid:145)Americans with Disabilities Act(cid:146)?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2000)

The Commission is not aware of any specific legal provisions in force in the United States that impose
certain obligations on judges with respect to disabled persons. It also does not know of any similar
measures in the Member States, and does not intend to put forward any such proposals.
2000/485/EC: Commission Decision of 18 July 2000 amending Decision 2000/350/EC on epidemiological surveillance of Bluetongue in Greece and certain measures to prevent the spread of the disease (notified under document number C(2000) 2008) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the Greek text is authentic)
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, Greece, animal disease, epidemiology, sheep, veterinary legislation

L 195/58

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

1.8.2000

COMMISSION DECISION

of 18 July 2000

amending Decision 2000/350/EC on epidemiological surveillance of Bluetongue in Greece and
certain measures to prevent the spread of the disease

(notified under document number C(2000) 2008)

(Only the Greek text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2000/485/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 90/425/EEC of 26 June
1990 concerning veterinary and zootechnical checks applicable
in intra-Community trade in certain live animals and products
with a view to the completion of the internal market (1), as last
amended by Directive 92/118/EEC (2), and in particular Article
10(4) thereof,

Having regard to Council Decision 90/424/EEC of 26 June
1990 on expenditure in the veterinary field (3), as last amended
by Decision 94/370/EC (4), and in particular Article 6 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

In the light of the results of the epidemiological surveil-
lance system set up in accordance with Article 2 of
Decision 2000/350/EC of 2 May 2000 on the epidemio-
logical surveillance of Bluetongue in Greece and certain
measures to prevent the spread of the disease (5), restric-
tions on movements of animals of susceptible species
from certain parts of the Greek territory are in place in
accordance with Article 3 of
the abovementioned
Decision.

(2)

Animal movement restrictions in certain regions result
to summer
in disruption of
pastures outside the restricted zones.

seasonal movements

(3)

(4)

Consideration must be given to the extra cost borne by
farmers facing these restrictions.

The measures provided for in this Decision are in
accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary
Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 8 of Decision 2000/350/EC, the following indent is
added:

‘— 50 % of the costs incurred by Greece in compensating
the farmers for the purchase of fodder when they are
not in the situation to move, as they are used to do,
their animals to summer pastures because of
the
restrictions on movements provided in Article 3.’

This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic.

Article 2

Done at Brussels, 18 July 2000.

For the Commission

David BYRNE

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 29.
(2) OJ L 62, 15.3.1993, p. 49.
(3) OJ L 224, 18.8.1990, p. 19.
(4) OJ L 168, 2.7.1994, p. 31.
(5) OJ L 124, 25.5.2000, p. 58.
2000/496/EC: Commission Decision of 18 July 2000 amending Decision 97/467/EC on drawing up provisional lists of third country establishments from which the Member States authorise imports of rabbit meat and farmed game meat (notified under document number C(2000) 1997) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Slovenia, game meat, health legislation, import, rabbit meat, veterinary legislation

8.8.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 200/39

II

(Acts whose publication is not obligatory)

COMMISSION

COMMISSION DECISION

of 18 July 2000

amending Decision 97/467/EC on drawing up provisional lists of third country establishments from
which the Member States authorise imports of rabbit meat and farmed game meat

(notified under document number C(2000) 1997)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2000/496/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Decision 95/408/EC of 22 June 1995
on the conditions for drawing up, for an interim period, provi-
sional lists of third country establishments from which Member
States are authorised to import certain products of animal
fishery products or live bivalve molluscs (1), as last
origin,
amended by Council Decision 98/603/EC (2), and in particular
Article 2(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

Provisional lists of establishments producing rabbit meat
and farmed game meat have been drawn up by Commis-
sion Decision 97/467/EC (3),
amended by
Decision 2000/329/EC (4).

last

as

Slovenia has sent a list of establishments producing
rabbit meat and farmed game meat and for which the
responsible authorities certify that the establishment is
in accordance with Community rules.

A provisional
list of establishments producing rabbit
meat and farmed game meat can thus be drawn up for
Slovenia.

(4)

(5)

Decision 97/467/EC should be amended accordingly.

The measures provided for in this Decision are in
accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary
Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The text of the Annex to this Decision is added to the Annex
of Decision 97/467/EC.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 July 2000.

