do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0850/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Prior notification of fiscal policy actions.
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU Member State, Eurogroup (NATO), European Commission, adoption of a law by vote, exchange of information, national law, tax law

11.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 350 E/51

However, there is no historical data available on the evolution of the number of slaughterhouses over the
past 15 years, as requested by the Honourable Member. The purpose of the lists is to ensure that the
relevant products in Community trade are produced in approved plants and that this can be verified by the
relevant authorities. It had not been the intention to provide statistical information on the number of
plants.

The Commission will review future possibilities for making better use of these lists for statistical purposes,
in line with its resources and other competing priorities.

(2001/C 350 E/053)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0850/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: Prior notification of fiscal policy actions

Will the Commission indicate whether it believes that the Finance Ministers of the Member States should
notify the Commission of proposed fiscal policy actions before they take them and, if so, why?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(20 June 2001)

In its Communication on strengthening economic policy co-ordination within the euro area (1), the
Commission proposed that the principle of informing beforehand other members of the euro area and the
Commission, before adopting an economic policy measure, should form part of a set of rules of conduct
outlined in the Communication.

This pre-informing should take place at the Eurogroup or at the Eurogroup working party of the Economic
and Financial Committee, and should provide the authorities of the Member State concerned with the
reactions or the messages even before the finalisation of the measure at hand.

Similarly, the main points of the stability programmes should be transmitted to the Commission before
their adoption by the Member States.

The Commission has indicated with its Communication that the principle that Member States inform
beforehand the Eurogroup and the Commission of proposed fiscal policy actions before they take them is
important as it allows to assess national policies in the light of the economic situation of the euro area as
a whole and consider the repercussions on other European Monetary Union (EMU) participants.

(1) COM(2001) 82 final.

(2001/C 350 E/054)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0852/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: Budgetary rigour

Will the Commission estimate the impact on GDP after one year and the impact on consumer price
inflation after two years of a 1 percentage point discretionary tightening in the general government budget
balance for Ireland and for Germany?
Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States and the European Community and its Member States - Resolution on human rights
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: ACP–EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly
Subjects: ACP-EU Joint Assembly, human rights, position of women, sexual mutilation













EUR-Lex - 22001P0920(14) - EN






Avis juridique important




|



22001P0920(14)

Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Partnership Agreement between the members of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States and the European Community and its Member States - Resolution on human rights  


Official Journal 265 , 20/09/2001 P. 0039 - 0039 





RESOLUTION(1)on human rightsThe ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly,- meeting in Libreville (Gabon) from 19 to 22 March 2001,- having regard to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the UN General Assembly in 1948,- having regard to the results of the UN Conference on Human Rights held in Vienna in 1993 and in particular the formal confirmation of the fact that women's rights must be recognised as an integral part of human rights,- having regard to the conclusions of the United Nations Conference on Women and Development held in Beijing in 1994,A. whereas the practice of female circumcision is a form of mutilation practised almost exclusively on women belonging to certain African ethnic groups,B. whereas this is a violation of the right to physical integrity,1. Calls on the authorities of the ACP countries in which the practice of female circumcision exists to take the necessary steps to end this practice, adopting all appropriate legislative, administrative and judicial measures and, in addition, launching cultural awareness and information campaigns;2. Instructs its Co-Presidents to forward this resolution to the ACP-EU Council and the Commission.(1) Adopted by the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly on 22 March 2001 in Libreville (Gabon).
Commission Regulation (EC) No 566/2001 of 22 March 2001 fixing the maximum export refund on common wheat in connection with the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2014/2000
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: ACP countries, award of contract, common wheat, export refund

23.3.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 84/17

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 566/2001

of 22 March 2001

fixing the maximum export refund on common wheat in connection with the invitation to tender
issued in Regulation (EC) No 2014/2000

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
to certain ACP States was opened
common wheat
pursuant
to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2014/
2000 (5).

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.

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,

(3)

(4)

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For tenders notified from 16 to 22 March 2001, pursuant to
the invitation to tender issued in Regulation (EC) No 2014/
2000, the maximum refund on exportation of common wheat
shall be EUR 11,95/t.

This Regulation shall enter into force on 23 March 2001.

Article 2

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

Done at Brussels, 22 March 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 241, 26.9.2000, p. 23.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0857/01 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Exports to the USA.
Date: 2001-03-22
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: NAFTA countries, United States, export, goods and services, gross domestic product

C 235 E/248

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

21.8.2001

At the Stockholm Council on 23 March 2001 the Community expressed support for this programme,
which was drawn up in consultation with the IMF

As far as the Commission is aware, the United States does not provide bilateral aid, only multilateral aid
through the IMF.

The Commission believes that actively pursuing the pre-accession strategy for Turkey can only underpin
the country(cid:146)s efforts to overcome the current crisis.

(2001/C 235 E/292)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0857/01

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 March 2001)

Subject: Exports to the USA

Will the Commission indicate the value of exports of goods and services (specifying each separately, but
not including income) from each EU member state to the United States of America and to NAFTA as
a whole for the latest five years for which figures are available and express this also as a percentage of each
country(cid:146)s GDP?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(21 May 2001)

In view of the length of its answer, the Commission is sending it direct to the Honourable Member and to
Parliament(cid:146)s Secretariat.

(2001/C 235 E/293)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0921/01

by Monica Frassoni (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(28 March 2001)

Subject: Tourism-oriented property development in Bosa and Villanova Monteleone, Teulada, Monte Russu

and Cala Giunco-Stagno Notteri, and a fish-farming plant in Bosa

In reply to my Questions Nos E-3009/00 (1), E-3339/00 (2), E-3340/00 (3) and P-3314/00 (4) concerning
tourism-oriented property development along the coast in Bosa and Villanova Monteleone, Teulada, Monte
Russu (Aglientu) and Cala Giunco-Stagno Notteri (Villasimius) and an intensive fish-farming plant in Bosa,
the Commission said that it would take the necessary steps to gather detailed information and ensure that
Community law is complied with.

Could the Commission clarify what steps it has taken to date with regard to the above-mentioned cases?

In particular, could it confirm:

(cid:129) with regard to the planned development in Monte Russu, that an assessment of implications has been
begun, in accordance with the provisions of Article 6(3) of Directive 92/43/EEC (5), and could it say
whether the findings of this assessment are already available?

(cid:129) with regard to the LIFE legislation, that the development has not yet received final construction
authorisation, and could it say whether this means that, once authorisation has been obtained, it will
be subject to an environmental impact assessment? Is any Community funding earmarked for the
development?