do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2711/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Employment in the business, public and other sectors.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, employment statistics

C 103 E/214

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

(2001/C 103 E/249)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2711/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

Subject: Employment in the business, public and other sectors

(1 September 2000)

What are the employment figures in each quarter for the last ten years for each Member State in

(cid:129) the business sector (private business and publicly-owned enterprises producing marketed goods and

services);

(cid:129) the public sector;

(cid:129) others (voluntary, etc)?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(27 October 2000)

Community statistics on employment are not broken down into the sectors referred to by the Honourable
Member. They only cover paid employment (and therefore not the voluntary sector) and they are
categorised according to NACE Rev. 1, which does not make a distinction between business and non-
business activities.

Data that do distinguish between (cid:145)business services(cid:146),
(cid:145)non-business services(cid:146) and (cid:145)the public sector(cid:146) are
available in the national accounts for the period from 1987 to 1997. These are sent directly to the
Honourable Member as well as to the Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat. Currently, these data are available on an
annual basis only.

(2001/C 103 E/250)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2712/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Companies in the EU

Will the Commission provide estimates of the number of new companies, failed companies and net new
companies in each Member State for each of the last five years?

Will it also provide the figures for the annual stock of companies and describe the main features of each
national definition if there is no common standard for the EU?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(6 October 2000)

Statistics of the number of new enterprises, failed enterprises and net new enterprises are not available at
the European level.

However, certain unharmonised data of a provisional nature are available and sent direct
to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat. There are important differences in some cases,
between definitions and means of collection.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2790/00 by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission. Comparative drug licensing systems in EU Member States.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European social policy, United Kingdom, competence of the Member States, market approval, medicinal product

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/223

(2001/C 89 E/254)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2790/00

by Phillip Whitehead (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Comparative drug licensing systems in EU Member States

In the UK, the Medicines Control Agency grants a licence for a new drug after determining that it is safe to
be used, but it does not give any consideration to the charge made by the manufacturer for that drug.
Do other Member States operate under a similar drug licensing system, or do they, in addition to licence
approval, set a price ceiling for the manufacturer? If so, might this provide the main explanation as to why
prices for newly licensed drugs vary considerably between the UK and other Member States?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(10 October 2000)

legislation is based upon the separation of

the considerations by public
European pharmaceutical
authorities of the safety, quality and efficacy of a given pharmaceutical product on the one hand and the
arrangements for negotiating pricing and reimbursement conditions within the health systems on the
other. This separation is therefore practised throughout the Community. The negotiation of marketing
conditions with the pharmaceutical companies (cid:129) including price negotiations in the Member States where
these are conducted (cid:129) is a matter for the Member States. These pricing and reimbursement negotiations
must take account of the principles underlying the single market and in particular must be in accordance
with the terms of Council Directive 89/105/EEC of 21 December 1988 relating to the transparency of
measures regulating the prices of medicinal products for human use and their inclusion in the scope of
national health insurance systems (1) which establishes procedural constraints, including requirements of
transparency and objectivity of criteria used, time constraints for responding to a company request for
price or reimbursement and a right for companies to appeal a given pricing or reimbursement decision.

(1) OJ L 40, 11.2.1989.

(2001/C 89 E/255)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2815/00

by Bill Miller (PSE) to the Commission

(5 September 2000)

Subject: University degree convalidation

Are degrees in psychology awarded by UK universities valid in Spain or would further studies have to be
completed before a graduate can operate in Spain?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(27 September 2000)

According to the information available to the Commission, the profession of psychologist is regulated both
in Spain and in the United Kingdom, a regulated profession being defined as a profession for the pursuit of
which the possession of a diploma or certain professional qualifications is an essential legal requirement.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2696/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Agricultural support and accession of Slovakia.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Bulgaria, EU aid, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Romania, Slovakia, accession to the European Union, aid to agriculture, common agricultural policy

8.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 136 E/79

(2001/C 136 E/087)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2696/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Agricultural support and accession of Slovakia

1. What is the Commission(cid:146)s estimate of the extra annual cost of support if existing EU farm support
policies were extended to Slovakia on its accession to the EU,

(a) assuming no change in its current agricultural production;

(b) projecting a change in its agricultural production based on changes in price incentives as support and

structural policies were brought into line with existing EU policies?

