do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
European Parliament legislative resolution on the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of Sweden with a view to adopting a Council decision extending Europol's mandate to deal with the serious forms of international crime listed in the Annex to the Europol Convention (9093/2001 – C5-0266/2001 — 2001/0817(CNS))
Date: 2001-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: Belgium, EU police cooperation, Europol, Sweden, fight against crime, judicial cooperation in criminal matters in the EU, public safety

13.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 140 E/135

European Parliament legislative resolution on the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium and the
Kingdom of Sweden with a view to adopting a Council decision extending Europol’s mandate to
deal with the serious forms of international crime listed in the Annex to the Europol Convention
(9093/2001 $ C5-0266/2001 $ 2001/0817(CNS))

Tuesday 13 November 2001

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

(cid:17) having regard to the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of Sweden (9093/

2001) (1),

(cid:17) having been consulted by the Council pursuant to Article 39(1) of the EU Treaty (C5-0266/2001),

(cid:17) having regard to Rules 106 and 67 of its Rules of Procedure,

(cid:17) having regard to the report of the Committee on Citizens’ Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home

Affairs (A5-0370/2001),

1.

2.

Approves the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium and the Kingdom of Sweden as amended;

Calls on the Council to alter the initiative accordingly;

Calls on the Council to notify Parliament should it intend to depart from the text approved by

3.
Parliament;

Asks to be consulted again if the Council intends to amend the initiative of the Kingdom of Belgium

4.
and the Kingdom of Sweden substantially;

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission and the governments of

5.
the Kingdom of Belgium and of the Kingdom of Sweden.

(1) OJ C 176, 21.6.2001, p. 26.

2.
Initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden with a view to the adoption of a Council Act amending the
Council Act of 12 March 1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission of personal data by
Europol to third States and third bodies (8785/2001 $ C5-0218/2001 $ 2001/0807(CNS))

The initiative was amended as follows:

INITIATIVE OF THE KINGDOM
OF SWEDEN (1)

AMENDMENTS
BY PARLIAMENT

Amendment 9
TITLE

Initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden with a view to the adop-
tion of a Council Act amending the Council Act of 12 March
1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission of per-
sonal data by Europol to third States and third bodies

Initiative of the Kingdom of Sweden with a view to the adop-
tion of a Council Act amending the Council Act of 12 March
1999 adopting the rules governing the transmission of per-
sonal data by Europol to third States and third bodies and the
Act of the Management Board of Europol of 15 October
1998 laying down the rules governing Europol’s external
relations with European Union-related bodies

(1) OJ C 163, 6.6.2001, p. 13.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3100/01 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Additional municipal levy on forest products in Greece.
Date: 2001-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU law - national law, Greece, VAT, national law, restriction on competition, silviculture, tax system

C 205 E/24

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

The Declaration on the TRIPs Agreement and Public Health referred to above, and which is in line with the
position adopted by the Community before the Conference, represents a significant step forward in the
debate on access to medicines. It brings clarification with regard to the link between the TRIPs Agreement
and WTO Members’ right to adopt public health measures. In addition, it reflects the consensus reached on
the definition of the flexibility inherent in several relevant TRIPs provisions.

(2002/C 205 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3100/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Additional municipal levy on forest products in Greece

(13 November 2001)

In Greece, in addition to normal VAT, a further municipal tax is levied on domestic forest products at the
primary processing (logging) stage. This tax is calculated each year by the Ministry for Agriculture and,
together with VAT, currently amounts to 17 % of the market price.

This additional municipal levy is to the benefit of imported timber and to the detriment of domestic forest
products. It creates serious economic and social problems for forest workers, their cooperatives and the
local economy of the disadvantaged and mountain regions of Greece. What measures will the Commission
therefore take to secure the abolition of the additional municipal tax levied by Greece on domestic forest
products at the primary processing stage, which undermines healthy competition and is contrary to EU
competition policy?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 2001)

Certain fiscal matters have been subject to harmonisation within the Community. This is the case for
valued added tax and for excise duties on tobacco, alcohol and mineral oils. There has been no
harmonisation of taxes on forest products. The Member States therefore remain free to levy the taxes they
see fit on these products, as long as they respect the general principles of the EC Treaty.

