do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2951/02 by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission. Allocation of structural funds.
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Galicia, Structural Funds, distribution of EU funding

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/579

(2004/C 88 E/0591)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2951/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Allocation of structural funds

Would the Commission please give details of the allocation by each local authority in Galicia (Spain) of the
monies invested by the structural funds over the 1994-1999 programming period?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(29 April 2004)

The Commission is informed by the responsible authorities in Spain that the information requested for the
region of Galicia is available at the detailed geographical level of the municipalities in incomplete form
only. They have given us the following breakdown by province for the 1994-1999 programming period:

(pesetas)

PROVINCE

ERDF

EAGGF

FIFG

Lugo

La Coruña

Orense

159 842 770 248

1 700 299 862

6 836 285 588

198 227 392 318

885 147 058

23 936 009 296

41 344 303 188

1 416 242 020

(cid:1)

Pontevedra

106 497 819 506

526 301 303

45 759 031 802

Total

505 912 285 260

4 527 990 243

76 531 326 686

They state that owing to the nature of the action financed by the ESF, the large number of Operational
Programmes (multiregional and one regional) involved and the large number of managing bodies acting in
Galicia, the breakdown asked for is very difficult to make. For Galicia as a whole the ESF contribution for
1994-1999 is EUR 576,13 million. This covers both the regional programme and the national level ones.

(2004/C 88 E/0592)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3207/02

by Kathleen Van Brempt (PSE) to the Commission

(12 November 2002)

Subject: Nicotine sweets

A number of tobacco manufacturers, including British American Tobacco, have announced that they will
shortly be marketing a peppermint containing as much nicotine as a cigarette. The manufacturers have
developed the cigalett as a way of providing smokers, who face a growing number of smoking bans, with
nicotine that they can use at any time and in any place.

What is the Commission’s reaction to this new product?

Will the Commission ban the cigalett?

If not, will Commission warn the public about the addictive effects of this sweet?

What is the position with regard to the labelling of the cigalett?
WRITTEN QUESTION P-2951/02 by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission. Allocation of structural funds.
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Galicia, Structural Funds, distribution of aid

C 28 E/250

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2003

The Commission reviews continually the information transmitted by the national authorities for the
purposes of statistics and for administrative management of the CAP. One of the objectives of this review
is to reduce the burdens for both the Member States and the economic operators from whom data are
collected.

As part of the simplification programme this review is examining whether data transmitted continue to be
necessary for management purposes and, if so, whether they may be available through other sources. It has
already achieved positive results in a number of sectors where it has been possible to identify and
eliminate duplication and collection of data which are no longer required. It should, however, be pointed
out that in the majority of cases data transmitted are shown to be necessary for management purposes and
that the instances of duplication are considerably fewer than is often suggested.

(1) Technical Action Plans for Agricultural Statistics.
(2) Land Use/Cover Area frame Sampling.

(2003/C 28 E/282)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2951/02

by Rosa Miguélez Ramos (PSE) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Allocation of structural funds

Would the Commission please give details of the allocation by each local authority in Galicia (Spain) of the
monies invested by the structural funds over the 1994-1999 programming period?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2002)

The Commission is collecting the information it needs to answer the question. It will communicate its
findings as soon as possible.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1825/2002 of 14 October 2002 establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: agri-monetary policy, citrus fruit, fruit vegetable, grape, import price, perennial vegetable, pip fruit

15.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 277/3

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1825/2002

of 14 October 2002

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

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

(2)

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
import arrangements
last
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 15 October 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 14 October 2002.

