do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3880/00 by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) and Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Council. CO2.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: air transport, atmospheric pollutant, climate change, fuel tax, pollution control measures, road transport

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/33

(2001/C 235 E/036)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3880/00

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) and Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Council

(20 December 2000)

Subject: CO2

What are the relative contributions of CO2 emissions from air travel and from car travel to global
warming? Does the Council believe that a higher elasticity of demand for the price of air fuel vis-(cid:224)-vis
petrol means that an amendment to the 1944 Chicago Convention provisions covering air fuel taxation
would permit a more coherent as well as a more equitable environmental policy than the current policy of
simply increasing taxes on petrol?

Reply

(14 May 2001)

Regarding the issue of the contributions to global warming from, respectively, air traffic and road traffic,
the Council would draw the Honourable Members(cid:146) attention to the work undertaken by the Commission
within the framework of the European Climate Change Programme. According to this research, transport-
related CO2-emissions in 1990 were measured at 739 Mt, representing 24 % of energy-related CO2-
emissions. With unchanged trends, transport-related CO2-emissions are projected to reach 1000 Mt by
2010 (by then representing 30 % of the total expected energy-related CO2-emissions).

The respective shares of air traffic and road traffic in terms of CO2-emissions in 1995 were, according to
the Commission, approximately the following:

Road:

Air:

Others:

%

85

12

3

Total

100

A forecast for 2010 indicates the following figures:

Road:

Air:

Others:

%

82 %

15 %

3 %

Total

100 %

Mt of CO2

675

96

29

800

Mt of CO2

812

153

29

944

At its meeting on 29 June 2000 the Council, generally speaking, endorsed the Commission(cid:146)s conclusions
and indicated that:

(cid:129) the great majority of delegations thought that, in principle and in terms of the consistency of the
taxation scheme, fuel for commercial aviation should be taxed in the same way as any other fuel;

(cid:129) consideration should be given to the question of competition with third countries and any distortion
of competition with socio-economic consequences should be avoided; a unilateral measure by the
European Community introducing taxation would not be desirable;

(cid:129) in the circumstances the strategy to be followed should be to transfer this matter to the ICAO. The
Council also considered that other fiscal measures or other technological solutions could be envisaged
to reduce CO2 emissions.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3961/00 by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Construction of gas turbines.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Crete, application of EU law, environmental protection, power plant, siting of power stations

22.5.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 151 E/209

Several modifications proposed by Member States to the Commission(cid:146)s proposal have been discussed, but a
decision has not been taken yet. For this reason the Commission can at this stage not predict how far the
wording will be changed in the Council Common Position and if e.g. the possibility of simultaneous
pedalling on EPACs will be required or not.

(1) OJ C 337 E, 28.11.2000.
(2) OJ L 225, 10.8.1992.

(2001/C 151 E/246)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3888/00

by Glyn Ford (PSE) to the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Subject: Protection for shipwrecks

British Navy ships that were lost at sea during the war are nowadays often looted for souvenirs by
commercial operators and used as playgrounds by leisure divers.

What plans does the Commission have for protecting these shipwrecks from such activities?

Would the Commission consider giving them the same status as war graves?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(24 January 2001)

The matter to which reference is made does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Community.

(2001/C 151 E/247)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3961/00

by Mihail Papayannakis (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Construction of gas turbines

The Minister for Development recently announced that gas turbine units would be built in the area of
Hellinoperamata (Herakleion) for the Greek Electricity Board (DEI). This decision is contrary to decisions of
the relevant prefectural and local government bodies. It should be pointed out that the area concerned is
already polluted by fumes from a DEI plant built inside the coastal area without any operating licence
which, along with other companies in the vicinity, is causing heavy pollution in the area to the west of the
City of Herakleion. A study drawn up for the municipality concerning the environmental consequences of
the DEI plant for the region in 1998 and 1999 respectively found that nitrogen and sulphur oxide levels
had risen by 300-400 %.