Article 90 (ex Article 95) of the EC Treaty prohibits discriminatory taxation by which a Member State gives
an advantage to its domestic products as compared to the products of other Member States. However, this
article does not prohibit fiscal measures which put a Member State’s own products at a disadvantage
compared to products of other Member States.

In view of this, the Commission has no intention to take measures in respect of the levy on forest products
in Greece.

(2002/C 205 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3147/01

by Nicholas Clegg (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 November 2001)

Subject:

’Euro Made Easy’ information packs

Are British citizens allowed to receive the ‘Euro Made Easy’
information on the single currency? If not, why not?

information packs produced to provide
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.2524 — Hydro/SQM/Rotem/JV) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-11-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, chemical industry, economic concentration, exchange of information, fertiliser industry, merger control

C 318/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

13.11.2001

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.2524 (cid:151) Hydro/SQM/Rotem/JV)

(2001/C 318/06)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.
On 31 October 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 undertakings Norsk Hydro ASA (Hydro, Norway) and NutriSI NV (NutriSI, Belgium), a joint
venture between Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile SA (SQM, Chile) and Rotem Amfert Negev Ltd
(Rotem, Israel), acquire, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Regulation, control in a newly created
company constituting a joint venture (NewCo).

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

(cid:151) Hydro: mineral fertilisers, oil and energy, light metals,

(cid:151) NutriSI: speciality fertilisers,

(cid:151) SQM: mineral fertilisers, industrial chemicals, iodine and lithium,

(cid:151) Rotem: part of the Israel Chemicals group of companies (ICL) active in mineral fertilisers and chemicals,

(cid:151) NewCo: production and distribution of speciality fertilisers, in particular water soluble NPK fertilisers

and liquid fertilisers.

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.2524 (cid:151) Hydro/SQM/Rotem/JV, 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 P-3189/01 by Willi Rothley (PSE) to the Commission. Languages in the EU.
Date: 2001-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Union, administrative competition, linguistic discrimination, mother tongue, official language

C 134 E/210

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

6.6.2002

The Council would furthermore like to remind the Honourable Member of the European Parliament that in
its Conclusions adopted on 20 September 2001, the Council explicitly stated that:

The Council has decided to set up within Europol, for a renewable period of six months, a team of
counter-terrorist specialists for which the Member States are invited to appoint liaison officers from
police and intelligence services specialising in the fight against terrorism, without prejudice to the
legislation by which they are governed.

Its remit will include the following tasks:

( to collect in a timely manner all relevant information and intelligence concerning the current

threat;

( to analyse the collected information and undertake the necessary operational and strategic

analysis;

( to draft a threat assessment document based on information received. This study will in particular
list targets, damage, potential modi operandi and consequences for the security of the Member
States (description of possible situations) and identify those areas in which preventive measures
must be taken (air traffic, official buildings, VIP protection, etc.).

(2002/C 134 E/220)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3189/01

by Willi Rothley (PSE) to the Commission

(13 November 2001)

Subject: Languages in the EU

On 27 September 2001 the German weekly ‘Die Zeit’ reported that in notices of vacancy the Commission
was requiring ‘native English’ for jobs in technical support offices, ranging from the Socrates student
programme to the TACIS/PHARE aid programme for Eastern Europe.

Any such discrimination against persons not having English as their mother tongue would be a flagrant
breach of the Treaties.

Is this report true?

If it is, will the Commission put a stop to this practice?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(10 December 2001)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the joint reply it gave to written questions
E-2901/01 and E-2944/01 by Mr Staes (1).

(1) See page 141.

(2002/C 134 E/221)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3190/01

by Christel Fiebiger (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(20 November 2001)

Subject: Biogeographical meeting on the Continental region (Natura 2000)

On 28 March 2001, at the time when complaint procedure 1998/5119 was dropped, the Commission’s
Environment DG (Directorate D) informed the Verein zum Schutz der Kahlen Schmücke (association for
the protection of the Kahle Schmücke, Thuringia) that the biogeographical meeting on the Continental
Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.2547 — Bayer/Aventis Crop Science) (Text with EEA relevance)
Date: 2001-11-13
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Commission, chemical industry, economic concentration, exchange of information, merger control, plant health product

13.11.2001

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 318/9

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.2547 (cid:151) Bayer/Aventis Crop Science)

(2001/C 318/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1.
On 29 October 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),
the
by which the undertaking Bayer AG (Bayer) acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of
Regulation, control of the whole of Aventis Crop Science Holding SA (ACS) by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

(cid:151) Bayer: healthcare, crop protection and animal health, seeds, chemicals and polymers,

(cid:151) ACS: crop protection, environmental science, seeds and bio-science.

