do-me/EUR-LEX huggingface dataset:
Commission Regulation (EC) No 942/2003 of 28 May 2003 fixing the maximum purchasing price for butter for the 73rd invitation to tender carried out under the standing invitation to tender governed by Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999
Date: 2003-05-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: award of contract, butter, maximum price, purchase price

L 133/64

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

29.5.2003

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 942/2003

of 28 May 2003

fixing the maximum purchasing price for butter for the 73rd invitation to tender carried out under
the standing invitation to tender governed by Regulation (EC) No 2771/1999

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European
Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/1999 of 17
May 1999 on the common organisation of the market in milk
and milk products (1), as last amended by Commission Regula-
tion (EC) No 509/2002 (2), and in particular Article 10 thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2771/
1999 of 16 December 1999 laying down detailed rules
for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1255/
1999 as regards intervention on the market in butter
and cream (3), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No
359/2003 (4), provides that, in the light of the tenders
received for each invitation to tender, a maximum
buying-in price is to be fixed in relation to the interven-
tion price applicable and that it may also be decided not
to proceed with the invitation to tender.

(2)

(3)

As a result of
buying-in price should be fixed as set out below.

the tenders received,

the maximum

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
accordance with the opinion of
the Management
Committee for Milk and Milk Products,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the 73rd invitation to tender issued under Regulation (EC)
No 2771/1999, for which tenders had to be submitted not later
than 27 May 2003, the maximum buying-in price is fixed at
295,38 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 29 May 2003.

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

Done at Brussels, 28 May 2003.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 48.
(2) OJ L 79, 22.3.2002, p. 15.
(3) OJ L 333, 24.12.1999, p. 11.
(4) OJ L 53, 28.2.2003, p. 17.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1803/03 by Dorette Corbey (PSE)and Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission. Large-scale hunting of migratory birds in Malta.
Date: 2003-05-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Malta, accession to the European Union, application of EU law, bird, hunting regulations, protected species, protection of animal life

C 33 E/172

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

6.2.2004

The Commission is not aware of any new evidence on risks arising from cosmic radiation which would
justify an adaptation of the radiation protection basic safety standards Directive at this stage.

(2004/C 33 E/173)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1803/03

by Dorette Corbey (PSE)
and Margrietus van den Berg (PSE) to the Commission

(28 May 2003)

Subject: Large-scale hunting of migratory birds in Malta

We recently received a report that in Malta the spring migration of birds culminated in large-scale hunting
of protected migratory species, even in protected areas. In its answer to Written Question E-3036/02 (1),
the Commission stated that when it joins the Union Malta will be required to transpose and comply with
all the provisions of the bird protection directive. The Commission also made clear that the situation in
countries joining the Union with regard to compliance with and transposition of the bird protection and
habitats directive will be monitored closely.

Can the Commission confirm that large-scale hunting of protected bird species during the spring

1.
migration did indeed take place?

Does the Commission share our view that such hunting runs counter to the obligations laid down in

2.
the bird protection directive?

Can the Commission state what if any measures it intends to take to draw Malta’s attention to those

3.
obligations?

Does the Commission share our view that under the bird protection directive a blanket ban on the

4.
spring hunting of birds, the trapping of birds and hunting at sea is justified?

(1) OJ C 222 E, 18.9.2003, p. 40.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2003)

The Commission does not have confirmation of the claims of large-scale hunting made by the Honourable
Members and therefore is unable to comment as to whether these claims run counter to the obligations of
the Birds Directive, Council Directive 79/409/EEC of 2 April 1979 on the conservation of wild birds (1).

The obligations of the Birds Directive have been underlined by the Commission in its contacts with Malta
on numerous occasions and the Commission will continue to monitor Malta’s compliance with the
commitments it has given in the run-up to accession. The Commission would also refer to its previous
response to Written Question E-3036/02 by Mrs Corbey.

Under the current jurisdiction, the Birds Directive would not demand an automatic blanket ban of the
activities.

(1) OJ L 103, 25.4.1979.
Euro exchange rates
Date: 2003-05-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: euro, exchange rate

28.5.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 126/3

COMMISSION

Euro exchange rates (1)

27 May 2003

(2003/C 126/02)

1 euro =

USD

JPY

DKK

GBP

SEK

CHF

ISK

NOK

BGN

CYP

CZK

EEK

HUF

LTL

Currency

US dollar

Japanese yen

Danish krone

Pound sterling

Swedish krona

Swiss franc

Iceland króna

Norwegian krone

Bulgarian lev

Cyprus pound

Czech koruna

Estonian kroon

Hungarian forint

Lithuanian litas

Exchange
rate

1,1901

138,93

7,4243

0,7235

9,193

1,5279

85,27

7,86

1,9461

LVL

MTL

PLN

ROL

SIT

SKK

TRL

AUD

CAD

Currency

Latvian lats

Maltese lira

Polish zloty

Romanian leu

Slovenian tolar

Slovak koruna

Turkish lira

Australian dollar

Canadian dollar

0,58675

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

31,412

NZD

New Zealand dollar

15,6466

SGD

Singapore dollar

Exchange
rate

0,6614

0,4316

4,3751

37 839

233,305

41,125

1 730 000

1,8041

1,6366

9,2812

2,0333

2,048

245,82

KRW

South Korean won

1 426,33

3,4523

ZAR

South African rand

9,5075

___________
(1) Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1772/03 by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Council. Thessaloniki June Council meeting.
Date: 2003-05-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU migration policy, European Council, external border of the EU, integration of migrants, paramilitary force, summit meeting

C 51 E/140

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

26.2.2004

Consequently, the ratification of this Protocol by EU Member States alone in line with Member States
undertakings as noted by both the Council (December 2002) and the European Council (March 2003)
would already allow for this instrument to take effect.