For the Commission

David BYRNE

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 243, 11.10.1995, p. 17.
(2) OJ L 289, 28.10.1998, p. 36.
(3) OJ L 199, 26.7.1997, p. 57.
(4) OJ L 114, 13.5.2000, p. 35.

L 200/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

8.8.2000

‘País: ESLOVENIA — Land: SLOVENIEN — Land: SLOWENIEN — Χώρα: ΣΛΟΒΕΝΙΑ — Country: SLOVENIA —
Pays: SLOVÉNIE — Paese: SLOVENIA — Land: SLOVENIË — País: ESLOVÉNIA — Maa: SLOVENIA — Land:
SLOVENIEN

ANNEX

1

2

3

4

5

6

484

NIMROD d.o.o.

Ljubljana

Ljubljana

SH, CP

7, b, c’
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2423/00 by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Crop damage in northern and eastern Germany.
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Germany, aid to agriculture, bad weather, competence of the Member States, crop losses

C 103 E/150

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

of the intervention mechanism; and (subject to negotiation with the supplier countries) greater external
protection and Community preference through applying the general system of fixed tariffs.

These measures, in conjunction with the introduction of set-aside, will make it possible to balance supply
and demand while still maintaining rice growers(cid:146) income.

(1) COM(2000) 278 final.

(2001/C 103 E/168)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2423/00

by Sylvia-Yvonne Kaufmann (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Crop damage in northern and eastern Germany

Because of the unusual weather this year, farmers in the north and east of Germany will have lost between
40 and 70 % of their crops. Agenda 2000 has already reduced farm incomes, and on top of this, farmers
now face potential ruin on account of the extreme weather conditions. As farms have thin equity
positions, this is a serious prospect for many.

What scope is there for farmers in northern and eastern Germany to receive assistance from special funds
to help them overcome the difficulties arising from the extreme weather?

What structural and regional policy measures is the Commission planning in order to support the regions
concerned?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(14 September 2000)

The Commission has noticed the damage to crops in Northern and Eastern Germany in 2000. However,
no special funding is available to make good the resulting loss of income by farmers. The arable crops
regime already provides a certain degree of protection against the variations in yields because the area
payments are fixed, decoupled from real production. The Commission can make certain application rules
more flexible in order to help farmers located in well-defined zones where agricultural activity is severely
affected by weather conditions, like drought, or flooding. In such cases, farmers might be allowed to
declare as voluntary set-aside some fields that could not be sown.
It must be underlined that the
Commission acts only if the Member State has produced in time a detailed and duly motivated report.
This was not the case for the Eastern part of Germany this year.

Under Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999 of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from
the European guidance and guarantee fund (EAGGF) and amending and repealing certain regulations (1), it
is in the competence of the Member States to establish rural development programmes which meet the
needs of the concerned regions. The Regulation provides the necessary instruments for rural development
including measures on restoring agricultural production potential damaged by natural disasters and
introducing appropriate prevention measures.

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2428/00 by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission. Removing the national veto on tax and other matters.
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European tax cooperation, majority voting

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/155

Disciplinary provisions have not yet been discussed in the Council(cid:146)s subordinate bodies. In the event
6.
of deployment in a multinational force, each person is usually subject to national disciplinary provisions,
as is, moreover, personnel under the responsibility of the national command structure of each State,
represented by the highest-ranking officer of that State.

(2001/C 103 E/172)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2428/00

by Jeffrey Titford (EDD) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Removing the national veto on tax and other matters

With reference to the European Union(cid:146)s draft paper on institutional reform, is it correct that it calls for the
abolition of the national veto on 39 separate areas of policy to (cid:145)forestall possible blockages(cid:146) in an enlarged
European Union?

What are these 39 areas of policy?

The document apparently contains a list of tax matters which are (cid:145)closely linked to the internal market(cid:146) and
those which are (cid:145)not closely linked to the internal market(cid:146).

