do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0328/01 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Cigarette smuggling.
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: dissemination of EU information, fraud, fraud against the EU, illicit trade, tobacco industry

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/91

(2001/C 261 E/094)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0328/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: Cigarette smuggling

There are persistent reports that legally established European cigarette production, storage and distribution
companies are also involved in cigarette smuggling in the EU. The Commission has already taken action
against two major American companies in this matter.

Given that cigarettes produced by the European cigarette industry are also marketed in the EU countries,
will the Commission say:

1. Does it have any information about the involvement of legally established European companies in
cigarette smuggling? Does it also intend to take action against such companies should there be
sufficient information to back the charges?

2. Which elements of this information are available and can be communicated to us?

Answer given by Mrs Schreyer on behalf of the Commission

(23 April 2001)

The European Anti-fraud Office (OLAF) is looking at all aspects involving cigarette smuggling into the
Community which affect the Communities financial interests. In this context, the Task Group Cigarettes is
working closely with the relevant authorities in the Member States and certain third countries to identify
the principals and organisations behind these activities.

Especially, when cigarettes are produced within the Community, exported to third countries, and
subsequently illegally reintroduced into the Community, there is a Community competence for carrying
investigations in the field of cigarettes produced in the Community and
out investigations, even if
subsequently diverted without payment of taxes and duties within the Community, fall more generally
within the responsibility of the Member States.

Investigations in this area are on-going. At this stage, it is therefore not appropriate to provide further
details.

(2001/C 261 E/095)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0329/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: State support for the transfer of Olympic Airways to Spata airport

According to Commission Decision 1999/332/EC (1), Article 57, second indent, Olympic Airways (OA)
will have to (cid:145)ensure that the compensation to be granted by Greece for the loss of investment at
Hellenikon airport will actually be available in time for the projected investments to be carried out at
Spata airport. Otherwise, the company could be exposed to larger cash requirements.(cid:146)

The Greek Government has also announced its intention of making use of the remaining aid authorised for
loan guarantees to cover loans in respect of the transfer to Spata Airport with an indicative budget of GRD
70,2 billion, together with a specific analysis every three months and work which must be carried out.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.2232 — Marinopoulos Abette/Sephora Holding/JV) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, database, dissemination of EU information, economic concentration, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46/7

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2232 (cid:151) Marinopoulos Abette/Sephora Holding/JV)

(2001/C 46/04)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 20 December 2000 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CEN(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 300M2232. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2252 (cid:151) Kuoni/TRX/E-TRX/TRX Central Europe JV)

(2001/C 46/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 17 January 2001 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in English and will be
made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CEN(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 301M2252. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0336/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Legislation to curb acid rain.
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law, acid rain, air quality, environmental protection, pollution control measures, prevention of pollution, transfrontier pollution

21.8.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 235 E/179

(2001/C 235 E/209)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0336/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: Legislation to curb acid rain

1. Will the Commission state which pieces of EU legislation aim to curb the incidence of acid rain?

2. Would, in the Commission(cid:146)s view, national legislation be able to have equivalent effect?

Can the Commission estimate the trans-boundary impact of acid rain? For example, where would the

3.
pollution affecting acid rain the United Kingdom be generated?

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

(2 April 2001)

1.
The proposal for a Parliament and Council Directive on national emission ceilings for certain
atmospheric pollutants (1) currently before Parliament (second reading) is designed in part to reduce by
half the area within Community with exceedance of critical loads for acidity by 2010 compared with the
1990 situation. Sectoral measures controlling emissions, for example from transport, and Large Combus-
tion Plants (2) will help to achieve this objective, as will Directive 96/61/EC on integrated pollution
prevention and control (3).

Acid rain is a large scale transboundary problem. It cannot be effectively controlled by national

2.
action alone.

3.
The following tables being sent direct to the Honourable Member and to the Parliament Secretariat
show the extent to which Member States, the candidate countries and emissions in the North Sea and the
Baltic contributed to the deposition of pollutants responsible for acidification (oxidised sulphur and
oxidised nitrogen) in each Member State in 1997 (4).