For the Commission

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Agriculture Director-General

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

L 277/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

15.10.2002

to the Commission Regulation of 14 October 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 50 10

0806 10 10

0808 10 20, 0808 10 50, 0808 10 90

0808 20 50

Third country
code (1)

Standard import
value

(EUR/100 kg)

052
096
999
052
999
052
999
052
388
524
528
999
052
064
400
999
096
388
400
512
800
804
999
052
720
999

50,3
36,4
43,3
103,8
103,8
89,5
89,5
63,1
61,4
61,6
47,9
58,5
106,8
135,5
213,7
152,0
38,5
85,1
58,6
88,6
192,2
91,5
92,4
86,1
40,1
63,1

(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 P-2950/02 by Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Information network on education in Europe.
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: education policy, education statistics, information, information network, recognition of diplomas, student

18.9.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222 E/31

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(3 December 2002)

The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written E-2797/02 by Mrs Lucas (1)

(1) See page 17.

(2003/C 222 E/035)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2950/02

by Juan Ojeda Sanz (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Information network on education in Europe

The initiative undertaken by the Commission to create a network of national academic recognition
information centres (NARIC) in 1984 demonstrates the EU’s intention to provide advice and reliable
information on the academic recognition and validity of degrees, diplomas and study periods abroad. This
initiative has encouraged mobility amongst students in Europe.

Since 1984 improvements and new aims have been introduced, including first and foremost the specific
desire on the part of ministers from more than 30 countries to create, by 2010, a ‘European higher
education area’ as referred to in the Bologna Declaration to facilitate the direct comparison of degrees.

With regard primarily to the effectiveness of the centres in the NARIC network and the results achieved by
them: Will the Commission provide figures on the number of pupils who have approached the network to
obtain information on the recognition of qualifications?

Can it give details as to the outcome of these queries and the advice provided at the offices in the Member
States?

If so, how long does it take on average for a reply to be given to a query?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(15 November 2002)

The Commission does not have at present reliable statistics on the issues raised by the Honourable
Member, which would only be available from individual Narics. The Commission will examine, on the
basis of recent surveys, whether such statistics can be elaborated and will not hesitate to inform Parliament
on its findings.

(2003/C 222 E/036)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2953/02

by Gabriele Stauner (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(22 October 2002)

Subject: Volume of payments into and from the Commission’s bank accounts

In its answer to my Written Question E-1851/02 (1), the Commission listed the banks with which it holds
accounts in order to make payments into and from the budget of the European Union.

However, the Commission refused to indicate the volume of payments relating to those banks in 2000 and
2001.
2003/19/EC: Council Decision of 14 October 2002 on declassifying certain parts of the Sirene Manual adopted by the Executive Committee established by the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: European treaties, Schengen Agreement, legal basis, legislation, user guide

L 8/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

14.1.2003

COUNCIL DECISION

of 14 October 2002

on declassifying certain parts of the Sirene Manual adopted by the Executive Committee estab-
lished by the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June 1985

(2003/19/EC)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Article 2

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Commu-
nity, and in particular Article 207 thereof,

Whereas:

Section 2.3 of the Sirene Manual, as well as Annexes 1, 2, 3, 4,
5 and 6 shall be classified ‘Restreint UE’.

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

By its Decision of 14 December 1993 (SCH/Com-ex (93)
22 rev) and 23 June 1998 (SCH/Com-ex (98) 17), the
Executive Committee established by the Convention
implementing the Schengen Agreement of 14 June
1985, which was replaced by the Council pursuant to
Article 2 of the Schengen Protocol, classified as ‘Confi-
dential’ the Sirene Manual, the final version of which
was adopted by the Decision of
the said Executive
Committee on 28 April 1999 (SCH/Com-ex (99) 5).

The Sirene Manual and the Decisions of the Executive
Committee on its
the
Schengen acquis as defined by the Council in its Decision
1999/435/EC of 20 May 1999.

classification form part of

Certain parts of the Sirene Manual should be declassified.

Certain parts of the Sirene Manual should have their
classification downgraded to ‘Restreint UE’.