2. What is the estimated annual cost respectively for both Guarantee and Structural Funds in each case?

(2001/C 136 E/088)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2697/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Agricultural support and accession of Bulgaria

1. What is the Commission(cid:146)s estimate of the extra annual cost of support if existing EU farm support
policies were extended to Bulgaria on its accession to the EU,

(a) assuming no change in its current agricultural production;

(b) projecting a change in its agricultural production based on changes in price incentives as support and

structural policies were brought into line with existing EU policies?

2. What is the estimated annual cost respectively for both Guarantee and Structural Funds in each case?

(2001/C 136 E/089)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2698/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Agricultural support and accession of Romania

1. What is the Commission(cid:146)s estimate of the extra annual cost of support if existing EU farm support
policies were extended to Romania on its accession to the EU,

(a) assuming no change in its current agricultural production;

(b) projecting a change in its agricultural production based on changes in price incentives as support and

structural policies were brought into line with existing EU policies?

2. What is the estimated annual cost respectively for both Guarantee and Structural Funds in each case?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2704/00 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Cost of air travel in the EU.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Union, United States, air freight rate, comparative analysis, competition, ticket

C 113 E/154

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2001

(2001/C 113 E/160)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2704/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Cost of air travel in the EU

Will the Commission please state the average price of an airline ticket for journeys of a comparable length
in the EU and in the US, taking typical short-, medium- and long-haul routes?

Has there been any improvement in the relative EU position over the last ten years, and what is the
evidence for this?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(13 October 2000)

In terms of international comparisons, the real difference is not between fares on either side of the
Atlantic, but rather between routes where there is substantial competition and routes where one or two
carriers operate unchallenged. According to work carried out by the travel industry, it seems that in the
mid 1990(cid:146)s, Community travellers were on average paying between twenty and forty percent more than
their American counterparts per kilometre for comparable economy class travel. By 1997 this gap seemed
to have almost disappeared. The economy fares available today on the most competitive routes in the
Community are comparable with those on the most competitive routes in the United States, but on both
sides of the Atlantic there remain many routes where new competitors have yet to emerge and fares are
higher. Because of a longer history of liberalisation and a larger low-cost industry in the United States, the
Community probably still has a higher proportion of the latter.

(2001/C 113 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2710/00

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Euro changeover and the black economy

1. Will the Commission please state recent estimates of its own, or of academic researchers, or of the
International Monetary Fund, of the size of the black economy in each Member State?

2. What will be the implications of the exchange of euro notes and coin for national currencies for the
black economy in each Member State?

3. What economic effects may arise, including the potential distortion of monetary indicators?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(11 October 2000)

A point to be borne in mind is that many transactions do not show up in statistical surveys for a
1.
variety of reasons (exemptions, declaration thresholds, etc.) that are though lawful. The Commission works
in close collaboration with the national statistical institutes in an attempt to include in the calculation of
gross national product (GNP) all activities, whether or not declared to the authorities. This approach is
described in the report sent by the Commission to the Council and to Parliament (1). The Commission does
not carry out estimates of the black economy in each Member State. The Honourable Member is here
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2741/00 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Cost of the changeover to the euro.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Denmark, EU Member State, Greece, Sweden, United Kingdom, public expenditure

20.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 89 E/219

State aid per person employed in the manufacturing sector

(In euro and 1997 prices)

1994

(cid:129)
1 432
1 102
2 419
605
447
(cid:129)
1 007
734
2 230
1 345
628
446
(cid:129)
274

1 357

Austria
Belgium
Denmark
Germany
Greece
Spain
Finland
France
Ireland
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal
Sweden
United Kingdom

EU 15

(1) COM(2000) 205 final.