(1) OJ C 56 E, 29.2.2000, Common Position (OJ C 375, 28.12.2000).
(2) Directive 88/609/EEC (OJ L 336, 7.12.1988), Common Position OJ C 375, 28.12.2000, on proposal for revision.
(3) OJ L 257, 10.10.1996.
(4) Estimation by the Meterological Synthesizing Centre West (MSC-West) of the European Monitoring and Evaluation

Programme (EMEP).

(2001/C 235 E/210)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0337/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: Tariff levels

1. Will the Commission state the weighted average tariff level for non-agricultural
European Union, Japan and the United States for the last available year?

imports in the

2. Will it also estimate the equivalent for each year prior to major international trade liberalisation
agreements since the formation of the Communities?
Budget of the European Training Foundation for the financial year 2001
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Training Foundation
Subjects: EU programme, European Training Foundation, Internet, budget, dissemination of EU information, management

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46/9

EUROPEAN TRAINING FOUNDATION

Budget of the European Training Foundation for the financial year 2001

(2001/C 46/08)

The Foundation’s budget 2001 amounts to EUR 16,8 million of which EUR 10,7 million are reserved for
expenses for personnel linked to the Foundation, EUR 1,4 million for building, equipment and general
operating expenses and EUR 4,6 million for expenses relating to the implementation of
the work
programme. Furthermore,
the Foundation manages Phare and Tacis funds for a total amount of
EUR 260,5 million.

The detailed budget, the establishment plan and other relevant information are available on Internet at the
following address:

http://www.etf.eu.int
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0316/01 by Andrew Duff (ELDR) to the Commission. The single market.
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, electronic money, intra-EU payment, single market, standardisation

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/87

Reply

(31 May 2001)

Since the Working Party in question was set up in 1998 on the initiative of the then Directorate General
XXII of the European Commission (now DG (cid:145)Education and Culture(cid:146)) the Honourable Member is advised to
address his question to the Commission.

(2001/C 261 E/091)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0316/01

by Andrew Duff (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: The single market

Some of my constituents have been experiencing problems in using payment cards outside the UK,
apparently because different systems are in use across the Union.

Is the Commission satisfied with the norms that exist for electronic payment cards? Do different systems
exist within the Union? Is the Commission satisfied that those different systems are truly compatible?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(30 March 2001)

In each of the Member States there is a variety of payment cards in use. The payment industry has
answered to the needs of the market in very different ways. Some payment cards can be used only
domestically, others internationally.

With regard to those destined for international use (e.g. MasterCard, Eurocard, Visa, Amex, Diners (cid:133)) they
are generally accepted where their label is displayed. Whether or not to accept such cards is a decision for
the merchant and the merchant(cid:146)s bank. Although some of the international cards are widely accepted,
there is no obligation to do so.

The Commission is aware of the existence of different electronic payment card systems and initiatives have
been taken in order to improve the situation. The objective is to reach an adequate level of interoperability
between different electronic payment systems.

It should be noted that standardisation is a voluntary and market-led process. Thus, the use of common
standards and specifications strongly depends on the willingness of the different market players to co-
operate in this domain.

The Commission is promoting payment systems interoperability in different ways:

(cid:129) by supporting standardisation initiatives or similar developments (eEurope smart card charter),

(cid:129) by funding research projects e.g. cross-border electronic purse,

(cid:129) by urging the banking industry to develop a single payment area (Communication on retail payment

in the internal market (1)).

(1) COM(2000) 36 final.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, euro, exchange rate, national currency

13.2.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 46/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

12 February 2001

(2001/C 46/01)

1 euro

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

7,4616

Danish krone

8,949

Swedish krona

0,6398

Pound sterling

0,9288

United States dollar

1,4064

Canadian dollar

109,22

Japanese yen

1,5369

Swiss franc

8,202

Norwegian krone

79,38

Icelandic kr(cid:243)na (2)

1,7285

Australian dollar

2,1276

New Zealand dollar

7,2888

South African rand (2)

(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
(2) Source: Commission.
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.2220 — General Electric/Honeywell) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, economic concentration, exchange of information, industrial enterprise, merger control, technology