This new supplementary fund will help to ensure the full and expeditious payment of victims of future oil
spills on a global scale.

(2004/C 51 E/153)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1772/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Council

(28 May 2003)

Subject: Thessaloniki June Council meeting

Will the Council please give its view of the agenda of the June Council meeting in Thessaloniki? Will the
meeting discuss the question of EU border police, policing resources for the new EU external borders post-
enlargement, coordination of integration issues in relation to migrants, and the issue of coordination of
managed economic migration?

Reply

(2 October 2003)

The Council would refer the Honourable Member to the debate which took place at the plenary part-
session in Strasbourg on Wednesday 4 June 2003, during which the Council Presidency set out the agenda
for the European Council meeting in Thessaloniki on 20 and 21 June 2003.

It would also refer the Honourable Member to the conclusions of the Seville European Council, and in
particular Annex II, detailing the Council’s role in preparing for the European Council (point A.2(a)).

(2004/C 51 E/154)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1774/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Council

(28 May 2003)

Subject: Repatriation of the Structural Funds

How does the Council view the issue of repatriation of Structural Funds, i.e. Member States deciding to
some degree on their own regional allocation of the Structural Funds?

Reply

(7 October 2003)

The Council would draw the Honourable Member’s attention to the fact that, pursuant to Council
Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1) of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural
Funds, the administration of those funds is the shared responsibility of the European Commission and the
Member States’ governments working in close cooperation.

Accordingly, the Commission negotiates and approves development programmes proposed by the Member
States and allocates the appropriations. These programmes are the result of the joint efforts of the national,
regional and local authorities, the economic and social partners and other competent bodies.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-1789/03 by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission. Fuel poverty.
Date: 2003-05-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: consumer protection, energy supply, payment, poverty, prices policy, public service

26.2.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51 E/141

The Member States and their regions must then administer the programmes and implement them by
selecting projects, which they monitor and evaluate. For its part, the Commission participates in the
follow-up of programmes and contributes to the work of the monitoring committees, it determines the
commitment appropriations, makes payments to reimburse expenditure actually incurred and certified and
verifies the control systems in place.

Given the legal framework in force therefore, the Member States themselves may not decide on their own
regional allocation of the structural funds.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2004/C 51 E/155)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1789/03

by Claude Moraes (PSE) to the Commission

(28 May 2003)

Subject:

‘Fuel poverty’

‘Fuel poverty’ is the inability of citizens to afford adequate heating and light because of energy pricing
policies and low incomes.

Does the Commission have a view, or has it undertaken any research on the issue of ‘fuel poverty’ in EU
countries?

Is the Commission aware that multinational companies like Electricité de France have different pricing
policies, and different policies on disconnection following non-payment of electricity bills in the cities of
London and Paris, for example?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(2 July 2003)

For the Commission the question of fuel poverty enters into the bigger debate of public service aspects
under energy policy. The Commission in its proposals amending the Electricity and Gas Directives (1) has
substantially strenghtened the public service aspects of the existing Directives to ensure that vulnerable
customers will be sufficiently protected in a market that will be completely open to competition. Thus, the
Electricity Directive obliges Member States to ensure that all consumers have the right to be supplied with
electricity. In both the Electricity and Gas Directives a provision is contained obliging Member States to
protect final customers and to ensure in particular that there are adequate safeguards to protect vulnerable
customers, including measures to help them avoid disconnection. It is up to Member States to implement
this provision in a way that suits their particular situation best.

As already mentioned, the policies concerning the non-payment of electricity bills are relevant of the
national authorities. Each Member State implements its own rules to protect the vulnerable consumers in
case of disconnection following non-payment of electricity bills. Multinational companies have to comply
with each national
legislation; these legislations are each different, which requires for a multinational
company different policies on pricing and disconnection following non-payment of bills.

(1) OJ C 240 E, 28.8.2001.
Commission Opinion on the draft Council Decision on a revision of the Statutes of the Economic Policy Committee
Date: 2003-05-28
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Central Bank, European Commission, committee (EU), legal status, member country













EUR-Lex - 52003SC0641 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



52003SC0641

Commission opinion on the draft Council Decision on a revision of the Statutes of the Economic Policy Committee  /* SEC/2003/0641 final */  









COMMISSION OPINION on the draft Council Decision on a revision of the Statutes of the Economic Policy CommitteeIn accordance with Article 209 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, the Council shall, after receiving an Opinion of the Commission, determine the rules governing the Committees. The Council requested the Opinion of the Commission, in a letter dated 20 May 2003, on a revision of the Composition and the Statutes of the Economic Policy Committee , which are currently set in the Council Decision of 29 September 2000 (2000/604/EC).The proposed revision aims at accommodating the forthcoming enlargement of the European Union to 25 Member States. In order to continue working efficiently, the draft Council Decision proposes that Member States, the Commission and the European Central Bank shall each appoint two instead of four members to the Committee.The Commission considers that the proposed revision of the Statutes is appropriate. The revision has no impact on the role of the Commission in the Committee.