do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0318/02 by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Preparations for the European Council meeting in Barcelona.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Council, European Union, research and development, research body, scientific research, technological change

18.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 172 E/183

Joint answer
to Written Questions P-0314/02 and P-0434/02
given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2002)

The Commission can confirm that it is currently examining the agreements signed, at the end of 2001,
between the Walloon region, the Charleroi airport management company and the airline Ryanair.

The Commission wishes to make sure that the benefits obtained by Ryanair on setting up in the Walloon
region are indeed commercial and that the agreements, a copy of which it received at the end of 2001, do
not contain anything likely to contravene the rules of the Treaty on State Aid (Articles 87 and 88 of the EC
Treaty).

Examination of these agreements began following the appearance of articles in the press and complaints to
the Commission. The next stage of the examination will be to send a letter to the Belgian authorities to ask
for additional information.

(2002/C 172 E/193)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0318/02

by Roger Helmer (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Preparations for the European Council meeting in Barcelona

The 2000 Lisbon European Council called on ‘the Council and the Commission, together with the Member
States where appropriate … to map by 2001 research and development excellence in all Member States in
order to foster the dissemination of excellence’. Was this target met?

Answer given by Mr Busquin on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2002)

The mapping of research and technological development excellence in Europe, as called for at the Lisbon
European Council on 23-24 March 2000, is being undertaken in close conjunction with a High Level
Group of representatives designated by the Member States. A pilot exercise covering a limited number of
scientific and technological topics was launched on the basis of the methodology described in the
Commission document (1). This pilot exercise should lead to the validation of a methodology which should
into widespread use in the Sixth Framework Programme for Research and Technological
be put
Development, as foreseen in the Commission’s proposal concerning activities to strengthen the foundations
of the European Research Area.

it has proved essential to carry out
However, before implementing the comprehensive pilot exercise,
preparatory studies due to the complexity of the exercise and the innovative nature of such a task at
European level. Significant progress has already been made and the conclusions of these preparatory
studies are presently available. Moreover, contracts to develop the comprehensive pilot exercise are
currently under negotiation and should be concluded in March 2002.

The conclusions of the pilot exercise will be presented at the end of 2002.

(1) SEC(2001) 434.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate, national currency, third country

12.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 38/1

I

(Information)

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

11 February 2002

(2002/C 38/01)

1 euro

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

=

7,4293

Danish krone

9,2598

Swedish krona

0,6176

Pound sterling

0,8794

United States dollar

1,4015

Canadian dollar

117,76

Japanese yen

1,4781

Swiss franc

7,836

Norwegian krone

88,93

Icelandic kr(cid:243)na (2)

1,7141

Australian dollar

2,0871

New Zealand dollar

10,0955

South African rand (2)

(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
(2) Source: Commission.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0339/02 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Working time directive.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EC Directive, application of EU law, impact study, organisation of work, seasonal worker, working time

C 160 E/210

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.7.2002

(2002/C 160 E/270)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0339/02

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Working time directive

The current working time directive permits individuals to opt out of the 48-hour work week maximum. If
this opt-out is removed, many businesses, especially seasonal businesses, will be forced to hire more staff
and increase their overall costs.

Has the Commission done a full impact assessment study on the effects of removing this opt-out clause?

Has the Commission seriously considered the effects on seasonal workers, such as, but not excluded to,
those working on formula one racing cars?

Would the Commission please provide details of the study and its findings?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(20 March 2002)

Article 18(1)(b)(i) of the working time Directive (1) lays down that a Member State shall have the option not
to apply Article 6 (maximum weekly working time of 48 hours) provided he has first obtained the worker’s
agreement to perform such work.

The United Kingdom is the only Member State having used this possibility not to apply Article 6.

Article 18(1)(b)(i) also provides for the re-examination of this clause in 2003. It states as follows:

Before the expiry of a period of seven years from the date referred to in (a) [23 November 1996], the
Council shall, on the basis of a Commission proposal accompanied by an appraisal report, re-examine
the provisions of this point (i) and decide on what action to take.