1995

632
1 324
1 246
1 850
1 187
1 077
1 015
771
806
2 760
1 441
704
172
415
318

1 338

1996

676
1 373
1 406
1 553
983
781
840
908
1 188
2 269
1 414
775
170
426
358

1 182

1997

761
879
1 501
1 448
1 188
675
1 046
1 457
1 122
1 930
1 500
709
213
401
341

1 151

1998

720
1 028
1 392
1 302
820
617
990
1 029
2 065
1 666
1 515
721
180
495
304

1 007

(2001/C 89 E/249)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2741/00

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Cost of the changeover to the euro

Has the Commission made any estimation of

1.
joining the single currency to the
11 countries which are currently part of the eurozone and the expected costs to Greece when it joins in
2001? Could the Commission provide a breakdown of these figures?

the cost of

Has the Commission make any estimation of the cost of joining the euro to Denmark, Sweden and

2.
the United Kingdom, if these countries expressed a wish to join?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(29 September 2000)

In the Commission(cid:146)s view, it is impossible to assess the (cid:145)cost(cid:146) of the changeover to the euro and existing
estimates should be taken with a pinch of salt. Most of these estimates fail to take account of the positive
effects of the creation of the euro.

(2001/C 89 E/250)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2743/00

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Sewage plant in Sarroch, Sardinia

In 1993 the region of Sardinia delegated responsibility to the municipality of Sarroch for building a
sewage treatment plant at Perd(cid:146)e Sali Porto Columbu with funding from the Envireg Community
programme (1). After the project had been assigned to a firm (2), the work was suspended on 26 February
1996 for an expert(cid:146)s report to be drawn up on relocating the sewage plant, because the engineer
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2768/00 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE), Martin Callanan (PPE-DE), Robert Goodwill (PPE-DE), Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) and Timothy Kirkhope (PPE-DE) to the Council. Immigration control within the Union.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, European convention, illegal migration, law of obligations, migration control, powers of the institutions (EU)

18.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 113 E/171

Considering the large variety of sea areas and nautical conditions in Community waters, and bearing in
mind the principle of subsidiarity, the Commission has no intention at present to propose additional
measures.

As regards the measures taken by the authorities of Hong Kong, these have to be seen in light of the
conditions prevailing in those waters.

(1) OJ L 144, 15.5.1998.

(2001/C 113 E/181)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2768/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE), Martin Callanan (PPE-DE),
Robert Goodwill (PPE-DE), Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE)
and Timothy Kirkhope (PPE-DE) to the Council

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Immigration control within the Union

Is the Council in a position to verify whether or not the 58 Chinese citizens found dead on arrival at
Dover had indeed been discovered and interviewed by Belgian police several weeks before and then
released, whether it is satisfied that Member States are abiding by their obligations under the Dublin
Convention, and whether Belgium, in particular, is meeting its obligations on immigration control?

Reply

(16 November 2000)

It is not within the competence of the Council to verify the type of situation mentioned by the

1.
Honorable Member.

2.
Control of the Member States(cid:146) obligations under the Dublin Convention is the responsibility of the
Committee set up by Article 18 of that Convention. In accordance with paragraph 2 of that article, that
Committee can examine, at the request of one or more Member States, any question of a general nature
concerning the application of the Convention.

3. With the entry into force of the Amsterdam Treaty, immigration, visa and asylum issues fall within
Community competence under Title IV TEC. It therefore belongs to the Commission, as guardian of the
Treaties, to verify whether Member States comply with their obligations in respect of such issues.

