WRITTEN QUESTION E-0958/01 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Making a distinction on grounds of nationality when governments apply tariffs and fines.
Date: 2001-03-30
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, discrimination on the basis of nationality, equal treatment, fine

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318 E/161

The Commission(cid:146)s proposal
according to Article 251 (ex Article 189b) of the EC Treaty.

is currently subject to consideration by the Parliament and the Council

The possible risks to health and to the environment of the phthalates most commonly used are currently
evaluated in the framework of Council Regulation (EEC) No 793/93 of 23 March 1993, on the evaluation
and control of the risks of existing substances (3). As these are comprehensive evaluations of all available
data on the toxicity and the effects of chemicals, covering all exposure situations from all known uses, the
the potential endocrine disrupting and
Commission would expect
to have an in-depth analysis of
reproductive toxicity effects of phthalates. The outcome of
the risk assessments will provide the
Commission with the appropriate scientific basis to propose further measures, as appropriate. In addition,
the particular use of phthalates in PVC has been raised in the Commission(cid:146)s Green Paper on polyvinyl
chloride (PVC) (4). The Green Paper has been discussed in the Council and the Parliament has adopted
a Resolution on 3 April 2001. Following these discussions and extensive consultations with other
stakeholders, the Commission intends to propose a Community strategy on PVC that will aim to address
all outstanding issues including those which may concern the use of phthalates in these applications.

The risk assessments will be peer-reviewed by the Scientific Committee on Toxicity Ecotoxicity and the
Environment (CSTEE) and will be summarised in Commission Recommendations published in the Official
Journal. Where unacceptable risks are identified, the Commission will consider additional risk reduction
measures, as appropriate, in those areas where concerns have been indicated.

Concerning the use of alternatives to phthalates, studies conducted at the request of the Commission
identified a number of potential substitutes to phthalates and to soft PVC. To obtain a view on their safety
profiles as compared with phthalates, the Commission requested the opinion of the CSTEE. In two separate
opinions, the CSTEE concluded that there were significant gaps in the amount of scientific information
available on the potential substitutes, which need to be filled in order to support their safe use. The
Commission remains optimistic that such information will become available in the near future.

(1) OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.
(2) OJ L 262, 27.9.1976.
(3) OJ L 84, 5.4.1993.
(4) COM(2000) 469 final.

(2001/C 318 E/174)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0958/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 March 2001)

Subject: Making a distinction on grounds of nationality when governments apply tariffs and fines

Does the Commission feel it is reasonable for states to apply different tariffs and fines to persons

1.
who do not have the nationality of those states?

Are Member States within the European Union allowed, when setting the level of tariffs and fines, to

2.
make a distinction between persons having the nationality of the Member State in question and others?

3. What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of the fact that Belgium has a category of (cid:145)Tariffs for foreigners(cid:146), laid
down by Royal Decree of 24 October 1997 which entered into force on 1 January 1998, that the police
invoke this list when they stop people for traffic offences and that these tariffs can be found on the
websites http://www.infocorner.org/verkeer/divers/index.htm and http://www.infocorner.org/verkeer/divers/
boetes2.htm?

Should this situation be changed, in the light of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is

4.
based on the equality of human beings, or in the light of European Union rules?

C 318 E/162

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

13.11.2001

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-0830/01 by
Mrs Peijs (1).

(1) See p. 129.

(2001/C 318 E/175)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0959/01

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(30 March 2001)

Subject: Increase in electricity generated from coal and nuclear energy and shutdown of environmentally

compatible power stations following liberalisation of the energy market

Is the Commission aware that since early this year, as a result of liberalisation, the Netherlands has
1.
been importing 30 % of its electricity requirements from Germany, France and Belgium and that a number
of power stations have been shut down as a result?

Can the Commission confirm that these imports are principally the result of the growing price
2.
differences between coal, brown coal and nuclear energy from electricity-exporting countries and, on the
other hand, natural gas and combined heat and power in which the Netherlands has invested heavily in
recent years in order to cut emissions of CO2 and other environmental effects?

3. What is the Commission(cid:146)s view of the fact that as a result of this development residual heat from
production processes and plants with a high energy efficiency is unutilised and that although emissions of
CO2 are falling in the Netherlands they are increasing considerably in other Member States, and hence the
European Union as a whole is less able to meet the Kyoto obligation to reduced emissions?

Can the Commission confirm that Dutch imports will continue to rise substantially in the next few

4.
years if the cross-border high voltage grid acquires a greater capacity?

Does the Commission agree that regions which are over-dependent on electricity generated elsewhere
5.
run the risk (cid:129) by analogy with the American state of California (cid:129) of not having enough electricity in a few
years(cid:146) time or of being only able to buy in at elevated prices in times of shortage, and that this effect will
be aggravated if
in order to satisfy environmental
requirements, to curtail their exports?

the regions which currently export are obliged,

6. What action is the Commission planning to take to guarantee continued availability and production
of electricity, to restrict the need for further growth in the high-voltage network (cid:129) which is a blot on the
landscape (cid:129) to counteract harmful effects on the environment and to enable consumers to refuse the use
of nuclear energy, which they do not want?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(31 May 2001)

1.
The Commission is aware of the fact that the Netherlands imports part of its electricity demand. In
fact, the Netherlands has always relied for around 15 % of its energy consumption on imports from other
Member States. It is true that the part of imported electricity has increased since liberalisation began, and is
now estimated at around 20 % of Dutch consumption. The physical capacity of the interconnectors with
Belgium and Germany would, however, not allow an import of 30 % of Dutch consumption. The
Honourable Member of Parliament is right that some of the installed capacity in the Netherlands is not
being used at the moment, because of the fact that the price of imported electricity is cheaper.