Written questions by Members of the European Parliament and their answers given by a European Union institution
Date: 2013-07-25
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, written question








CE2013211EN.01000101.xml










25.7.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 211/1





http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB
WRITTEN QUESTIONS WITH ANSWER

Written questions by Members of the European Parliament and their answers given by a European Union institution
(2013/C 211 E/01)
Contents

E-000325/12 by Francisco Sosa Wagner to the Commission

Subject: Damage caused by open-cast mining
Versión española
English version

E-000705/12 by Liam Aylward to the Commission

Subject: Data protection for EU citizens and public health research
English version

P-000709/12 by Dominique Vlasto to the Commission

Subject: Classification of volunteer firefighters' activities as an occupation
Version française
English version

E-000729/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Financing of the Natura 2000 network
Versión española
English version

E-000731/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Financial assessment of the Natura 2000 network
Versión española
English version

E-000755/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Turkish retaliation against France
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-000925/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: EU‐Turkey bilateral relations
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-000761/12 by Niki Tzavela to the Commission

Subject: Measures to reduce suicides
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-000770/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: Speculation in the cereals sector
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-000772/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: Regulation governing the electronic identification of ovine animals
Versiunea în limba română
English version

P-000785/12 by Elisabeth Köstinger to the Commission

Subject: Blocking of access by Internet providers
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-000786/12 by Roberta Angelilli, Gianni Pittella, Gabriele Albertini, Sonia Alfano, Alfredo Antoniozzi, Raffaele Baldassarre, Paolo Bartolozzi, Mario Borghezio, Frieda Brepoels, Antonio Cancian, Lara Comi, Leonidas Donskis, Kinga Gál, Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg, Mikael Gustafsson, Salvatore Iacolino, Philippe Juvin, Filip Kaczmarek, Othmar Karas, Tunne Kelam, Seán Kelly, Giovanni La Via, Vytautas Landsbergis, Eva Lichtenberger, Monica Luisa Macovei, Thomas Mann, Erminia Mazzoni, Clemente Mastella, Claudio Morganti, Tiziano Motti, Cristiana Muscardini, Kristiina Ojuland, Mariya Nedelcheva, Alfredo Pallone, Aldo Patriciello, Mario Pirillo, Niccolò Rinaldi, Raül Romeva i Rueda, Licia Ronzulli, Anna Rosbach, Oreste Rossi, Matteo Salvini, Amalia Sartori, Giancarlo Scottà, Marco Scurria, Joanna Senyszyn, Debora Serracchiani, Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris, Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska, Peter Šťastný, Gianluca Susta, Rui Tavares, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Giommaria Uggias, Manfred Weber, Andrea Zanoni, Keith Taylor, Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa and László Tőkés to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Tibet: violations of the Tibetan people's human rights and freedom of expression by the Chinese authorities
българска версия
Versión española
Dansk udgave
Deutsche Fassung
Eestikeelne versioon
Version française
Versione italiana
Tekstas lietuvių kalba
Magyar változat
Nederlandse versie
Wersja polska
Versão portuguesa
Versiunea în limba română
Slovenské znenie
Svensk version
English version

P-000810/12 by Liam Aylward to the Commission

Subject: Future of adult and community education under the ‘Erasmus for All’ programme
English version

E-000815/12 by Robert Dušek to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of Council Directive 1999/74/EC and sanctions for non-compliance
České znění
English version

E-000816/12 by Renate Sommer to the Commission

Subject: Defamation of Christian minorities in Turkish school textbooks
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-000817/12 by Liam Aylward to the Commission

Subject: Airline consumers and ETS
English version

E-000819/12 by Lambert van Nistelrooij, Nuno Teixeira and Wim van de Camp to the Commission

Subject: Status of Aruba in the process of transformation to an outermost region and financial support from Pilot Project 13 03 32
Nederlandse versie
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-000820/12 by Jan Březina to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Response by the Vice-President/High Representative to the recent developments in Burma
České znění
English version

E-000841/12 by Daniel Caspary to the Commission

Subject: Labelling of ampere hours (Ah) on batteries
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-001504/12 by Carl Schlyter to the Commission

Subject: Capacity labelling of all portable batteries
Svensk version
English version

E-000852/12 by Liam Aylward and Brian Crowley to the Commission

Subject: Flexibility for young farmers under the CAP 2014-2020
English version

E-000870/12 by Saïd El Khadraoui to the Commission

Subject: Charging stations for electric vehicles
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-000929/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: State aid scheme for milk quality
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-000941/12 by Frieda Brepoels to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — EU report on East Jerusalem 2011, legislation against the settlement policy and black lists for settlers
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001493/12 by Marita Ulvskog to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Prevention of EU financial transactions in support of Israeli settlement activity
Svensk version
English version

E-000958/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: European Emissions Trading System
Slovenské znenie
English version

P-000961/12 by Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz to the Commission

Subject: The ongoing excessive deficit procedure against Hungary and its possible future impact
Magyar változat
English version

E-000966/12 by Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa to the Commission

Subject: Proposed reorganisation of the distribution of funds in the new budget perspective for 2014-2020
Wersja polska
English version

E-001002/12 by Jens Rohde to the Commission

Subject: Youth unemployment in the EU
Dansk udgave
English version

E-001007/12 by Giovanni La Via to the Commission

Subject: Interreg III B Archimed programme: non-payment of final beneficiaries
Versione italiana
English version

E-001013/12 by Liam Aylward, Pat the Cope Gallagher and Brian Crowley to the Commission

Subject: Proposed revision of the European Good Distribution Practice Guidelines
English version

E-001026/12 by Georgios Koumoutsakos to the Commission

Subject: Mutation of the bird flu virus and pre-emptive action
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001071/12 by Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 and orphan diseases
English version

E-001087/12 by Charalampos Angourakis to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Torture of detainees in Libya
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001395/12 by João Ferreira and Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Torture and killing of prisoners in Libya
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-001094/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Palm oil
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-001884/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Biofuel emissions
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-001105/12 by Auke Zijlstra to the Commission

