do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0119/01 by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Possible health risks of flavour enhancers E621 and E632 (glutamate).
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer protection, food additive, food safety, foodstuffs legislation, health risk

3.7.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 187 E/191

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(19 February 2001)

In the Commission(cid:146)s answer to the Honourable Member(cid:146)s Written Question P-4157/00 (1),
it already
informed him of the initiative it had taken regarding Italian Law No 108/96 on usury. As part of that
initiative, it wrote to the Italian Government on 16 January, requesting it to provide all the information
relevant to the appraisal of Decree-Law No 304 of 29 December 2000 in terms of Community law.

(1) OJ C 174 E, 19.6.2001, p. 241.

(2001/C 187 E/204)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0119/01

by Ria Oomen-Ruijten (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Possible health risks of flavour enhancers E621 and E632 (glutamate)

There are regular reports in the media on serious health complaints (headache, rashes, dizziness and
insomnia) which may be connected with the consumption of food containing flavour enhancers. The
reports refer to E621, E631 and E632 (monosodium glutamate or vetsin).

Is the Commission aware of these reports?

Have the side-effects of these substances, as mentioned above, been taken into account in any decisions
concerning these substances? What were the conclusions concerning the side-effects?

Does the Commission intend to investigate the possible harmful effects of the substances in question or
take any action? If so, when? If not, why not?

Anwer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(16 March 2001)

Monosodium glutamate (E 621) is authorised according to the Community legislation for use in foodstuffs
in general with a maximum level of 10 gram per kilogram (g/kg); disodium and dipotassium inosinate
(E 631 and E 632) are authorised for use in seasonings and condiments according to good manufacturing
practice. These substances have undergone, as with all food additives, a safety evaluation by the Scientific
Committee on Food prior to their authorisation.

In particular, monosodium glutamate and the so-called (cid:145)Chinese restaurant syndrome(cid:146) were evaluated
within the report on adverse reactions to food and food ingredients by the Scientific Committee on Food
in 1995.

In this report, it is stated that tests on individuals who identify themselves as suffering from the (cid:145)syndrome(cid:146)
have often failed to confirm the role of monosodium glutamate as the provocative agent. Moreover, these
substances are widely distributed in all animal and plant tissues.

Therefore, the Commission sees no need to revise the legislation in force on glutamates and inosinates in
the current situation, but will, as a matter of course, keep the situation under review in the light of
scientific progress in this, as in any other area.
1.European Parliament legislative resolution on the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee for a European Parliament and Council directive amending Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings (C5-0644/2000 — 1998/0266(COD))
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: Delegation to the Conciliation Committee, European Parliament
Subjects: common transport policy, freedom to provide services, rail transport, trade licence, transport company, transport safety

21.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 267/47

5. Licensing of railway undertakings/Allocation capacity and levying for the use

of railway infrastructure ***III

Thursday 1 February 2001

A5-0014/2001

1.
European Parliament legislative resolution on the joint text approved by the Conciliation Commit-
tee for a European Parliament and Council directive amending Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing
of railway undertakings (C5-0644/2000 - 1998/0266(COD))

(Codecision procedure: third reading)

The European Parliament,

(cid:19) having regard to the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee (C5-0644/2000),

(cid:19) having regard to its position at first reading (1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the

Council (COM(1998) 480) (2),

(cid:19) having regard to the amended Commission proposal (COM(1999) 616) (3),

(cid:19) having regard to its position at second reading on the Council common position (4),

(cid:19) having regard to the Commission’s opinion on Parliament’s amendments to the common position

(COM(2000) 571 (cid:19) C5-0479/2000),

(cid:19) having regard to Article 251(5) of the EC Treaty,

(cid:19) having regard to Rule 83 of its Rules of Procedure,

(cid:19) having regard to the report of its delegation to the Conciliation Committee (A5-0014/2001),

1.

Approves the joint text;

Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council pursuant to Article 254(1) of

2.
the EC Treaty;

Instructs its Secretary-General duly to sign the act and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of

3.
the Council, to have it published in the Official Journal of the European Communities;

4.

Instructs its President to forward this legislative resolution to the Council and Commission.