It is appropriate to repeal the Executive Committee deci-
sions (SCH/Com-ex (93) 22 rev) and (SCH/Com-ex (98)
17)
insofar as they relate to the classification of the
Sirene Manual, so that future decisions on its classifica-
tion may be taken in accordance with the normal rules
on the classification of documents, as set out in Council
Decision 2001/264/EC of 19 March 2001 adopting the
Council's security regulations (1),

Article 3

The declassified parts of the Sirene Manual shall be published
in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

Article 4

1.
The decisions of the Schengen Executive Committee of
14 December 1993 (SCH/Com-ex (93)22 rev.) and of 23 June
1998 (SCH/Com-ex (98) 17) shall be repealed insofar as they
relate to the Sirene Manual.

2.
Future decisions on the classification of the Sirene Manual
shall be taken in accordance with the provisions of Decision
2001/264/EC.

Article 5

This Decision shall take effect on the day of its publication in
the Official Journal of the European Communities.

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Done at Luxembourg, 14 October 2002.

Article 1

The Sirene Manual shall be declassified, with the exception of
section 2.3 and Annexes 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6.

For the Council

The President

L. ESPERSEN

(1) OJ L 101, 11.4.2001, p. 1.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 1828/2002 of 14 October 2002 prohibiting fishing for cod by vessels flying the flag of Portugal
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Portugal, authorised catch, catch quota, fishing area, fishing regulations, sea fish, ship's flag

15.10.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

L 277/9

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1828/2002

of 14 October 2002

prohibiting fishing for cod by vessels flying the flag of Portugal

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2847/93 of 12
October 1993 establishing a control system applicable to the
common fisheries policy (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC)
No 2846/98 (2), and in particular Article 21(3) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

(3)

Council Regulation (EC) No 2555/2001 of 18 December
2001 fixing for 2002 the fishing opportunities and asso-
ciated conditions for certain fish stocks and groups of
fish stocks, applicable in Community waters and, for
Community vessels, in waters where limitations in catch
are required (3), lays down quotas for cod for 2002.

to ensure compliance with the provisions
In order
relating to the quantity limits on catches of stocks
subject to quotas, the Commission must fix the date by
which catches made by vessels flying the flag of a
Member State are deemed to have exhausted the quota
allocated.

According to the information received by the Commis-
sion, catches of cod in the waters of ICES division I, II
(Norwegian waters) by vessels flying the flag of Portugal

or registered in Portugal have exhausted the quota allo-
cated for 2002. Portugal has prohibited fishing for this
stock from 2 September 2002. This date should be
adopted in this Regulation also,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Catches of cod in the waters of ICES division I and II (Norwe-
gian waters) by vessels flying the flag of Portugal or registered
in Portugal are hereby deemed to have exhausted the quota
allocated to Portugal for 2002.

Fishing for cod in the waters of ICES division I and II (Norwe-
gian waters) by vessels flying the flag of Portugal or registered
in Portugal is hereby prohibited, as are the retention on board,
transhipment and landing of this stock caught by the above
vessels after the date of application of this Regulation.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following its
publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.

It shall apply from 2 September 2002.

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

Done at Brussels, 14 October 2002.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 261, 20.10.1993, p. 1.
(2) OJ L 358, 31.12.1998, p. 5.
(3) OJ L 347, 31.12.2001, p. 1.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2899/02 by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Council. Violations of the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports.
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Belgium, Nepal, code of conduct, export licence, military equipment, national law, sale

C 137 E/132

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

12.6.2003

The problem referred to in the above questions was not covered in the evaluation made by the
6.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) from 3 March 2002 through 8 March 2002, that addressed
the reactor safety procedures and staff training in this respect. The IAEA recommendations do not address
the improvement of the safety system itself. The implementation of IAEA recommendations is progressing
according to plan and in close contact with the safety authorities. The ten year revision of the licence that
do include the re-assessment of the coolant leak scenarios, is not related to the IAEA evaluation and had
already been started more than a year prior to the IAEA evaluation.