An invitation to tender for a study on the effects of this clause has recently been sent to independent
national experts. The study should provide an overview of the application of Article 18(1) (b) (i) in the
United Kingdom. It should notably take good account of the social partners’ opinion and analyse the case
law of the bodies responsible for the enforcement of national rules concerning working time.

The Commission will in due course prepare the appraisal report on this issue, based on the conclusions of
the study and on its own findings.

(1) Council Directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time,

OJ L 307, 13.12.1993.

(2002/C 160 E/271)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0345/02

by Eija-Riitta Korhola (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: EU standards governing whistle-blowers in the private sector

‘The Economist’ (issue of 12.-18.1.2002) raises an important issue when dealing with whistle-blowers in
the private sector.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 255/2002 of 12 February 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, import price, pip fruit

L 41/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

13.2.2002

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 255/2002

of 12 February 2002

establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and
vegetables

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

(2)

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

In compliance with the above criteria,
the standard
import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the
Annex to this Regulation,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 of
21 December 1994 on detailed rules for the application of the
last
import arrangements
amended by Regulation (EC) No 1498/98 (2), and in particular
Article 4(1) thereof,

fruit and vegetables (1), as

for

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Whereas:

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the
outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade nego-
tiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the
standard values for imports from third countries,
in
respect of the products and periods stipulated in the
Annex thereto.

The standard import values referred to in Article 4 of Regula-
tion (EC) No 3223/94 shall be fixed as indicated in the Annex
hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 13 February 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 12 February 2002.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 337, 24.12.1994, p. 66.
(2) OJ L 198, 15.7.1998, p. 4.

13.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 41/5

to the Commission Regulation of 12 February 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the
entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

ANNEX

CN code

0702 00 00

0707 00 05

0709 90 70

0805 10 10, 0805 10 30, 0805 10 50

0805 20 10

0805 20 30, 0805 20 50, 0805 20 70,
0805 20 90

0805 50 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
204
212
608
999
052
628
999
052
204
999
052
204
212
220
508
624
999
052
204
999

052
204
220
464
600
624
999
052
220
600
999
060
400
404
720
728
999
388
400
528
999

92,5
71,6
144,5
21,1
82,4
116,8
223,4
170,1
132,7
119,7
126,2
55,4
55,4
44,2
45,9
23,9
58,2
47,2
92,6
81,1
86,8

64,6
78,8
59,3
138,7
105,6
76,0
87,2
52,3
43,3
45,7
47,1
33,1
118,8
91,2
113,9
116,6
94,7
119,4
111,6
96,3
109,1

(1) Country nomenclature as fixed by Commission Regulation (EC) No 2020/2001 (OJ L 273, 16.10.2001, p. 6). Code ‘999’ stands for ‘of

other origin’.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0338/02 by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Tobacco subsidies.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EAGGF Guidance Section, aid to agriculture, tobacco

C 205 E/122

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

(2002/C 205 E/131)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0338/02

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Tobacco subsidies

Could the Commission please provide a breakdown of funding for tobacco subsidies, Member State by
Member State, for the past 5 years.

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2002)

The following table sets out
Guarantee Fund, Guarantee Section, declared by the Member States in the period 1997-2001.

the tobacco premiums from the European Agricultural Guidance and

Belgium

Germany

Greece

Spain

France

Italy

Austria

Portugal

Tobacco premium (B1-171)

2001

3,1

33,7

376,4

115,5

77,0

338,3

1,0

19,0

Total

963,9

2000

3,6

36,3

374,8

115,6

79,7

357,4

0,8

16,7

984,8

1999

3,6

23,2

374,9

70,7

70,1

348,4

0,7

18,3

909,8

1998

3,2

29,5

365,8

107,4

79,8

260,0

0,7

19,8

866,2

(Million €)

1997

3,2

27,0

355,9

122,3

84,2

394,2

0,6

17,9

1 005,3

(2002/C 205 E/132)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0342/02

by Pierre Jonckheer (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Subsidies and open-cast mines in the district of Alto Carrión, Palencia (Spain)

With reference to question E-2270/01 (1)
province of Palencia), would the Commission answer the following questions:

(operation of open-cast mines in the Alto Carrión district,

6 How much Community funding has been granted by way of coal aid to the Spanish Government?

6 Under what heading was such funding allocated?

6 Who acted as intermediary in the funding procedure?

6 Has Unión Minera del Norte SA (Uminsa) 6 the company responsible for operating the open-cast
mines in the Alto Carrión district 6 received any EU funding, or has it been allocated any state aid?