(1) OJ C 175, 21.6.1999, p. 119.
(2) OJ C 321, 20.10.1998, p. 8.
(3) OJ C 116E, 26.4.2000, p. 38.
(4)

‘Texts adopted’, 5.7.2000, Item 7.

2.
European Parliament legislative resolution on the joint text approved by the Conciliation Commit-
tee for a European Parliament and Council directive on the allocation of railway infrastructure
capacity, the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification
(C5-0645/2000 - 1998/0267(COD))

(Codecision procedure: third reading)

The European Parliament,

(cid:19) having regard to the joint text approved by the Conciliation Committee (C5-0645/2000),

(cid:19) having regard to its position at first reading (1) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the

Council (COM(1998) 480) (2),

(1) OJ C 175, 21.6.1999, p. 120.
(2) OJ C 321, 20.10.1998, p. 10.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0178/01 by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. Sustainable fisheries.
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: FIFG, aid for restructuring, common fisheries policy, conservation of fish stocks, fishing industry

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/145

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-177/01 and E-0208/01
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2001)

According to OECD estimations, only 10 % of EU public subsidies to the fisheries sector were applied in
1997 to fleet renewal and modernisation. For the 1994-1999 FIFG (Financial Instrument for Fisheries
Guidance) period, public money (Community and Member States) spent on renewal and modernisation of
the fleet was € 593 million, or about 22 % of the total public aid given to the sector during this period. In
contrast, € 894 million (33,5 % of total public aid) were allocated to financing fishing vessel decom-
missioning schemes with the aim of reducing over-capacity. One of the main objectives of the Common
Fisheries Policy (CFP) is to adjust fisheries resources to fleet capacity, as well as to provide a sustainable and
profitable fisheries industry. Community rules are in place to prevent the allocation of aid for new vessels
or modernisation if a Member State has not achieved the target for capacity reduction set in the Multi-
Annual Guidance Programmes for fleet restructuring.

(2001/C 235 E/165)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0178/01

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Sustainable fisheries

Is the Commission planning to develop and propose an EU-wide programme of financial incentives to
encourage more sustainable fishing practices?

(2001/C 235 E/166)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0207/01

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 2001)

Subject: Incentives for sustainable fishing

Is the Commission planning to develop and propose an EU-wide programme of financial incentives to
encourage more sustainable fishing practices?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-178/01 and E-0207/01
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(12 March 2001)

Financial aid to the fisheries sector is provided under the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance
(FIFG).

The FIFG provides financial assistance to restructure the fisheries sector and hence to ensure its
sustainability. Measures to do this include support for fleet capacity reduction programmes and accom-
panying measures to minimise the social
impact of the restructuring. Temporary cessation of fishing
activities are also eligible for assistance when these are necessary for the recovery of the stocks. In addition,
financial compensation may be granted to fishermen and vessel owners in order to cover technical
adjustments when the Council imposes restrictions on the use of certain gear or fishing methods.

These measures will remain in place at least until 2006.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0173/01 by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission. CFP review and the accession countries.
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Central and Eastern European countries, access to EU information, common fisheries policy, enlargement of the Union, political participation

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/141

(cid:129) the Communication on nature conservation and fisheries management in the marine environment (2),
to be followed by the Communication on the elements of a strategy for the integration of
environmental protection requirements into the Common Fisheries Policy (expected by March 2001).

Secondly, as far as the Habitats Directive (3) is concerned, the Commission is using all its means, including
those of a financial nature, to ensure its complete implementation in the marine environment.

Furthermore, the Commission(cid:146)s proposal for a 6th Environment Action Programme (4), in Article 5, point 5,
proposes, (cid:145)promoting greater integration of environmental considerations in the Common Fisheries Policy,
taking the opportunity of its review in 2002(cid:146) and in point 7, (cid:145)A thematic strategy for the protection of the
marine environment(cid:146). The implementation of relevant
international and Community environmental
commitments will be important topics to be addressed in this context.

Finally, although ratification by the Community of the United Nations (UN) Agreement on straddling and
highly migratory fish stocks is still pending, the Commission in proposing Community legislation is
already taking account of the principles originating from the UN Agreement. Moreover, the Commission is
fisheries organisations
also proposing implementation of management measures adopted by regional
operating within the framework of this Agreement.