Subject: Restriction of right to freedom of expression and information gathering
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001110/12 by Niki Tzavela to the Commission

Subject: Commissioner for Greece
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001117/12 by Kartika Tamara Liotard to the Commission

Subject: ESBL bacteria in Dutch chicken meat
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001221/12 by Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: Presence of dangerous ESBL enzyme in 99 % of chicken meat
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001133/12 by Bart Staes to the Commission

Subject: European funds for the Belgian Railways
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001147/12 by Petru Constantin Luhan to the Commission

Subject: Regional statistics
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-001208/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Campaigns to promote wine in third countries
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001230/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Recognition of years of service of the school guards under PD 164/2004 for insurance and pensions
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001243/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: Chloramfenicol contamination of pig feed
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-001274/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: New forms of assistance for farmers in 2012
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-001275/12 by Carlo Fidanza to the Commission

Subject: Collapse of Spanair
Versione italiana
English version

E-001287/12 by Antolín Sánchez Presedo, Iratxe García Pérez, Alejandro Cercas, Carmen Romero López, Luis Yáñez-Barnuevo García and Inés Ayala Sender to the Commission

Subject: Interoperability of electronic road toll systems in Europe
Versión española
English version

E-001293/12 by Piotr Borys to the Commission

Subject: Financing of culture in the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020
Wersja polska
English version

E-001297/12 by Pavel Poc, Karin Kadenbach, Kriton Arsenis, Janusz Wojciechowski, Kartika Tamara Liotard, Nikolaos Chountis, Giommaria Uggias, Bas Eickhout, Sabine Wils, Csaba Sándor Tabajdi, Marisa Matias, Andrea Zanoni, Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris and Alojz Peterle to the Commission

Subject: Neonicotinoid insecticides and honey bee health
České znění
Deutsche Fassung
Ελληνική έκδοση
Versione italiana
Magyar változat
Nederlandse versie
Wersja polska
Versão portuguesa
Slovenska različica
English version

E-001332/12 by David Campbell Bannerman to the Commission

Subject: NGO activities — criteria
English version

E-001336/12 by Monica Luisa Macovei to the Commission

Subject: Evaluation of the efficiency of judicial systems in the Member States
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-001340/12 by Morten Messerschmidt to the Commission

Subject: Irregularities in EU projects in Greece
Dansk udgave
English version

E-001401/12 by Erminia Mazzoni, Alfredo Antoniozzi, Clemente Mastella, Cristiana Muscardini, Lara Comi, Carlo Fidanza, Raffaele Baldassarre, Crescenzio Rivellini, Marco Scurria, Elisabetta Gardini, Roberta Angelilli and Aldo Patriciello to the Commission

Subject: Use of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) in Campania
Versione italiana
English version

E-001410/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: The sites of final repositories for highly radioactive waste
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-001417/12 by Kyriakos Mavronikolas to the Commission

Subject: Allowances for former Commissioners
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001428/12 by Michael Cashman, Ulrike Lunacek, Sophia in 't Veld, Raül Romeva i Rueda, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Kinga Göncz, Zita Gurmai, Csaba Sándor Tabajdi and Sarah Ludford to the Commission

Subject: New Hungarian law on religion and compatibility with EU equal treatment legislation
Versión española
Deutsche Fassung
Magyar változat
Nederlandse versie
Suomenkielinen versio
English version

P-001438/12 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Metal artificial hips manufactured by Depuy — revision of the Medical Devices Directive
Dansk udgave
English version

E-001451/12 by Kinga Göncz to the Commission

Subject: Data collection on the Roma population of the EU
Magyar változat
English version

P-001502/12 by Francesco De Angelis to the Commission

Subject: Natural disaster in central Italy
Versione italiana
English version

E-001507/12 by Auke Zijlstra to the Commission

Subject: Greeks hire EU passports out to illegal immigrants
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001520/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Funding from the Marco Polo II programme
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-001529/12 by Alajos Mészáros to the Commission

Subject: Provision of financial assistance for decommissioning the Jaslovské Bohunice nuclear power plant
Magyar változat
English version

E-001581/12 by Krišjānis Kariņš to the Commission

Subject: Divergent quality of goods sold under the same label in various Member States
Latviešu valodas versija
English version

E-001582/12 by Vital Moreira to the Commission

Subject: Implementing the Portuguese Language Orthographic Agreement in the Official Journal of the European Union

Versão portuguesa
English version

E-001583/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: Food-based fuel production
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-001587/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: Violation of data protection law
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-001619/12 by Alajos Mészáros to the Commission

Subject: Limiting the freedom of employment
Magyar változat
English version

E-001627/12 by Ana Miranda, Frieda Brepoels and Jill Evans to the Commission

Subject: Funding for Sahrawi refugee camps
Versión española
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001628/12 by Ana Miranda, Frieda Brepoels and Jill Evans to the Commission

Subject: Funding for Sahrawi refugee camps
Versión española
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-001736/12 by Åsa Westlund to the Commission

Subject: Humanitarian situation in Saharawi refugee camps
Svensk version
English version

E-001660/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: Market protection and job creation policies in the EU II
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-001679/12 by Marta Andreasen to the Commission

Subject: Cash shortfall for payments at the end of 2011 and effects on the 2012 budget
English version

P-002587/12 by Nicole Sinclaire to the Commission

Subject: Commission budget shortfall
English version

E-001681/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: China: airlines outside the ETS — violation of Directive 2008/101/EC
Versione italiana
English version

E-001699/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: ‘Social tailoring’ project
Versione italiana
English version

E-001712/12 by Elisabetta Gardini to the Commission

Subject: Funds for environmental restoration
Versione italiana
English version

E-001721/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Centralised Temporary Storage (ATC) of nuclear waste in Villar de Cañas (Cuenca)
Versión española
English version

E-001738/12 by Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Aid to the Middle East and North Africa
English version

E-001745/12 by Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă to the Commission

Subject: Cross-border partnerships — violence against women and children
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-001759/12 by Lucas Hartong to the Commission

Subject: House purchase by Commissioner De Gucht
Nederlandse versie
English version

