WRITTEN QUESTION E-2533/00 by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Standardisation and certification of early warning systems.
Date: 2000-08-02
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, approximation of laws, business management, claim, company law, credit guarantee, national law

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/45

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2000)

The Commission is very concerned about the forest fires that affected Greece this summer and the
personal tragedies involved.

The Community has no emergency financial aid mechanism to help southern Member States such as
Greece cope with the damage caused by this wave of fires.

Member States can however, provided that all relevant rules, decisions and agreements are respected, use
Community funds to repair damage to public infrastructure and purchase firefighting equipment.

On restoration of
the natural environment, a number of operational programmes approved or in
negotiation include aid under the sixth indent of Article 30(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1257/1999
of 17 May 1999 on support for rural development from the European Agricultural Guidance and
Guarantee Fund and amending and repealing certain Regulations (1) that will help make good the needs
identified.

Under Council Regulation (EEC) No 2158/92 of 23 July 1992 on protection of the Community(cid:146)s forests
the Commission on 17 July 2000 to spend € 3 750 000 (Community contribution
against
€ 1 675 000) on forest protection in Greece. This includes creation of tracks, firebreaks and water points,
preventive forestry measures and launching of monitoring action.

fire (2)

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999.
(2) OJ L 217, 31.7.1992.

(2001/C 136 E/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2533/00

by Karl von Wogau (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(2 August 2000)

Subject: Standardisation and certification of early warning systems

The Federal Republic of Germany has created the legal framework for the introduction of early warning
systems in the business sphere. Does the Commission know whether other Member States have introduced
similar systems?

Does the Commission feel it would be advisable to introduce, in a common market, arrangements for the
standardisation and/or certification of systems of this kind?

Very recently, Germany created a legal framework for the introduction of early warning systems. The use
of such systems is specified in the law on monitoring and transparency in the business sphere, the law
implementing the directive on corporations with partners and in Article 91(2) of the law on shares. Since
the beginning of this year auditors have been required to draw up a report on the existence of an early
warning system.

If similar systems are in use in other Member States, this raises the issue of whether, in a common market,
it would be beneficial for capital investors if a joint framework were to be created governing the quality
and comparability of such early warning systems.

C 136 E/46

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

8.5.2001

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

The Commission knows the German system to which the Honourable Member refers. It appears that the
aim of this system is to ensure maximum protection for investors and creditors by requiring company
managers to report on the resources implemented to detect risks.

The Commission does not currently know of any comparable laws in other Member States.

At Community level, there are no provisions laying down such obligations.

However, as part of the Financial Services Action Plan the Commission has launched a study on the
Member States(cid:146) existing codes on corporate governance. It will thus gain a more accurate view of the
current position in all the Member States.

(2001/C 136 E/051)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2540/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 July 2000)

Subject: Cap de la Hague

Will the Commission say whether it regards the proposed expansion of a reprocessing plant at Cap de la
Hague on the Normandy coast as necessary or desirable in view of recent problems with other
reprocessing plants within the EU, and will it also provide an assurance that there will be no threat from
either liquid waste or any other emissions from such a plant and its expansion to my constituents in the
South East of England?

Will the Commission review safety procedures in the light of recent developments?

Answer given by Mrs Wallstr(cid:246)m on behalf of the Commission

(3 October 2000)

In case an expansion of the reprocessing plant at Cap de la Hague is planned, a submission of general data
to the Commission has to be made in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty.

When such submissions are made, the Commission takes account of the effects of planned and unplanned
release of effluents on the exposure of the population of other Member States and of current developments
by obtaining the opinion of a group of experts at that time.

However, the Commission has not received any submission concerning a possible expansion at Cap de la
Hague.

(2001/C 136 E/052)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2549/00

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

(28 July 2000)

Subject: Determining the exclusive economic zone of the Canary Islands

The general description of the outermost regions (French Overseas Territories, Canary Islands (Spain) and
the Portuguese archipelagoes of the Azores and Madeira) by the Commission secretariat (on its website for
outermost regions) notes that the European Union has the largest maritime territory in the world, thanks
to its outermost regions, with a 25 million km2 economic zone that will be of crucial importance in the
21st century because of the extensive resources and potential it offers.