The Commission intends to continue this process in a more efficient manner on the basis of a reinforced
Common Fisheries Policy. It is the intention of the Commission that the forthcoming reform of the CFP
will fully take into account the need to deal more effectively with fisheries and environment conservation
issues.

(1) COM(98) 42.
(2) COM(1999) 363.
(3) Directive 92/43/EEC (OJ L 206, 22.7.1992).
(4) COM(2001) 31 final.

(2001/C 235 E/155)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0173/01

by Patricia McKenna (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(1 February 2001)

Subject: CFP review and the accession countries

How is the Commission planning to involve the accession states in its consultation process for the CFP
review?

(2001/C 235 E/156)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0213/01

by Catherine Stihler (PSE) to the Commission

(2 February 2001)

Subject: CFP review and accession states

How is the Commission planing to involve the assession states in its consultation process for the CFP
review?
European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council directive amending for the 20th time Council Directive 76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (Short Chain Chlorinated Paraffins) (COM(2000) 260 — C5-0321/2000 — 2000/0104(COD))
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: approximation of laws, chemical product, dangerous substance, environmental protection, marketing restriction, paraffin

C 267/42

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.9.2001

Thursday 1 February 2001

TEXT PROPOSED
BY THE COMMISSION

AMENDMENTS
BY PARLIAMENT

(Amendment 4)
ANNEX
Annex I(2) (Directive 76/769/EEC)

2. Before 1 January 2003,
the provisions on SCCP will be
reviewed by the European Commission in cooperation with
the Member States in the light of any relevant new scientific
data on risks to health and the environment of SCCP.

2. Before 1 January 2003, all remaining uses of SCCP will
be reviewed by the European Commission in cooperation with
the Member States and the OSPAR Commission, in the light
of any relevant new scientific data on risks to health and the
environment of SCCP.

The European Parliament shall be informed of the out-
come of this review.

European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a European Parliament and Council
directive amending for the 20th time Council Directive 76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the
marketing and use of certain dangerous substances and preparations (Short Chain Chlorinated
Paraffins) (COM(2000) 260 + C5-0321/2000 + 2000/0104(COD))

(Codecision procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

) having regard to the Commission proposal

to the European Parliament and the Council

(COM(2000) 260) (1),

) having regard to Article 251(2) and Article 95 of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Commission

submitted the proposal to Parliament and the Council (C5-0321/2000),

) having regard to Rule 67 of its Rules of Procedure,

) having regard to the report of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy

(A5-0003/2001),

1.

Approves the Commission proposal as amended;

Asks to be consulted again should the Commission intend to amend its proposal substantially or

2.
replace it with another text;

3.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

(1) OJ C 337 E, 28.11.2000, p. 138.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0143/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council. Democratic criteria.
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, Treaty on European Union, competence of the Member States, legislative power

C 261 E/46

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.9.2001

The table comprises the officials and temporary staff in active employment, all budgets mixed (Adminis-
tration, Research and Technological Development, Office for Official Publications and OLAF).

(2001/C 261 E/046)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0140/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Legislative discussions

Does the Council see any problem in separating the items of a legislative and those of an executive nature
discussed within the Council?

(2001/C 261 E/047)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0141/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Open debates

What is the Council(cid:146)s objection to the opening up of its meetings to the public and the press whenever
items of a legislative nature are discussed and put to the vote?

(2001/C 261 E/048)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0142/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Secrecy of national legislatures

Is the Council aware of any EU Member State which has a chamber of its legislature that meets in secret
when discussing legislation?

(2001/C 261 E/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0143/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Democratic criteria

If a Member State decided that its national legislature should henceforth meet in secret, would the Council
believe that such a Member State continued to meet the criteria set out in Article 6 of the Treaty on
European Union?