P-001762/12 by Giovanni La Via to the Commission

Subject: Values to be adhered to for sugar-acid ratios of ‘Red orange of Sicily PGI’
Versione italiana
English version

E-001772/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Greek fence on the border with Turkey
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-001794/12 by Spyros Danellis to the Commission

Subject: Reliability of Corporate Social Responsibility data
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001835/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Undermining European solidarity 
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-002139/12 by Marc Tarabella to the Commission

Subject: The Schmallenberg virus
Version française
English version

E-001855/12 by Diane Dodds to the Commission

Subject: Schmallenberg virus
English version

P-001867/12 by Pat the Cope Gallagher to the Commission

Subject: Hydraulic fracturing
English version

E-001872/12 by Pat the Cope Gallagher to the Commission

Subject: Hydraulic Fracturing
English version

E-001887/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Smuggling on the EU's eastern borders
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-001905/12 by Cătălin Sorin Ivan to the Commission

Subject: Discriminatory attitudes — PVV
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-001931/12 by Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă to the Commission

Subject: Volatile agricultural prices
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-001932/12 by Michael Cashman, Ulrike Lunacek, Sophia in 't Veld, Raül Romeva i Rueda and Sirpa Pietikäinen to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Discriminatory treatment of EU delegation staff in same-sex relationships
Versión española
Deutsche Fassung
Nederlandse versie
Suomenkielinen versio
English version

E-002000/12 by Michael Cashman, Ulrike Lunacek, Sophia in 't Veld, Raül Romeva i Rueda and Sirpa Pietikäinen to the Commission

Subject: Discriminatory treatment of EU delegation staff in same-sex relationships
Versión española
Deutsche Fassung
Nederlandse versie
Suomenkielinen versio
English version

P-001941/12 by Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska to the Commission

Subject: Discrimination against Poles in the Netherlands
Wersja polska
English version

E-001943/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Projects funded in Andalusia by the EIB
Versión española
English version

E-001944/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Pesticides
Versión española
English version

E-001945/12 by Markus Pieper to the Commission

Subject: Labour market participation among women — policies in Germany
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-001946/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: EU sport funding 2012-2013
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-001947/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Broadening of the tax base in Greece
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001948/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Motion to impose a special consumption tax on Greek wines
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001949/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: New Greek memorandum — provisions for cuts to supplementary pensions 
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-001950/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Greek memorandum and critical network infrastructures
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-000325/12
a la Comisión
Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)
(19 de enero de 2012)

Asunto: Daños causados por explotaciones mineras a cielo abierto
Como consecuencia de una denuncia presentada por la Comisión Europea, el Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea ha condenado al Reino de España por incumplir la normativa de protección ambiental y autorizar explotaciones mineras a cielo abierto, muy agresivas, en espacios catalogados como lugar de interés comunitario y zona de especial protección para las aves (sentencia del pasado 24 de noviembre de 2011).
Sin embargo, las primeras declaraciones de las autoridades competentes y de la empresa revelan los escasos efectos de la sentencia, pues pretenden tramitar un nuevo plan de explotaciones a cielo abierto 2010-2020, con una evaluación estratégica, a pesar de que los daños ya han sido causados y el plan contempla nuevas cortas adyacentes a las que han sido objeto de la sentencia.
1. ¿Qué medidas de vigilancia piensa adoptar la Comisión para garantizar el cumplimiento de la sentencia?
2. ¿Qué plazo va a otorgar la Comisión a la autoridad competente para que ordene la restauración ambiental del entorno dañado e imponga a la empresa la adopción de las medidas compensatorias que deberían haberse ejecutado desde 2004?
3. ¿Piensa la Comisión iniciar un procedimiento para determinar, además de la restauración, la cuantía de la indemnización de los daños y perjuicios que deberían satisfacer la Administración infractora y la empresa a los vecinos del entorno?
Respuesta del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión
(24 de febrero de 2012)
La Comisión ha pedido a las autoridades españolas que la informen de las medidas adoptadas y aplicadas, o que tengan aún que adoptar y aplicar, a fin de dar cumplimiento al tenor de la sentencia (1).
La Comisión también ha preguntado a las autoridades sobre el calendario, los hitos y el coste presupuestario del plan de acción proyectado para ejecutar la sentencia del Tribunal.
La Comisión supervisará la plena ejecución de la sentencia del Tribunal y no dudará en tomar las medidas necesarias en caso de que se presenten pruebas relacionadas con el incumplimiento de la sentencia mencionada.
La Comisión recuerda que la duración orientativa de los procedimientos dirigidos a garantizar la ejecución de una sentencia anterior del Tribunal (incluida, cuando sea necesaria, una recuperación del medio ambiente proporcional a la pérdida o daños sufridos) debe oscilar, por término medio, entre 12 y 24 meses (2). Esto no excluye que circunstancias específicas (3) puedan justificar, en casos excepcionales, una duración de procedimiento más larga. Tampoco va en contra del deseo de la Comisión de que se proceda al pleno cumplimiento por parte de los Estados miembros lo más rápidamente posible.
La Comisión hace hincapié en que cada Estado miembro está obligado a reparar los daños causados a los particulares por las infracciones del Derecho comunitario que le sean imputables.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000325/12
to the Commission
Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)
(19 January 2012)