C 46/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

13.2.2001

Steel consumers/
dealers

Coal workers

Steel workers

DHEJNE, Nina
DIEDERICH, Pierre
MASI, Marcello
NUSSER, J(cid:252)rgen

GREATREX, Neil
MOHR, Jean-Marc
VAREA, Rafael
WODOPIA, Franz-Josef

DETAILLE, Marcel
GIBELLIERI, Enrico
HAAS, Karl
SCHMIDT, Rainer

Sweden
Belgium
Italy
Germany

United Kingdom
France
Spain
Germany

Luxembourg
Italy
Austria
Germany

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.2220 (cid:151) General Electric/Honeywell)

(2001/C 46/03)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.
On 5 February 2001 the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to
Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 (2),
by which the US undertaking General Electric Company (GE) entres into a full merger within the meaning
of Article 3(1)(b) of the Regulation with the US undertaking Honeywell International Inc. (Honeywell). As a
result of the transaction, Honeywell will become a wholly owned subsidiary of GE.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

(cid:151) GE: diversified industrial corporation active in numerous fields including aircraft engines, transpor-
tation systems, industrial systems, power systems, plastics, lighting, medical systems, appliances, media,
financial services, software and Internet services,

(cid:151) Honeywell: diversified technology and manufacturing company active in the fields of aerospace
solutions, industrial automation, asset management, performance materials, power and transportation
products.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified concentration could fall within

3.
the scope of Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit

4.
proposed operation.

their possible observations on the

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication.
Observations can be sent by fax (No (32-2) 296 43 01 or 296 72 44) or by post, under reference
COMP/M.2220 (cid:151) General Electric/Honeywell, to:

European Commission,
Directorate-General for Competition,
Directorate B (cid:151) Merger Task Force,
Rue Joseph II/Jozef II-straat 70,
B-1000 Brussels.

(1) OJ L 395, 30.12.1989, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 257, 21.9.1990, p. 13.
(2) OJ L 180, 9.7.1997, p. 1; corrigendum: OJ L 40, 13.2.1998, p. 17.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0335/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Wheat prices.
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: common agricultural policy, common organisation of markets, fixing of prices, prices, single market, wheat

C 235 E/178

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

(2001/C 235 E/208)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0335/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: Wheat prices

Will the Commission state the EU(cid:146)s internal price for common wheat at the end of each decade since
1959, and state that price as a proportion of the world market price in each case?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(23 March 2001)

The common organisation of the market in cereals was established on 1 July 1967. Prior to that, since
1962, Regulation No 19 (1) had provided for transitional arrangements.

Under the market organisation,
common wheat:

internal prices were aligned on intervention prices, set as follows for

(cid:129) Marketing year 1967/1968: 98,75 UA (units of account)/tonne,

(cid:129) Marketing year 1969/1970: 98,75 UA/tonne,

(cid:129) Marketing year 1979/1980: ECU 165,26/tonne,

(cid:129) Marketing year 1989/1990: ECU 163,62/tonne,

(cid:129) Marketing year 1999/2000: € 119,19/tonne.

There are sometimes huge short-term fluctuations in the relationship between these institutional (cid:129) by
definition stable (cid:129) prices and the world market price in the course of a marketing year.

In 1969/1970, the cif
insurance,
between 53 and 49 UA, i.e. approximately 50 % of the intervention price.

(cost,

freight) prices/Rotterdam recorded by the Commission were

After an exceptional rise in 1973-1974, the cif price/Rotterdam for wheat remained around ECU 143/
tonne during the marketing year 1979/80, i.e. 86 % of the intervention price.

In the wake of the special measures introduced by the United States at the end of the 1980s to help wheat
exports, world prices had fallen from around ECU 130 during the summer of 1989 to under ECU 70 in
the second half of 1990 and to less than 50 in January/February 1991, i.e. approximately 30 % of the
Community intervention price.

The 1992 reform of
the
Community market price close to the world level. During the marketing year 1999/2000, the cif price
remained between € 102 and € 103, i.e. approximately 90 % of the price agreed.

the common agricultural policy, which cut

intervention prices, brought

(1) OJ 30, 20.4.1962.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0331/01 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Competitiveness of Spata airport.
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, air freight rate, airport, charges for use of infrastructure, competence of the Member States, competitiveness, consumer protection

18.9.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 261 E/93

As regards the other areas, such as that of the aviation operations highlighted by the Honourable Member,
where there are still no common measures, the lady Vice-President of the Commission responsible for
transport matters has drawn the attention of the Greek Government(cid:146)s Ministry of Transport to the
shortcomings pinpointed by both the Joint Aviation Authorities and the Civil Aviation Organisation and
the American Aviation Administration. In his reply the Minister stressed that the shortcomings were minor
in extent and could in no case affect air traffic safety. Moreover, he insisted that, since they had been
confirmed, appropriate action had been taken to remedy these quickly. The Commission has taken note of
this.