7.
The safety evaluation currently under way will be submitted to the competent safety authorities and
conclusions will be drawn. In addition, open consultations are held with the regional and local authorities.

(2003/C 137 E/150)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2899/02

by Nelly Maes (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(14 October 2002)

Subject: Violations of the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports

We have recently heard that the Belgian Delcredere service has granted a State guarantee for the contract
concluded between FN and the Government of Nepal to supply 5 500 mini-machine guns.

First and foremost, this violated the Code of Conduct on Arms Exports, as the German Government had
not permitted this transaction, but
the purchase price of
EUR 15,4 million will be paid even if the delivery does not go ahead.

the Belgian Government did. Moreover,

Does this not constitute unfair preferential treatment of a private business and distortion of competition?

Does it not also undermine the agreements made in the EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports?

Reply

(18 February 2003)

The particular case raised by the Honourable Member has not been raised in the Council, but decisions
related to the granting of export licences are taken by each Member State individually taking full account
of the Code of Conduct and the criteria set out in it. The Code of Conduct does not provide for Member
States to give any information about the grounds on which export licences are granted or refused nor it
does not lie in the Council’s purview to pass judgement on any particular transaction. However, Member
States are required every year to inform the Council about their arms exports, on the basis of which an
annual report is produced. This allows for common assessment of the functioning of the Code.

(2003/C 137 E/151)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2908/02

by María Valenciano Martínez-Orozco (PSE) to the Commission

Subject: Progress of infringement proceedings No 93/2212

(16 October 2002)

With reference to the reasoned opinion (Article 226) on the failure to designate sufficient special
protection areas under Directive 79/409/EC (1).
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2890/02 by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Arrest of a North Korean and her interpreter in China.
Date: 2002-10-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: China, EU relations, North Korea, human rights, right to justice

C 192 E/84

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

difference in distribution and other costs mentioned above and are not a result from trade practices
infringing Community competition policy, no breach of EC Treaty rules occurs.

(2003/C 192 E/083)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2890/02

by Hanja Maij-Weggen (PPE-DE) to the Commission

Subject: Arrest of a North Korean and her interpreter in China

(14 October 2002)

Will the Commission seek clarification from the Chinese authorities concerning the fate of the 32-year-old
North Korean Yu Kum-shil, who was arrested in the border town of Erenhot on 31 August while
attempting to travel to Mongolia to visit her husband?

Can the Commission also have inquiries made of the Chinese authorities as to what has happened to her
husband, the South Korean Mr Yong-chol, and the interpreter who was accompanying her, Mr Shin Yong-
in?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 2002)

The Commission thanks the Honourable Member for the information concerning the arrest of the North
Korean Yu Kum-shil and her interpreter on 31 August 2002 in the border town of Erenhot. The
Commission will investigate this particular case further.

The Union has, in the past, followed with particular attention the situation of North Korean refugees in
China and has raised the issue on every possible occasion both with the DPRK and China. The treatment
of North Korean refugees will be addressed during the next session of the EU-China bilateral Human Rights
dialogue on 13/14 November 2002 in Beijing.

(2003/C 192 E/084)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2930/02

by Graham Watson (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 October 2002)

Subject: Racing pigeon medicines

Does the Commission see any reason why Article 67 of the Review 2001 process (Reform of the EC
Pharmaceutical Legislation) would require medicines for racing pigeons to be available on prescription
only?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(11 November 2002)

Article 4(2) of Directive 2001/82/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the
Community code relating to veterinary medicinal products (1) gives the Member States the possibility to
permit exemptions in respect of veterinary medicinal products intended solely for certain categories of
species including homing pigeons. This national provision will exempt these products from marketing
authorisation requirements. However, such products can not contain substances the use of which require
veterinary control and adequate measures have to be applied by those Member States to prevent
unauthorised use of these products for other animals. Article 67 of Directive 2001/82/EC lays down the
minimum requirements regarding requirements for dispensing of veterinary medicinal products without