Subject: Damage caused by open-cast mining
As a consequence of a report presented by the European Commission, the European Court of Justice has ruled against the Kingdom of Spain for not complying with environmental protection legislation and authorising open-cast mining, on a very large scale, in areas designated as sites of Community importance and special protection areas for birds (ruling of 24 November 2011).
Nonetheless, the first statements from the relevant authorities and the company show the weak effects of the ruling, since they have a new open-cast mining plan 2010-2020, with a strategic assessment, even though the damage has already been done and the plan contemplates new cuts adjacent to those that were the subject of the ruling.
1. What monitoring measures is the Commission considering adopting, in order to guarantee compliance with the ruling?
2. What deadline will the Commission set for the relevant authority to order the environmental restoration of the damaged area and force the company to adopt the compensatory measures that it should have carried out since 2004?
3. Is the Commission considering launching a procedure to determine, on top of the restoration, the amount of compensation for the damage and harm caused to be paid to local residents by the administration and company at fault?
Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(24 February 2012)
The Commission has asked the Spanish authorities to be informed of the measures taken or still to be taken and implemented in order to comply with the terms of the judgment (4).
The Commission has also enquired the authorities about the calendar, milestones and budgetary cost of the envisaged action plan to execute the Court ruling. 
The Commission will monitor the full implementation of the Court judgment and will not hesitate to take the necessary steps should evidence be produced in relation to lack of compliance with the referred ruling. 
The Commission recalls that the indicative duration in proceedings to ensure implementation (including, where necessary, proportionate environmental restoration with the loss or damage sustained) of an earlier judgment of the Court should be on average between 12 and 24 months (5). This does not exclude the possibility that a procedure might, exceptionally, take longer when warranted by specific circumstances (6). Nor does it stand in the way of the Commission's desire to seek the swiftest possible compliance by Member States.
The Commission underlines that the Member States are obliged to make good loss and damage caused to individuals by breaches of Community law for which they can be held responsible. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000705/12
to the Commission
Liam Aylward (ALDE)
(30 January 2012)

Subject: Data protection for EU citizens and public health research
‘Whereas Member States must also be authorised, when justified by grounds of important public interest, to derogate from the prohibition on processing sensitive categories of data where important reasons of public interest so justify in areas such as public health and social protection — especially in order to ensure the quality and cost-effectiveness of the procedures used for settling claims for benefits and services in the health insurance system — scientific research and government statistics; whereas it is incumbent on them, however, to provide specific and suitable safeguards so as to protect the fundamental rights and the privacy of individuals;’
1. Does the Commission have any measures in place to protect the rights of citizens concerning data sharing whilst also furthering the cause of European public health research?
2. Are there any further plans to provide Member States with funding concerning essential public health research programmes?
3. Is the Commission aware that a number of cancer organisations across Europe are concerned that increased harmonisation of data protection will prove counterproductive in the area of public health research?
4. Has the Commission considered the implications that further data protection measures will have regarding the implementation of research programmes whilst also complying with complex data protection procedures?
5. Does the Commission have any plans to propose further research programmes in the area of cancer research?
Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission
(2 March 2012)
The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU recognises protection of personal data as a fundamental right of the citizen. The measures to protect the rights of the citizen regarding data protection are established by the Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC (7). The Commission's proposal for Data Protection Reform, published on 25 January 2012 (8), clarifies the principles established in the current Directive 95/46/EC and underlines that privacy rights will be adequately protected in the future in view of rapid technological developments. 
Member States have implemented the current Data Protection Directive 95/46/EC differently, resulting in divergences in enforcement which create complexity, legal uncertainty and administrative costs. The proposed regulation will decrease the fragmentation by establishing a single set of rules valid across the EU. The proposed regulation includes specific provisions for processing personal data for scientific research which will apply also in public health research. Increasing legal certainty and clarity on applicable rules are expected to have positive implications on public health and research.
Public health research is an integral part of the Commission's ongoing 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7, 2007-2013). Likewise, cancer research has been a constant research priority throughout FP7. The Commission's proposal for Horizon 2020, presented on 30 November 2011, foresees continued support for both public health and cancer research.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-000709/12
à la Commission
Dominique Vlasto (PPE)
(30 janvier 2012)

Objet: Assimilation de l'activité de sapeur-pompier volontaire à un travailleur
Parmi les 2,5 millions de pompiers en Europe, 2 millions sont des volontaires, ayant fait le choix, souvent en parallèle de leur métier, de se mettre à la disposition des forces de sécurité civile.
Les arrêts de la CJUE et le projet de révision de la directive de 2003 sur le temps de travail font toutefois planer une menace sur la possibilité pour les sapeurs-pompiers volontaires de concilier activité professionnelle et volontariat aux côtés des soldats du feu de métier.
En assimilant les pompiers volontaires à des travailleurs, la Commission reconnaît le rôle éminent qu'ils jouent dans la sécurité des Européens. Mais imposer des conditions excessives, notamment en termes de mobilisation des volontaires, représente un obstacle majeur à la bonne organisation des activités de secours et à la garantie de disposer d'effectifs suffisants pour intervenir en urgence.
Selon le programme de travail de la Commission, le projet de directive sur le temps de travail sera à nouveau discuté au sein du Parlement européen au cours du premier semestre 2012.
La Commission conditionne depuis plusieurs années l'assimilation des sapeurs-pompiers volontaires à des travailleurs à des études d'impact et à des consultations avec les partenaires sociaux. L'ensemble des sapeurs-pompiers professionnels et volontaires s'inquiète de ce qu'une assimilation marque la fin du volontariat et provoque une baisse significative et alarmante des effectifs des forces de protection civile et va à rebours des législations nationales en la matière.
1. À la lumière des études d'impact et des discussions menées par la Commission, cette dernière a-t-elle toujours l'intention d'intégrer dans sa proposition de directive une assimilation des sapeurs-pompiers volontaires à des travailleurs?
2. La Commission envisage-t-elle de proposer un régime spécifique ou dérogatoire au bénéfice des pompiers volontaires, afin de tenir compte des particularités évidentes de cette activité et du besoin du corps des sapeurs-pompiers de pouvoir compter sur des volontaires?
Réponse donnée par M. Andor au nom de la Commission
(21 février 2012)
La Commission est pleinement consciente de l'importance des pompiers volontaires, qui dans de nombreux États membres, et en particulier dans les zones rurales, assurent aux citoyens des services d'urgence étendus.
Comme il ressort de sa communication de 2010 (9) relative à la révision de la directive sur le temps de travail (10), la Commission estime qu'il faut accorder une attention particulière à la situation des pompiers volontaires. Les exclure du champ d'application de la réglementation européenne sur le temps de travail serait, selon elle, inapproprié au regard, notamment, de l'article 31 de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l'Union européenne. Mais d'autres solutions, qui tiennent dûment compte de la spécificité de cette activité tout en assurant la sécurité et la protection de la santé des volontaires, sont envisageables.
La Commission tient à rappeler que le 15 novembre 2011, les principaux partenaires sociaux intersectoriels au niveau européen ont décidé d'engager des négociations sur cette révision, conformément à l'article 154, paragraphe 4, du traité sur le fonctionnement de l'Union européenne. Leur objectif est de parvenir à un accord qui pourrait être mis en œuvre par une décision du Conseil en application de l'article 155 du traité. Pour ne pas s'ingérer dans les négociations des partenaires sociaux, la Commission s'abstiendra de présenter une proposition de modification de la réglementation pendant la durée prévue par le traité pour lesdites négociations.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-000709/12
to the Commission
Dominique Vlasto (PPE)
(30 January 2012)