Is the Commission aware of these very serious allegations, and what action does it intend to take to ensure
compliance with Community environmental legislation and to put an end to pollution in the Hellinoper-
amata region?

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

(1 February 2001)

The Commission is conducting a detailed investigation of the problem raised by the Honourable Member
and will inform him of the outcome as soon as possible.
Commission opinion of 20 December 2000 concerning the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the commissioning of the liquid metal disposal plant (LMDP) and the waste receipt, assay, characterisation and supercompaction facility (WRACS) located on the Dounreay nuclear site in Scotland (United Kingdom), in accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: United Kingdom, frontier region, nuclear safety, project evaluation, public health, radioactive effluent

C 20/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

23.1.2001

COMMISSION OPINION

of 20 December 2000

concerning the plan for the disposal of radioactive waste from the commissioning of the liquid
metal disposal plant (LMDP) and the waste receipt, assay, characterisation and supercompaction
in
facility (WRACS)

located on the Dounreay nuclear site in Scotland (United Kingdom),

accordance with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty

(2001/C 20/03)

(Only the English text is authentic)

On 8 June 2000 the European Commission received from the United Kingdom Government, in accordance
with Article 37 of the Euratom Treaty, general data relating to the plan for the disposal of radioactive
waste resulting from the commissioning of the liquid metal disposal plant (LMDP) and the waste receipt,
assay, characterisation and supercompaction facility (WRACS).

On the basis of these data and clarifications subsequently provided by the United Kingdom Government,
and following consultation with the group of experts, the Commission has drawn up the following
opinion:

(a) The distance between the plant and the nearest point of another Member State, in this case Denmark

(Faeroe Islands), is approximately 370 km;

(b) Under normal operating conditions, the discharges of liquid and gaseous effluents will not cause an
exposure of the population in other Member States that is significant from the point of view of health;

(c) Solid low and intermediate level radioactive waste arising from the operations of the LMDP and

WRACS will be stored on-site. Off-site movement of waste is not currently envisaged;

(d) In the event of unplanned discharges of radioactive waste, which may follow an accident on the scale
considered in the General Data, the doses likely to be received by the population in other Member
States would not be significant from the point of view of health.

In conclusion, the Commission is of the opinion that the implementation of the plan for the disposal of
radioactive waste, resulting from the commissioning of the liquid metal disposal plant (LMDP) and the
waste receipt, assay, characterisation and supercompaction facility (WRACS), both in normal operation and
in the event of an accident of the type and magnitude considered in the General Data, is not liable to result
in the radioactive contamination, significant from the point of view of health, of the water, soil or airspace
of another Member State.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3926/00 by Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines (PPE-DE) to the Council. European Social Fund and teacher training.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Social Fund, Spain, teacher training, vocational training

C 187 E/84

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

(2001/C 187 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3926/00

by Cristina GutiØrrez-Cortines (PPE-DE) to the Council

(20 December 2000)

Subject: European Social Fund and teacher training

Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1) laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds provides for
measures to be taken in different spheres under the European Social Fund, including the promotion and
improvement of vocational training and the encouragement of education as part of a policy of continuing
education.

The Council:

1. Will the Council give details of the total amount allocated to training?

2. What sums have been allocated to the training of trainers and teachers in Spain?

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.

Reply

(24 April 2001)

The Council would point out to the Honourable Member that it is not for it to decide how much
European Social Fund aid should be allocated for training or for instructor- and teacher-training in Spain.

Pursuant
to the Regulation laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds to which the
Honourable Member refers, decisions on Structural Fund contributions are adopted by the Commission,
by agreement with the Member State concerned.

The Council is not therefore in a position to reply to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s question.

(2001/C 187 E/092)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3927/00

by Bernard Poignant (PSE) to the Commission

(13 December 2000)

Subject: Application of ILO Convention 147 to ships using Community ports

The recent (cid:145)Ievolo Sun(cid:146) shipping disaster has once again focused public attention on the dangers of
maritime transport in Community waters. One year after the Erika shipwreck, an initial package of
measures on maritime safety proposed by the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council is
about to be adopted.

The amendment of Council Directive 95/21/EC concerning the enforcement, in respect of shipping using
Community ports and sailing in the waters under the jurisdiction of the Member States, of international
standards for ship safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living and working conditions (port State
control), the amendment of Directive 94/57/EC on common rules and standards for ship inspection and
survey organisations and for the relevant activities of maritime administrations, and the proposal for
a regulation on the accelerated phasing-in of double hull or equivalent design requirements for single hull
oil tankers are all technical measures in the field of maritime safety policy.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2796/2000 of 20 December 2000 amending Annex II to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agricultural product, designation of origin, floriculture, foodstuff, horticulture, location of production

L 324/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

21.12.2000

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2796/2000

of 20 December 2000

amending Annex II to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 on the protection of geographical
indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

(2)

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92 of 14
July 1992 on the protection of geographical indications and
designations of origin for agricultural products and food-
stuffs (1), as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No
1509/2000 (2), and in particular the third subparagraph of
Article 1(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

the main sources of

In order to meet the expectations of certain agricultural
producers, for whom ornamental plants and flowers are
income, such products
one of
should be included in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No
2081/92. Since they are agricultural products it
is
possible that such producers may lodge applications for
their registration under Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92

given the link that they may have with certain geograph-
ical regions.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
the Regulatory
accordance with the opinion of
Committee on Geographical
Indications and Designa-
tions of Origin,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

In Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 2081/92, the following
product is added:

‘— Ornamental plants and flowers.’

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publica-
tion in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

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

Done at Brussels, 20 December 2000.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 208, 24.7.1992, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 174, 13.7.2000, p. 7.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3983/00 by Christine De Veyrac (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Community subsidies for the Midi-Pyrénées Region: amounts and allocation.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EAGGF Guidance Section, EU aid, EU programme, European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, Midi-Pyrenées, commitment of expenditure, regional aid, small and medium-sized enterprises

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/17

(2001/C 318 E/017)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3983/00

by Christine De Veyrac (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Community subsidies for the Midi-PyrØnØes Region: amounts and allocation

What are the figures for Community subsidies, distinguishing where necessary between commitment
appropriations and payment appropriations, for Toulouse and the Midi-PyrØnØes Region in 1997, 1998,
1999 and 2000, and who were the beneficiaries, under the heading of:

(cid:129) the ERDF

(cid:129) the EAGGF-Guidance

(cid:129) the ESF

(cid:129) research programmes

(cid:129) environment programmes

(cid:129) SME programmes

(cid:129) education, training and youth programmes

(cid:129) decentralised cooperation?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(27 June 2001)

Further to its answer of 11/01/2001 (1), the Commission is sending the information requested direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(1) OJ C 151 E, 22.5.2001.

(2001/C 318 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-4038/00

by Bart Staes (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(21 December 2000)

Subject: Breach of European rules on competition

On Tuesday, 13 July 1999, inspectors from the Commission (cid:145)s DG IV went looking for evidence of(cid:146)misuse
of a dominant position(cid:146) in the Interbrew(cid:146)s Louvain offices. They found incriminating material and, after
two days, came to a series of conclusions.

Interbrew was apparently exchanging information with other brewers.
Investment in and promotion
campaigns involving clients were jointly coordinated, and it is claimed that the brewers also got together
and figured out how they could get a grip on other costs.

In November 1999, DG IV inspectors carried out a number of searches on the premises of the Martens,
Alken-Maes and Co.Bra.Ha breweries. That operation resulted directly from the inquiry into Interbrew
which had revealed evidence of a cartel having been established.

In October 2000, the four breweries were formally accused and were given just two months in which to
defend themselves against the Commission(cid:146)s charges.

The Belgian beer market is not the only one characterised by an oligopoly. On the other European
markets, too, there are just a few main players. In Denmark, Carlsberg controls 70 % of the market, while
Brau Union controls 56 % of the market in Austria. The Netherlands is dominated by Heineken (60 %),
while Heineken and Kronenbourg control 80 % of the French beer market.

The Belgian and Luxembourg markets are the first in respect of which the Commission has initiated
a formal procedure alleging breach of the rules on competition.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3983/00 by Christine De Veyrac (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Community subsidies for the Midi-Pyrénées Region: amounts and allocation.
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU financing, Midi-Pyrenées

C 151 E/210

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

22.5.2001

(2001/C 151 E/248)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3983/00

by Christine De Veyrac (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: Community subsidies for the Midi-PyrØnØes Region: amounts and allocation

What are the figures for Community subsidies, distinguishing where necessary between commitment
appropriations and payment appropriations, for Toulouse and the Midi-PyrØnØes Region in 1997, 1998,
1999 and 2000, and who were the beneficiaries, under the heading of:

(cid:129) the ERDF

(cid:129) the EAGGF-Guidance

(cid:129) the ESF

(cid:129) research programmes

(cid:129) environment programmes

(cid:129) SME programmes

(cid:129) education, training and youth programmes

(cid:129) decentralised cooperation?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2001)

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

(2001/C 151 E/249)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-4106/00

by Pietro-Paolo Mennea (ELDR) to the Commission

(20 December 2000)

Subject: State of affairs of farming in Apulia

In demonstrations lasting several days during the first half of November, in the city of Barletta and in
villages in the Ofanto valley, farmers from Barletta mounted a strong protest against the steep increase in
fuel prices, the extremely high fines imposed for planting vines which are held to be illegal, and the 35 %
cut in aid for olive oil.

The city and residents of Barletta suffered serious damage when the town hall was occupied, the main
internal roads in the city itself were blocked and a tilting train was forcibly held at the city railway station;
as a result of these protests three city guards who had intervened to curb the demonstration were
wounded.

Therefore, will the Commission say whether farmers within Objective 1 regions may benefit from:

(cid:129) the abolition of fines imposed for vines which are held to be illegal or, alternatively, the imposition of

a token fine, as is already the case in Spain;

(cid:129) non-implementation of the revised 35 % cut in aid to olive oil, or, if the revised cut is confirmed, a

reduction below 35 %;

(cid:129) a reduction in the cost of fuel used for agricultural purposes.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 2791/2000 of 20 December 2000 fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 21st partial invitation to tender issued within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 1531/2000
Date: 2000-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export refund, white sugar

21.12.2000

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 324/13

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 2791/2000

of 20 December 2000

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar for the 21st partial invitation to tender issued
within the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No
1531/2000

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2038/1999 of 13
September 1999 on the common organisation of the markets
in the sugar sector (1), as amended by Commission Regulation
(EC) No 1527/2000 (2), and in particular the second subpara-
graph of Article 18(5) thereof,

and world markets in sugar, for the partial invitation to
tender in question.

(3)

(4)

Following an examination of the tenders submitted in
response to the 21st partial
invitation to tender, the
provisions set out in Article 1 should be adopted.

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Sugar,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1531/2000 of 13 July
2000 on a standing invitation to tender to determine
levies and/or refunds on exports of white sugar (3),
requires partial invitations to tender to be issued for the
export of this sugar.

Pursuant to Article 9(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1531/
2000 a maximum export refund shall be fixed, as the
case may be, account being taken in particular of the
state and foreseeable development of the Community

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 21st partial invitation to tender for white sugar issued
pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1531/2000 the maximum
amount of the export refund is fixed at 43,596 EUR/100 kg.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 21 December 2000.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 20 December 2000.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 252, 25.9.1999, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 175, 14.7.2000, p. 59.
(3) OJ L 175, 14.7.2000, p. 69.