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.2547 (cid:151) Bayer/Aventis Crop Science, 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-3109/01 by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission. Procedures for awarding European Social Fund grants to universities.
Date: 2001-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Social Fund, competence of the Member States, education grant, management, university

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/227

In line with the approach set out in the Commission report on measures to implement Article 299(2) (1),
the assessment will analyse the possibilities and questions raised by the two instruments referred to above
and make recommendations both to the Commission and the outermost regions. The terms of reference
are still being defined in detail by the Commission.

(1) COM(2000) 147 final.

(2002/C 115 E/243)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3109/01

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(13 November 2001)

Subject: Procedures for awarding European Social Fund grants to universities

Under the current procedure for the European Social Fund (ESF), grants are awarded to students on a
calendar year basis from January to December, although the academic year runs from September to July
and notification of funding is not received by the university until the preceding October/ November.
Students who are dependent on this funding therefore start a course in September in the knowledge that
resources are guaranteed only until December, with funding from January dependent on a successful ESF
bid.

Is the ESF grant procedure applied in every Member State in the same way?

Does the Commission intend to change or to review these procedures?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(18 December 2001)

Procedures for awarding grants to universities depend upon the managing and paying authorities in each
of the Member States and not upon the Commission. The problems referred to by the Honourable Member
should therefore be addressed to the responsible authority in the Member State.

Commitments for assistance over a period of two or more years are usually effected annually, and
pluriannuel grants may therefore be applied pro rata to the corresponding academic year.

(2002/C 115 E/244)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3118/01

by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 November 2001)

Subject: Leader+

On 14 April 2000 the Commission approved guidelines addressed to the Member States for the new
Community initiative Leader+ (2000-2006). The Member States were called on to submit their proposals
for programmes within six months of the publication of the notice.

In mid-November 2000 the Free State of Bavaria consequently submitted its draft to the Agriculture
Directorate-General of the European Commission, via the Federal Ministry for Consumer Protection, Food
and Agriculture. The Commission had originally promised that
the approval procedure would be
completed within five months.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-3115/01 by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission. Aid for the clam sector in Languedoc (France).
Date: 2001-11-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU aid, Languedoc-Roussillon, Structural Funds, eligibility criteria, mollusc, structural policy

C 93 E/218

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.4.2002

(2002/C 93 E/263)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3115/01

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(13 November 2001)

Subject: Aid for the clam sector in Languedoc (France)

Representatives of the clam sector in the region of Languedoc-Roussillon (France) have told me of their
concern that they are unable to benefit from aid under the FIFG owing to a strict interpretation of
Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 (1) laying down the detailed rules and arrangements
regarding Community structural assistance in the fisheries sector.

Can the Commission clarify whether this sector can benefit from FIFG aid for seeding clams?

(1) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999, p. 10.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(28 November 2001)

The Honourable Member refers to Article 13 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2792/1999 of 17 December
1999, laying down the detailed rules and arrangements regarding Community structural assistance in the
fisheries sector (1), but the question implies that this problem relates to clam breeding rather than to sea
fishing. At all events the Commission can confirm that neither repopulating (fisheries) nor seeding
(aquaculture) are regarded as structural measures; consequently, they are not eligible for Community
structural aid.

(1) OJ L 337, 30.12.1999.

(2002/C 93 E/264)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3144/01

by Carlos Coelho (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 November 2001)

Subject: Delays in the transposition of directives

Further to the question put to the Commission in June 2000, I would now draw attention to recent public
statements to the effect that there has been little or no change in the situation and that Member States are
still delaying the transposition of directives relating to the internal market. It is regrettable that the
harmonisation of the economies of the fifteen Member States is proceeding at so slow a pace, thereby
jeopardising Europe’s competitiveness at a time when the world economy is hovering on the brink of
recession.

The fact that Portugal is one of the Member States that has been most reluctant (12 % of EU legislation on
the internal market not yet implemented) is a source of concern.

Will the Commission provide a comparative study of the situation in each Member State, indicating the
number of directives whose transposition has been delayed in the case of each Member State?

Will the Commission also provide a list of the directives not yet transposed in Portugal?