Subject: Classification of volunteer firefighters' activities as an occupation
Of the 2.5 million firemen in Europe, 2 million are voluntary, having chosen to make themselves available to the public safety forces, often in parallel to their careers.
However, CJEU judgments and the draft revision of the 2003 Working Time Directive threaten the ability of volunteer firefighters to reconcile their working lives with the voluntary work they do alongside professional firefighters.
By classifying voluntary firefighters’ activities as an occupation, the Commission is acknowledging the important role they play in Europeans’ safety. However, imposing excessive conditions, particularly relating to the mobilisation of volunteers, represents a major obstacle to the sound organisation of rescue activities and to ensuring that there are enough firefighters to respond to emergencies.
According to the Commission’s timetable, the draft of the Working Time Directive will be debated again in the European Parliament during the first half of 2012.
For several years, the Commission has made the classification of voluntary firefighters’ activities as an occupation dependent on the outcome of impact assessments and consultations with social partners. Professional and voluntary firefighters are all concerned that such classification will spell an end to volunteering and lead to a significant and alarming drop in numbers in civil protection forces; it also runs counter to national legislation on this issue.
1. In light of the impact assessments and debates undertaken by the Commission, does it still intend to include the classification of voluntary firefighters’ activities as an occupation in its proposal for a directive?
2. Does the Commission envisage proposing a specific or opt-out scheme for the benefit of voluntary firemen in order to take account of the clear specificities of this activity and of the need for the fire service to be able to count on its volunteers?
Answer given by Mr Andor  on behalf of the Commission
(21 February 2012)
The Commission is fully aware of the importance of volunteer firefighters in providing comprehensive emergency services to citizens in many Member States, particularly in rural areas. 
As it indicated in its 2010 communication (11) on the review of the Working Time Directive (12), the Commission sees a need to give particular consideration to the situation of volunteer firefighters. Excluding them from the scope of EU working-time rules would, in its view, be inappropriate, having regard in particular to Article 31 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. However, other solutions that both take the special characteristics of this activity suitably into account and ensure proper protection of volunteers' health and safety are possible.
The Commission would point out that the main cross-sectoral social partners at European level decided on 15 November 2011 to open negotiations on the review, as they are entitled to do under Article 154(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Their objective is to reach an agreement which could be implemented by means of a Council decision under Article 155 TFEU. Out of respect for the autonomy of the social partners' negotiations, the Commission will abstain from putting forward a proposal to amend the legislation during the period provided for under the Treaty for their negotiations. 
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-000729/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 de enero de 2012)

Asunto: Financiación de la Red Natura 2000
En virtud de la Directiva 1992/43/CEE, los Estados Miembros deben determinar los hábitats de especies que figuran en el Anexo II, a la vez que garantizar el mantenimiento o, en su caso, el restablecimiento, en un estado de conservación favorable, de los tipos de hábitats naturales y de los hábitats de las especies de que se trate en su área de distribución natural.
Teniendo en cuenta el artículo 192.4 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea —en su versión consolidada publicada en el Diario Oficial de la Unión Europea de 30 de marzo de 2010— que dice: «Sin perjuicio de determinadas medidas adoptadas por la Unión, los Estados miembros tendrán a su cargo la financiación y la ejecución de la política en materia de medio ambiente.»
Visto el artículo 8 de la Directiva Hábitats 1992/43, en particular los puntos 8.2 y 8.3,
A la luz de lo anterior,
¿Puede la Comisión indicar a quien corresponde hacerse cargo de la financiación necesaria para el mantenimiento de la Red Natura 2000, una vez que dicha financiación ha sido evaluada por la Comisión, habida cuenta del artículo 192.4 antes mencionado?
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-000731/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 de enero de 2012)

Asunto: Evaluación financiación Red Natura 2000
La Directiva Hábitats 1992/43/CEE, de conservación de los hábitats naturales y de la fauna y flora silvestres, crea una red ecológica europea de zonas especiales de conservación, denominada «Red Natura 2000». En virtud de ella, los Estados miembros deben determinar los hábitats de especies que figuran en el Anexo II, a la vez que garantizar el mantenimiento o, en su caso, el restablecimiento, en un estado de conservación favorable, de los tipos de hábitats naturales y de los hábitats de las especies de que se trate en su área de distribución natural.
Visto el artículo 8 de la Directiva Hábitats 1992/43/CEE, en particular los puntos 8.2 y 8.3, y en el supuesto que un Estado miembro no haya propuesto la evaluación de la financiación de un espacio concreto de la Red Natura 2000,






1.


¿Puede solicitarlo cualquier persona interesada?










2.


En caso afirmativo, ¿puede la Comisión indicar cuál es el procedimiento adecuado?










3.


¿Puede indicar la Comisión si la omisión por parte de un Estado Miembro de la financiación suficiente de un espacio de la Red Natura 2000, evaluada en los términos previstos por el artículo 8.3 de la Directiva Hábitats, puede suponer la apertura de un procedimiento de infracción por incumplimiento de la Directiva?