6 If it has, how much aid or funding has it received, under what heading and in what connection?

(1) OJ C 115 E, 16.5.2002, p. 48.
WRITTEN QUESTION P-0435/02 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Advertising leaflet and television campaign about the euro published in Britain.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Central Bank, United Kingdom, euro, financing method, public awareness campaign

C 277 E/46

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.11.2002

At its meeting on 25 and 26 April 2002, the Justice and Home Affairs Council adopted some conclusions
on combating racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia, in which it pointed in particular to the importance
of the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia.

The Council is also currently considering an initiative from the Kingdom of Spain for supervision of levels
of training and other aspects of private security personnel within the Union.

(2002/C 277 E/049)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0435/02

by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Advertising leaflet and television campaign about the euro published in Britain

With reference to a leaflet and television advertisement entitled ‘The Euro. Our Money 4 Getting ready for
the Euro’, both published in the name of the European Central Bank,

would the Commission like to explain:

(a) on what basis the ECB, a supposedly independent central bank, is taking it upon itself to provide

unsolicited information on the euro to the British people;

(b) which institution paid for the advertisement and leaflet;

(c)

from which budget the money to pay for the advertisement and leaflet originated;

(d) whether or not the decision to enter the euro is a national decision in which the European Institutions

may legally interfere?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(20 March 2002)

The Honourable Member refers to a document and a television advertisement which have been produced
under the authority of the European Central Bank (ECB) in the framework of their information campaign
on the euro.

The necessary conditions to be fulfilled by a Member State for the adoption of the euro are spelled out in
Title VII of the EC Treaty.

(2002/C 277 E/050)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0437/02

by Ozan Ceyhun (PSE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Problems encountered by citizens of the Federal Republic of Germany when passing through the

Republic of Bulgaria 4 specific information and witness statements

In connection with my question H-0793/01 and the Commission’s reply of 13 November 2001, the
Commission asked me to provide further information and details in order to assess the situation more
accurately.

I am now sending the Commission detailed information and witness statements under separate cover. I
would like to combine this with asking the Commission how, in the light of these new facts, it intends to
proceed vis-à-vis the Republic of Bulgaria as regards compliance with the Copenhagen criteria.
2002/293/EC: Decision No 13/2002 of 12 February 2002 of the Joint Committee established under the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and the United States of America related to the listing of Conformity Assessment Bodies under the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: Joint Committee
Subjects: EU market, United States, agreement (EU), electro-magnetic equipment, market access, mutual recognition principle, quality label, research method

17.4.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 101/29

DECISION No 13/2002

of 12 February 2002

of the Joint Committee established under the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the
European Community and the United States of America related to the listing of Conformity
Assessment Bodies under the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility

(2002/293/EC)

THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and the United
States of America and in particular Article 7 and 14,

Whereas the Joint Committee is to take a decision to list a Conformity Assessment Body or Bodies under a
Sectoral Annex,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

1. The Conformity Assessment Body in Attachment A is added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies
under column ‘US access to the EC market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic
Compatibility.

2. The specific scope of listing,

in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures, of the
Conformity Assessment Body indicated in Attachment A has been agreed by the Parties and will be
maintained by them.

3. This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by representatives of the Joint Committee who are
authorised to act on behalf of the Parties for purposes of amending the Agreement. This Decision shall
be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.

Washington DC, 3 January 2002.

Brussels, 12 February 2002.

On behalf of the United States of America

On behalf of the European Community

Catherine NOVELLI

Roderick ABBOTT

US Conformity Assessment Body added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under column ‘US access
to the EC market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility

Attachment A

TIMCO Engineering, Inc.