(2001/C 113 E/182)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2770/00

by Roberta Angelilli (UEN) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Electromagnetic waves

About one year ago the Rome city authorities adopted a decision allowing tenants of buildings owned by
companies to oppose the installation of relay masts and setting new limits governing the siting of such
masts, particularly in the vicinity of schools and hospitals

However, in the district of Torrino, Rome, residents of buildings owned by various companies (Inpdai,
Enasarco NPDAP and others) have not had the opportunity to oppose the installation of masts, because the
companies themselves have signed agreements with the various telephone companies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2591/00 by Isidoro Sánchez García (ELDR) to the Council. Official mandate granted by the Council to the Commission to resolve the trade dispute over bananas and taking account of remoteness.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Council of the European Union, European Commission, delegation of power, trade dispute, tropical fruit

C 103 E/192

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.4.2001

This report was followed by a Commission work programme for the introduction of measures designed to
implement Article 299(2).

However, to date the Council has received no formal proposals from the Commission and, as a result, is
unable to give the Honourable Member a more precise answer to his question about the Council(cid:146)s
expectations as regards the adoption of special measures to implement Article 299(2).

(2001/C 103 E/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2591/00

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

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Official mandate granted by the Council to the Commission to resolve the trade dispute over

bananas and taking account of (cid:145)remoteness(cid:146)

A number of options are being discussed as part of the debate which has been launched in the agriculture
and trade sector on reforming the COM for bananas so as to comply with the decisions of the WTO
dispute settlement panel from the point of view of trade, in which quotas and tariffs are combined.

What official mandate has the Council given to the Commission to enable it to negotiate and, if possible,
resolve the trade dispute with certain banana-exporting third countries stemming from the system for
importing bananas to the Community market? Has it taken account of the remoteness of banana-
producing regions in the Community, which are referred to in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty?

Reply

(9 November 2000)

The Council has not given any (cid:145)official mandate(cid:146) for the Commission to negotiate in the banana dispute.

However, it should be remembered that the Council since spring 1999 has on a number of occasions
encouraged the Commission to hold talks with all parties concerned with a view to finding a solution to
the dispute.

At its meeting on 10 July 2000 the Council noted a report by the Commission on the talks it had held to
resolve the banana dispute and asked it to examine the possibility of managing the market using a (cid:145)first
come, first served(cid:146) quota system. It asked the Commission to report back after investigating the possible
solutions, including the tariff solution and its implications. The Council will take a decision when it has
seen that report.

At the same time the Council reiterated its concern that the banana dispute should be settled as soon as
possible having regard in particular for the interests of Community producers.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2761/00 by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission. EU dairy farming subsidies.
Date: 2000-09-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, EU aid, dairy farm, dairy production, distributive trades

3.4.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 103 E/219

(2001/C 103 E/256)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2761/00

by Mark Watts (PSE) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: EU dairy farming subsidies

Could the Commission provide me with a full breakdown of EU subsidies for:

(a) dairy farming milk production,

(b) dairy farming milk distribution, and

(c) dairy farming

per Member State per year, for the last five years?

Could the Commission also identify any other sources of European Union funding to support milk?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 September 2000)

Within the common market organisation for milk and milk products, milk production has so far only been
supported indirectly through intervention buying for butter and skimmed milk powder and through export
refunds and internal subsidies for certain dairy products. In the context of Agenda 2000 it has been
decided that direct support to dairy farming will be introduced from 2005.

Tables indicating the annual Community expenditure on support for milk and milk products, per Member
State and per budget heading for the period 1995-1999, are sent direct to the Honourable Member and
Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

In the context of the policy of support for investments in the agricultural sector,
including for the
marketing and processing of agricultural products, the Community has supported investments aimed at
modernising installations, the improvement of quality and the achievement of environmental objectives.
These investments have been supported in accordance with certain conditions, in particular the avoidance
of increased production capacity given the surplus situation in the sector.

Concerning the amounts of aid granted during 1995-1999 relevant for the milk sector, the data are not
currently available because they form part of the structural fund programmes, which are not yet closed.

(2001/C 103 E/257)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2782/00

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(1 September 2000)

Subject: Distribution of tickets for the World Cup in 2006

Will the Commission be in touch with the German organisers of the 2006 football World Cup to ensure
that arrangements for the distribution of tickets comply with the EU Treaties and other EU competition
law?