Respuesta conjunta del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión
(12 de marzo de 2012)
La responsabilidad de la financiación de la Red Natura 2000 recae fundamentalmente en los Estados miembros. No obstante, el artículo 8 de la Directiva 92/43/CEE (13) contempla efectivamente la cofinanciación por parte de la Unión Europea de determinadas medidas, una vez los lugares han sido designados zonas especiales de conservación. Sobre la base de las propuestas de la Comisión, se han ofrecido posibilidades de cofinanciación en el marco de cada uno de los fondos de la UE pertinentes. Por lo tanto, corresponde a los Estados miembros hacer uso de estos fondos para llevar a cabo las medidas de conservación en las zonas Natura 2000. Las condiciones de admisibilidad para beneficiarse de los diferentes fondos son las que establecen las normas específicas de cada fondo y, en el caso de los grandes fondos sectoriales, los Estados miembros definen sus programas y, dentro de ellos, el apoyo que se da a Natura 2000.
La nueva estrategia de financiación para la Red Natura 2000 se recoge en un reciente documento de trabajo de los servicios de la Comisión (14) sobre la financiación de Natura 2000. Con vistas al próximo marco de financiación plurianual, la Comisión está colaborando estrechamente con los Estados miembros para desarrollar marcos de acción prioritaria, tal como prevé el artículo 8 de la Directiva 92/43/CEE. Su objetivo es actuar como instrumentos de planificación para reforzar la integración de la financiación de Natura 2000 en la utilización de los instrumentos financieros pertinentes de la UE.
El acceso a los distintos fondos está determinado por las normas que rigen cada uno de ellos. Los principales fondos sectoriales son gestionados a través de las autoridades competentes de los Estados miembros. Desde septiembre de 2007 está abierta la posibilidad de presentar solicitudes en relación con el Reglamento LIFE+. El hecho de que un Estado miembro no haya aprovechado las posibilidades de utilización de la cofinanciación de la UE en relación con Natura 2000 no puede aducirse como motivo para incumplir los objetivos de adopción de las necesarias medidas de conservación para las zonas.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000729/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 January 2012)

Subject: Financing of the Natura 2000 network
Under Directive 1992/43/EEC, Member States should determine the habitats of the species listed in Annex II while ensuring that natural habitats and species habitats are maintained or, where necessary, restored to a favourable conservation status in their natural range.
Article 192(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union in its consolidated version as published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 30 March 2010 states:
‘Without prejudice to certain measures adopted by the Union, the Member States shall finance and implement the environment policy’.
Bearing in mind Article 8 of the Habitats Directive 1992/43/EEC, specifically paragraphs 2 and 3 and in the light of the above, can the Commission indicate who is responsible for ensuring the funding required to maintain the Natura 2000 network once that funding has been assessed by the Commission, taking into account Article 192(4) of the Treaty?
Question for written answer E-000731/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 January 2012)

Subject: Financial assessment of the Natura 2000 network
The Habitats Directive 1992/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, created a European ecological network of special conservation areas known as the ‘Natura 2000 network’. Under it, Member States are to determine the habitats of species listed in Annex II, while ensuring the maintenance or, where appropriate, the restoration, at a favourable conservation status, of natural habitat types and habitats of the species concerned in their natural range.
In view of Article 8 of the Habitats Directive 1992/43/EEC, in particular paragraphs 2 and 3, and in the event that a Member State has not proposed a financial assessment of a specific Natura 2000 network area, 






1.


Can anybody interested apply?










2.


If so, can the Commission indicate the correct procedure?










3.


Can the Commission say whether a Member State’s failure to ensure adequate funding for a Natura 2000 area as assessed in accordance with Article 8(3), could lead to an infringement procedure being opened for breach of the directive?




Joint answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(12 March 2012)
The main responsibility for financing Natura 2000 lies with the Member States. However, Article 8 of Directive 92/43/EEC (15) does provide for EU co-financing of certain measures once the sites have been designated as special areas of conservation. On the basis of Community proposals co‐financing opportunities have been provided under each of the relevant EU funds. It is for the Member States to fully avail themselves of these funds for delivering the conservation measures for the Natura 2000 sites. Eligibility for using different funds is governed by the specific rules of each fund and for the major sectoral funds, Member States define their programmes and within them how Natura 2000 is supported.
The new funding strategy for Natura 2000 is set out in a recent Commission staff working paper (16) on financing Natura 2000. For the next multiannual financial framework the Commission is working closely with the Member States on the development of prioritized action frameworks, foreseen under Article 8 of Directive 92/43/EEC. These are intended to act as planning tools to strengthen the integration of Natura 2000 financing into the use of relevant EU financial instruments.
Access to the relevant funds is determined by the rules governing each of the funds. The main sectoral funds are managed via competent authorities in the Member States. The LIFE+ Regulation has been open to applications since September 2007. A failure of a Member State to avail itself of the opportunities to use EU co-financing for Natura 2000 cannot be used as a basis for it not meeting the objectives of putting in place the necessary conservation measures for the sites.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-000755/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(1 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Αντίμετρα της Τουρκίας στη Γαλλία
Μετά την έγκριση από τη γαλλική γερουσία του νομοσχεδίου που ποινικοποιεί την αμφισβήτηση της γενοκτονίας των Αρμενίων στα πρότυπα της γενοκτονίας των Εβραίων, η Τουρκία, κατά δήλωση πολιτικών ηγετών της αναμένεται να θέσει αντίμετρα για «να τιμωρήσει τη Γαλλία».
Η τουρκική στάση προκαλεί την αντίδραση της αρμενικής διασποράς και όλων των υπεύθυνων κρατών που γνωρίζουν τα ιστορικά γεγονότα.
Επιπλέον, τα αντίμετρα πρόκειται να έχουν αρνητικά αποτελέσματα στα σύνολο της ευρωπαϊκής αγοράς με την οποία η Τουρκία ενώνεται τελωνειακά, δεσμευόμενη για την αποφυγή μέτρων εμπορικών διακρίσεων.
Παράλληλα, εξετάζεται η εξαίρεση των εταιρειών γαλλικών συμφερόντων από τα δημόσια έργα, σύμφωνα με την τουρκική εφημερίδα Zaman.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Υπάρχει σχεδιασμός για κοινή στάση της ΕΕ επί του θέματος;











Θεωρεί ότι πρέπει να αντιμετωπιστεί με διπλωματικά μέσα αυτός ο νέος γύρος οικονομικής καχυποψίας που ξεκινάει η Τουρκία;











Λαμβάνοντας υπόψη το μέγεθος των μέτρων, θεωρεί χρήσιμη στάση τη παρέμβαση του Παγκόσμιου Οργανισμού Εμπορίου, ως αρμόδιου για την αντιμετώπιση της αντισυστημικής συμπεριφοράς στο διεθνές εμπόριο;




Κοινή απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(16 Μαρτίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος στην απόφαση 2012-647 DC της 28ης Φεβρουαρίου 2012 του γαλλικού συνταγματικού δικαστηρίου, η οποία ακυρώνει το εν λόγω μέτρο.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-000925/12
adresată Comisiei
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(2 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Relația bilaterală Turcia — UE
În urma unei decizii adoptate de Parlamentul francez privind recunoașterea faptului că aproximativ 1,5 milioane de creștini armeni au fost uciși de turci în timpul Primului Război Mondial, Turcia a suspendat relațiile militare, economice și politice cu Franța, stat membru al UE, amenințând chiar cu „măsuri punitive”. Comisia este rugată să precizeze cum va aborda acest subiect în relația bilaterală cu Turcia, stat candidat la aderarea la UE.
Răspuns comun dat de dl Füle  în numele Comisiei
(16 martie 2012)
Comisia face trimitere la Decizia 2012-647 DC din 28 februarie 2012 a Curții Constituționale, franceze, prin care se anulează măsura în cauză.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000755/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Turkish retaliation against France
The French Senate has passed a bill outlawing the denial of the Armenian genocide, along the lines of the Jewish Holocaust. Following this development, Turkey, according to a statement by its political leaders, is expected to take countermeasures ‘in order to punish France’.
The Turkish position invites a reaction from the Armenian diaspora and all responsible states that recognise the historical facts of the care.
In addition, such countermeasures would have an adverse effect on the entire European market, which has a customs union with Turkey and is committed to the prevention of trade discrimination.
Moreover, according to the Turkish newspaper Zaman, companies with French interests may be excluded from public contracts.
In view of this:







Is a common EU position being envisaged regarding this matter?











Does the Commission consider that diplomatic means should be used to address this new climate of economic mistrust initiated by Turkey?











Regarding the scale of the measures, does it think that it would be useful to involve the WTO, this being the body that addresses behaviour that is contrary to the interests of the global trading system?




Question for written answer E-000925/12
to the Commission
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(2 February 2012)

Subject: EU‐Turkey bilateral relations
Following the decision adopted by the French parliament regarding the recognition of the fact that approximately 1.5 million Armenian Christians were killed by Turks during the First World War, Turkey has suspended military, economic and political relations with France, a Member State of the EU, even threatening ‘punitive measures’. Can the Commission specify how it will address this subject within the bilateral relationship with Turkey, an EU membership candidate?
Joint answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(16 March 2012)
The Commission refers the Honourable Members to Decision 2012-647 DC of 28 February 2012 of the French Constitutional Court, which annuls the measure in question. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-000761/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Niki Tzavela (EFD)
(1 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Πολιτική για τη μείωση των αυτοκτονιών
Ανησυχητικά είναι τα στοιχεία που διαβιβάστηκαν σήμερα από την Ελληνική Αστυνομία στη Βουλή και αφορούν τις αυτοκτονίες (τετελεσμένες και απόπειρες), για την τριετία 2009-2011 (2009 έως και 10 Δεκεμβρίου 2011) στην Ελλάδα.
Συνολικά κατά την τριετία, οι τελεσθείσες αυτοκτονίες ή απόπειρες αυτοκτονίας ανήλθαν σε 1 727. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, το 2009 τα κρούσματα αυτοκτονιών (τετελεσμένες και απόπειρες) ανήλθαν σε 507, ενώ το 2010 παρουσίασαν σημαντική αύξηση, της τάξης του 22.5 %, φθάνοντας τις 622, για να παραμείνουν περίπου στο ίδιο επίπεδο το 2011, καθώς με βάση τα διαθέσιμα στοιχεία της Ελληνικής Αστυνομίας τα άτομα που έθεσαν ή αποπειράθηκαν να θέσουν τέλος στη ζωή τους είχαν ανέλθει, έως τις 10 Δεκεμβρίου 2011, σε 598.
Όπως επισημαίνεται, οι αυτοκτονίες μπορούν να αποφευχθούν και τονίζεται ότι δεν πρέπει να συνδέονται απόλυτα με την οικονομική κρίση. «Αν και οι αυξητικές τάσεις αυτοκτονίας σχετίζονται με την οικονομική κρίση, δεν πρέπει να ταυτιστούν με αυτή, γιατί τότε περισσότεροι άνθρωποι που αντιμετωπίζουν οικονομικά προβλήματα θα οδηγηθούν σε αυτοκτονία» και στη συνέχεια: «Η αυτοκτονία μπορεί να προληφθεί, δεν είναι μια μοιραία κατάληξη, αρκεί να ζητηθεί βοήθεια. Ο φόβος του να ζητήσεις βοήθεια είναι που σκοτώνει».
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή: 






—


ποια είναι η επίσημη θέση της για τις αυτοκτονίες και ποια είναι τα αντίστοιχα ποσοστά στην Ευρώπη;