However, at this stage, nothing in the comments of which the Commission is aware enables one to think
that the placing in service and the operation of Spata airport could be affected.

(2001/C 261 E/097)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0331/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 February 2001)

Subject: Competitiveness of Spata airport

According to Greek press reports, the Spata Airport company has substantially increased rates for the use
of the premises and for its services and has also set far higher airport taxes than those in rival airports. If
the latter are added to the passenger taxes they will probably mean that the new airport is unable to
compete in attracting air traffic.

Does the Commission agree that the airport may find it difficult to be competitive and viable owing

1.
to its pricing policy?

2.

Are these increases in airport taxes and the new passenger charges justified?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 April 2001)

Decisions on the level and the structure of airport charges fall under the prime responsibility of the local
and national authorities concerned. Pending adoption of the Commission(cid:146)s proposal (1) for a Directive on
airport charges, the general principles of Community law may apply to measures in this field necessitating,
in particular, that charges are set in a non-discriminatory manner. No complaint has been forwarded in
this respect so far. On the basis of the available information the Commission is not in the position to
assess the implication of the proposed level of airport charges for the competitiveness of this airport.

In the absence of detailed information, the Commission is not in the position to evaluate whether taxes
and charges to be imposed at Spata airport are justified from the point of view of the air traveller.

(1) OJ C 257, 22.8.1997.
Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.2247 — CU Italia/Banca Popolare di Lodi/JV) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-02-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Publications Office of the European Union, database, dissemination of EU information, economic concentration, merger control, restrictive-practice authorisation

C 46/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

13.2.2001

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.2247 (cid:151) CU Italia/Banca Popolare di Lodi/JV)

(2001/C 46/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 24 January 2001 the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to
declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council
Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89. The full text of the decision is only available in Italian and will be made
public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

(cid:151) as a paper version through the sales offices of the Office for Official Publications of the European

Communities (see list on the last page),

(cid:151) in electronic form in the (cid:145)CIT(cid:146) version of the CELEX database, under document No 301M2247. CELEX

is the computerised documentation system of European Community law.

For more information concerning subscriptions please contact:

EUR-OP,
Information, Marketing and Public Relations (OP/A/4-B),
2, rue Mercier,
L-2985 Luxembourg.
Tel. (352) 29 29 424 55, fax (352) 29 29 427 63.

Summary of notifications received in 2000 by the Commission pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation
(EC) No 258/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(2001/C 46/07)

Between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2000 the Commission had received two notifications of
placing on the market novel foods or novel food ingredients pursuant to Article 5 of Regulation (EC)
No 258/97.

Applicant

Description of
food or food ingredient

Scientific evidence

Notification

Transmission to
Member States

1
1

1
2

F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd
Vitamins & Fine Chemicals
Regulatory Affairs
Bldg 241/283
CH-4070 Basel

Mr. Jean-Pierre ClaviØ
(cid:145)Vidalou(cid:146)
F-47300 Pujols

Riboflavin from Bacillus
subtilis as nutrient

(cid:145)Huile d’amondon(cid:146)

20 March 2000

26 April 2000

24 July 2000

4 August 2000

ACNFP (1) Report on Ribo-
from fermentation
flavin
using
genetically modified
(GM) Bacillus subtilis

AFSSA (2) Avis
relatif (cid:224) la
mise sur
le marchØ d’une
(cid:145)huile vierge d’amandons de
pruneaux(cid:146)
Opinion on placing on the
market of (cid:145)prune kernel oil(cid:146)

(1) ACNFP: Advisory Committee for Novel Foods and Processes (United Kingdom).
(2) AFSSA: Agence fran(cid:231)aise de sØcuritØ sanitaire des aliments (France).