849 NW State Road 45
P.O. Box 370
Newberry, Florida 32669
USA
Tel. (1-352) 472 55 00
Fax (1-352) 472 20 30
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0347/02 by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission. Air safety and illegal trading in used spare parts.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, air safety, civil aviation, illicit trade, spare part, used goods

C 172 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2002

(2002/C 172 E/196)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0347/02

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Air safety and illegal trading in used spare parts

It has emerged from an investigation carried out in Italy that a huge trade in recycled used spare parts for
civil aircraft is going on under the auspices of the Panaviation company, and it is reported that such parts
are still available for purchase via the Internet.

There is apparently even a possibility that certain serious air crashes which have occurred recently were
caused through the use of used or unsuitable parts for which a forged certificate had been issued.

What urgent action is the Commission intending to take in order to ensure that national and international
civil-aviation monitoring bodies carry out appropriate checks promptly in order to ascertain from the
airlines which aircraft have been fitted with spare parts or other equipment of dubious origin, so that steps
can be taken to prevent those aircraft from being used to operate civilian flights from any European
airport?

Does the Commission not also think that an investigation into the above-mentioned illegal trade should be
carried out throughout Europe?

(2002/C 172 E/197)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0378/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(19 February 2002)

Subject: Dangerous used spare parts for aircraft

The Italian aviation authorities have revealed that American and Italian companies were marketing old,
defective and recycled spare parts for aircraft. The problem reportedly affects 2 % of aircraft and it is
estimated that such unsuitable spares may be responsible for 10 % of recent aviation accidents.

1.

2.

Are there any specifications with which airlines should comply in purchasing their spare parts?

Are there airlines which use such spare parts?

3. What measures will the Commission take to tackle this problem in a coordinated manner?

(2002/C 172 E/198)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0540/02

by Christopher Heaton-Harris (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(28 February 2002)

Subject: Defective planes

Can the Commission state what action it has taken with regard to the recent scandal involving the sale of
defective aircraft parts in Italy? In particular, are there any investigations ongoing into the activities of the
company ‘Panaviation’?

What contact has the Commission had on this subject with the Italian Government?
WRITTEN QUESTION E-0335/02 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Import of horses.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Central and Eastern Europe, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, equidae, import (EU)

20.6.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 147 E/247

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(22 February 2002)

In May 2000 the Commission adopted two proposals for Directives (1), respectively concerning works,
supplies and services contracts awarded by public authorities (‘the Public Sector Directive’) and contracts
awarded in the water, energy and transport sectors (‘the Utilities Directive’).

With reference to the 2000 Lisbon European Council (23-24 March 2000), which asked ‘the Commission,
the Council and Member States’ to act in a timely manner in order to allow these two proposals enter into
force by 2002, the Honourable Member asks whether this goal will actually be reached this year.

As the Honourable Member might be aware, the Parliament adopted both reports concerning these
proposals on 17 January 2002, together with 103 amendments for the Public Sector Directive and 82
amendments for the Utilities Directive. Among others, these included amendments whose effect would be
to raise some of the relevant thresholds to unacceptably high levels 2 furthermore not compatible with
the objective of facilitating access to public procurement for small and medium-sized enterprises.

Whether it will be possible to achieve adoption of the two proposals for Directives on public procurement
will depend on the time needed to conclude the legislative process within both branches of the legislature,
i. e. the Parliament and Council. To meet the objective set at Lisbon would therefore require all institutions
concerned to act speedily and constructively.

(1) OJ C 29 E, 30.1.2001.

(2002/C 147 E/266)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0335/02

by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Import of horses

Would the Commission state how many live horses were imported by the European Union from the
Central and East European countries in (a) 2000 and (b) 2001.

In particular, how many live horses were imported by the European Union in each of the two years from:

1.

Poland;

2.

Lithuania;

3. Romania?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(11 March 2002)

Because of the length of the answer, which includes a number of tables, the Commission is sending it
direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat.