WRITTEN QUESTION P-2226/01 by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Tobacco directive, Article 7.
Date: 2001-07-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, consumer information, labelling, tobacco

C 364 E/248

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

20.12.2001

0,5 % is the lowest of all Member States. Luxembourg and Portugal, with deficits of 2 % and 2,7 %
respectively, have each moved up four places in the overall ranking since they appointed a national
transposition co-ordinator.

The Commission encourages the exchange of best practice on transposition, such as the appointment of
transposition co-ordinators and/or regular reporting on progress to national parliaments, particularly
through the Internal Market Advisory Committee. It expects Member States to consider these experiences
as part of their efforts to attain the 1,5 % deficit target set by the European Council for Spring 2002.

(2001/C 364 E/273)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2164/01

by Colette Flesch (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 July 2001)

Subject: Brussels: a capital for Europe?

According to press reports, the Belgian Prime Minister and the Commission President have organised
a discussion forum on the role of Brussels as capital of Europe.

1.

Does the President(cid:146)s involvement stem from a Commission decision?

If so, does the Commission think it right to intervene in this way regarding the seat of the

2.
institutions by coming out on the side of Brussels? Can it justify its attitude?

3.

4.

If not, should the Commission President be considered to be acting in a personal capacity?

Is he willing to show the same kind of support for Luxembourg and Strasbourg?

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(31 July 2001)

Mr Prodi, President of the Commission, took part in the discussion forum referred to by the Honourable
Member as a follow-up to Declaration No 22 annexed to the Treaty of Nice relating to the venues for
European Councils. The Commission recalls that the Declaration states that (cid:145)As from 2002, one European
Council meeting per Presidency will be held in Brussels. When the Union comprises 18 members, all
European Council meetings will be held in Brussels.(cid:146)

The discussions at this event sponsored by Mr Verhofstadt and Mr Prodi were purely an intellectual
exercise with a view to clarifying the image and role of Brussels in the light of the European Council
Declaration: there was no intention of calling into Question the decisions on the seats of the institutions,
determined by the EC Treaty.

Thus the last Question is superfluous.

(2001/C 364 E/274)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2226/01

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 July 2001)

Subject: Tobacco directive, Article 7

Can the Commission confirm that the descriptor ban on normal-strength cigarettes does not apply to
cigarettes exported outside the EU?

20.12.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 364 E/249

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(5 September 2001)

Article 7 of Directive 2001/37/EC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative
provisions of the Member States concerning the manufacture, presentation and sale of tobacco products (1)
states that with effect from 30 September 2003 and without prejudice to Article 5 (1) of the same
Directive, texts, names, trademarks and figurative or other signs suggesting that a particular tobacco
product is less harmful than others shall not be used on the packaging of tobacco products. There is no
distinction made between tobacco products imported into, exported from or manufactured in the
Community. There is a reference in Recital 27 to the justification for this measure and to the development
of international rules, a reference to the draft World Health Organisation framework Convention on
Tobacco Control, in the negotiation of which the Community and its Member States are presently engaged.

(1) OJ L 194, 18.7.2001.

(2001/C 364 E/275)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2227/01

by Herman Schmid (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Economic resources of the European political parties

(18 July 2001)

At the June part-session I put an oral Question about the economic relations of the European political
parties (H-0460/01) (1) and received an answer from the Commission on 13 June which was incomplete
and unsatisfactory.

The background to my Question was that the new concept of (cid:145)European political parties(cid:146)
is hard to
translate into practical reality because it has to be distinguished from (cid:145)national political parties(cid:146), while at
the same time being something different from the political groups in the European Parliament which are
to a varying extent already functioning as European political parties. Is it possible to imagine any other
sphere of activity for the European political parties than the political territories of the Member States?

Your reply failed to answer the main point of my Question.

I therefore have no choice but to return to the matter and to ask:

(cid:129) What does the term (cid:145)own resources(cid:146) in the Commission(cid:146)s answer mean? Could these, for example,
come from the funds of national parties? Will the European parties be permitted to accept large-scale
financial support from national parties?

(cid:129) Will it be permissible for a part of the remaining 75 % to come from the national parties (should the

Commission be unable to pay the full amount)?

(cid:129) I understand that rigorous financial controls will be carried out, but for that very reason I should like
to know what rules apply. Are the European parties to be permitted to use their resources for
activities in the Member States, or will the new regulations rule that out?

(1) Written answer of 13 June 2001.

Answer given by Mr Prodi on behalf of the Commission

(3 August 2001)

The Commission tabled its original proposal on 13 February 2001 and, following Parliament(cid:146)s Opinion
given on 17 May 2001, tabled a revised proposal on taking up some of Parliament(cid:146)s amendments.