(2001/C 261 E/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0144/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Council

(1 February 2001)

Subject: Council secrecy

Will the Council seek the advice of its Legal Service so as to ascertain whether the continued practice of
meeting in secret, even when discussing legislation, is consistent with:

(a)

the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, and

(b)

the constitutional traditions common to the Member States?
Commission Regulation (EC) No 223/2001 of 1 February 2001 fixing the maximum export refund on rye in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 1740/2000
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, export licence, export refund, rye, third country

2.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 31/13

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 223/2001

of 1 February 2001

fixing the maximum export refund on rye in connection with the invitation to tender issued in
Regulation (EC) No 1740/2000

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 of 30
June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in
cereals (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1666/
2000 (2),

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 of
29 June 1995 laying down certain detailed rules for the
application of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92 on the
granting of export refunds on cereals and the measures to be
taken in the event of disturbance on the market for cereals (3),
as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2513/98 (4), and in
particular Article 7 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

An invitation to tender for the refund for the export of
rye to all
to
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1740/2000 (5).

third countries was opened pursuant

Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95 provides that
the Commission may, on the basis of the tenders noti-
fied,
in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) No 1766/92, decide to fix

a maximum export refund taking account of the criteria
referred to in Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 1501/95.
In that case a contract is awarded to any tenderer whose
bid is equal to or lower than the maximum refund.

(3)

(4)

The application of the abovementioned criteria to the
current market situation for the cereal in question results
the
in the maximum export refund being fixed at
amount specified in Article 1.

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

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 26 January to 1 February 2001,
pursuant to the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC)
No 1740/2000, the maximum refund on exportation of rye
shall be EUR 40,95/t.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 2 February 2001.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 1 February 2001.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 181, 1.7.1992, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 193, 29.7.2000, p. 1.
(3) OJ L 147, 30.6.1995, p. 7.
(4) OJ L 313, 21.11.1998, p. 16.
(5) OJ L 199, 5.8.2000, p. 3.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, euro, exchange rate, national currency

1.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 33/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

31 January 2001

(2001/C 33/01)

1 euro

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

7,4611

Danish krone

8,8395

Swedish krona

0,6367

Pound sterling

0,9293

United States dollar

1,3954

Canadian dollar

107,87

Japanese yen

1,5302

Swiss franc

8,205

Norwegian krone

79,83

Icelandic kr(cid:243)na (2)

1,7034

Australian dollar

2,1113

New Zealand dollar

7,2044

South African rand (2)

(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
(2) Source: Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0127/01 by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Illegal arrest of Greek Cypriot by Turkish-Cypriot regime.
Date: 2001-02-01
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Cyprus, Türkiye, United Kingdom, diplomatic relations, government violence, political kidnapping, right to justice

C 187 E/192

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

3.7.2001

(2001/C 187 E/205)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0127/01

by Konstantinos Hatzidakis (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Illegal arrest of Greek Cypriot by Turkish-Cypriot regime

(1 February 2001)

Approximately one month ago, the Turkish occupation forces abducted and arrested the Cypriot citizen,
from the territory of the sovereign British bases in Cyprus with a view to
Panikkos Tsiakourmas,
exchanging him for the Turkish-Cypriot drug-trafficker arrested a few days previously on the territory of
the Republic of Cyprus, in whose possession a substantial quantity of drugs had been found.

Given that the Turkish occupation forces are using blackmailing tactics to equate a person charged under
public criminal law with an innocent citizen suspected of no wrongdoing, will the Commission act within
its powers to secure the release of this innocent Greek Cypriot who is being held illegally by the Turkish-
Cypriot regime?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question P-0045/01 by
Mr Zacharakis (1).

(1) See p. 168.

(2001/C 187 E/206)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0135/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(31 January 2001)

Subject: Labour mobility

Will the Commission indicate any evidence it possesses concerning the extent of labour mobility in the
European Union (both within Member States between regions, and between Member States) compared
with labour mobility in the United States and Japan?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(28 March 2001)

In 1999, it was estimated that just under 4 % of the population aged over 15 years in the Community were
non-nationals of the Member State they lived in. Net migration into the Community represents some 0,2 %
of the total population. The equivalent figure for the United States is 0,35 %. Net migration in Japan is
negligible (12 000 in a population of 126 million).

In 1997, around a quarter of migrants into Member States were returning nationals, a further 17 % were
from other Member States and 57 % were from third countries.

In the United States, between 1998 and 1999, about 1,4 million people (3 % of movers) moved from
abroad.