Can the Commission provide a full list of those tax matters said to be (cid:145)closely linked to the internal
market(cid:146), and those that are said not to be?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(7 September 2000)

The Honourable Member is referring to the Presidency(cid:146)s report to the Feira European Council on the
Intergovernmental Conference on Institutional Reform(Confer 4750/00 (1)). Annex 3.1 to the report
contains a list of 39 provisions which should be examined with a view to a changeover to qualified
majority voting. Annex 3.2 contains a draft by the Presidency for the reformulation of Article 93 (former
Article 99) of the EC Treaty which would retain the principle of unanimous voting with regard to taxation.
It also gives a brief list of specific measures linked to the internal market in respect of which voting by
qualified majority could be envisaged. The report by the Presidency (Part I, Chapter 3, paras.6 to 8)
indicates what stage the negotiations have reached.

(1) http://db.consilium.eu.int/cigdocs/EN/04750f.pdf.

(2001/C 103 E/173)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2430/00

by Gorka Kn(cid:246)rr Borr(cid:224)s (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(24 July 2000)

Subject: Peoples

What is the Council(cid:146)s interpretation of (cid:145)peoples(cid:146), within the meaning of Articles 151, 189 and 190 of the
EC Treaty? In the case of the Spanish State, does it correspond to that which the Spanish Constitution
recognises as (cid:145)nationalities(cid:146)?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1567/2000 of 18 July 2000 on the issue of system B export licences in the fruit and vegetables sector
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: export licence, export refund, quantitative restriction, stone fruit

19.7.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 180/19

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1567/2000

of 18 July 2000

on the issue of system B export licences in the fruit and vegetables sector

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

(3)

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 5(5) thereof,

Whereas:

prejudice the proper working of
scheme in the fruit and vegetables sector.

the export refund

system B
situation, applications
To avoid this
licences for peaches and nectarines exported after 18
July 2000 should be rejected until the end of the current
export period,

for

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

(1)

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1321/2000 (3) fixes the
indicative quantities for system B export licences other
than those sought in the context of food aid.

In the light of the information available to the Commis-
sion today, there is a risk that the indicative quantities
laid down for the current export period for peaches and
nectarines will shortly be exceeded. This overrun will

Applications for system B export licences for peaches and
nectarines submitted pursuant to Article 1 of Regulation (EC)
No 1321/2000, export declarations for which are accepted
after 18 July 2000 and before 16 September 2000, are hereby
rejected.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 19 July 2000.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 18 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.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2408/00 by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Currency speculation.
Date: 2000-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common foreign and security policy, international finance, speculative capital

C 89 E/194

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.3.2001

Accordingly, on the basis of the information supplied, the Commission is unable to identify an infringe-
ment of Community law in this particular case.

(2001/C 89 E/217)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2408/00

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Currency speculation

Would the Commission be prepared to take an initiative to form a global alliance of governments with the
objective of ending currency speculation?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(20 September 2000)

Free movement of capital is a principle enshrined in the EC Treaty, of which the Commission is the
guardian. While it is involved in assessing the implications of the globalization of financial markets for the
financial sector of the Member States, the Commission along with other international organizations has
analyzed the idea of introducing capital controls to limit speculation.

Free capital movements contribute to an efficient allocation of resources in the world economy allowing
international investment to find the highest rate of return. In this way, liberalized capital flows foster a
higher level of economic growth and a more even distribution of growth around the world. Any measure
to limit the movement of capital must take account of these important considerations. Moreover, the scale
of international capital flows has grown enormously in the last 20 years, making it difficult to distinguish
between flows that might be termed purely speculative and those that occur for reasons of investment and
trade. Even if speculative flows could be readily identified, the experience of capital controls suggests that
they are rarely effective in the medium term, as investors find means to circumvent them.

Because of these considerations, any attempt to re-introduce capital controls or other measures impeding
the free movement of capital should not be supported.

(2001/C 89 E/218)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2409/00

by John Cushnahan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 July 2000)

Subject: Americans with Disabilities Act

Is the Commission aware that the United States, under the Americans with Disabilities Act, judges must
take a person(cid:146)s disability into account when passing sentence? Does any Member State have similar
legislation? Would the Commission be prepared to put forward a proposal to encourage all Member States
to incorporate into their national legislation a measure similar to the (cid:145)Americans with Disabilities Act(cid:146)?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2000)

The Commission is not aware of any specific legal provisions in force in the United States that impose
certain obligations on judges with respect to disabled persons. It also does not know of any similar
measures in the Member States, and does not intend to put forward any such proposals.