Απάντηση του κ. Dalli εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(6 Μαρτίου 2012)
Τα στοιχεία σχετικά με τις αυτοκτονίες που συγκέντρωσε η Eurostat παρουσιάζουν αύξηση των αυτοκτονιών κατά 4,0 % στα 27 κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ μεταξύ του 2007 και του 2009 (το τελευταίο έτος για το οποίο διατίθενται στοιχεία για τα περισσότερα κράτη μέλη). Στη διάρκεια αυτής της περιόδου τα ποσοστά των αυτοκτονιών αυξήθηκαν κατά άνω του 10 % σε εννέα κράτη μέλη, συμπεριλαμβανομένης της Ελλάδας, στην οποία σημειώθηκε αύξηση 15,4 %. Στην ίδια περίοδο το ποσοστό αυτοκτονιών μειώθηκε σε τρία κράτη μέλη (Bουλγαρία, Λουξεμβούργο και Αυστρία). Τα στοιχεία για το 2010 διατίθενται μέχρι σήμερα μόνον για πέντε κράτη μέλη. Τέσσερα από αυτά κοινοποίησαν ελαφρές μειώσεις. 
Οι αυτοκτονίες οφείλονται σε μια σειρά διαφόρων αιτιών και οι κοινωνικοοικονομικές εξελίξεις εντοπίστηκαν από την έρευνα ως βασικός παράγοντας. Ενώ η πρόληψη της αυτοκτονίας είναι ένα θέμα που εμπίπτει στην αρμοδιότητα των κρατών μελών, οι εργασίες στο πλαίσιο του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμφώνου για την Ψυχική Υγεία και την Ευημερία, ιδίως όσον αφορά την ανταλλαγή εμπειριών μεταξύ των κρατών μελών σχετικά με την κατάθλιψη, μπορούν να βοηθήσουν την εθνική δράση για την πρόληψη των αυτοκτονιών. 
Επιπλέον, το πρόγραμμα υγείας συγχρηματοδοτεί το σχέδιο «Πρόληψη των αυτοκτονιών μέσω διαδικτύου και προώθηση της ψυχικής υγείας μέσω των μέσων μαζικής επικοινωνίας (SUPREME)» από το 2010 έως το 2013. Tο 7ο πρόγραμμα πλαίσιο για έρευνα και τεχνολογική ανάπτυξη (2007-2013) χρηματοδοτεί τρία σχέδια: «Saving and Empowering Young Lives in Europe (SEYLE)» (2009-2011) (Σωτηρία και υποστήριξη της ζωής των νέων στην Ευρώπη), «Optimising Suicide Prevention Programs and their Implementation (OSPI-Europe)» (2008-2012) (Βελτίωση των προγραμμάτων για την πρόληψη των αυτοκτονιών και της εκτέλεσής τους), και «Suicidality: Treatment Occurring in Paediatrics (STOP)» (2010-2014) (Τάση προς αυτοκτονία: θεραπεία που παρέχεται από την παιδιατρική). 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000761/12
to the Commission
Niki Tzavela (EFD)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Measures to reduce suicides
Worrying data has been released today by the Greek Police to the Parliament regarding suicides (and attempted suicides) for the 2009-2011 period (2009 until 10 December 2011) in Greece.
In total, over the three-year period, there were 1 727 suicides or attempted suicides. More specifically, in 2009, there were 507 suicides or attempted suicides, while in 2010 there was a significant increase by 22.5% to 622 cases. The figure remained more or less at the same level in 2011 — according to figures from the Greek Police recorded up to 10 December 2011, there were 598 cases of persons taking their own lives or attempting to do so.
The report points out that suicides can be prevented and emphasises that they should not be inseparably linked with the economic crisis. It goes on to say that ‘although the rising rates of suicides are related to the economic crisis, they should not be identified with it, since this could drive more people facing financial problems to suicide’ and that ‘suicide can be prevented, it is not an inevitable outcome — it is enough to ask for help. The fear of asking for help is what kills.’
I would like to ask the Commission:






—


What is its formal position on suicide and what are the relevant percentages for Europe?




Answer given by Mr Dalli  on behalf of the Commission
(6 March 2012)
Data on suicide collected by Eurostat indicates an increase of suicides by 4.0 % in the 27 EU Member States between 2007 and 2009 (the latest year for which data is available for most Member States). During this period, suicide rates increased by more than 10 % in nine Member States, including Greece, which registered an increase of 15.4 %. In the same period the suicide rate fell in three Member States (Bulgaria, Luxembourg and Austria). Data for 2010 is so far only available for five Member States. Four of these reported slight decreases. 
Suicide is driven by a range of different causes, and socioeconomic developments were identified by research as a key factor. While preventing suicide is an issue falling under the responsibility of Member States, work under the European Pact for Mental Health and Well-being in particular as regards exchange between Member States on depression can help support national action in suicide prevention. 
Furthermore, the Health Programme is co-funding the project ‘Suicide Prevention by Internet and Media-based Mental Health Promotion (SUPREME)’ from 2010 to 2013. The 7th Framework Programme for Research and Technological development (2007-2013) is funding three projects: ‘Saving and Empowering Young Lives in Europe (SEYLE)’ (2009-2011), ‘Optimising Suicide Prevention Programs and their Implementation (OSPI-Europe)’ (2008-2012), and ‘Suicidality: Treatment Occurring in Paediatrics (STOP)’ (2010-2014). 
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-000770/12
adresată Comisiei
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(31 ianuarie 2012)

Subiect: Speculații cu cereale
Anul 2009 — 2010 a fost un an slab pentru producția de grâu, prețul a ajuns și la 1,1 Ron/ kg. Anul 2011 a adus o recoltă de grâu semnificativ mai bună, iar prețul la grâu a coborât până la 0,6 — 0,7 Ron/kg. Marii traderi de cereale au blocat piața grâului în așteptarea creșterii prețului grâului la nivelul anului 2010 — începutul anului 2011. Comisia este rugată să informeze Parlamentul care sunt strategiile avute în vedere pentru limitarea efectelor speculei în domeniul cerealelor.
Răspuns dat de dl Cioloș în numele Comisiei
(28 februarie 2012)
Comisia Europeană monitorizează în permanență situația prețurilor la cereale atât pe piețele UE, cât și pe piețele internaționale. Buna funcționare a piețelor de mărfuri agricole și de instrumente derivate pe mărfuri este o prioritate pentru Comisia Europeană.
La nivel european, Comisia Europeană urmărește creșterea transparenței piețelor agricole prin publicarea următoarelor: prețurile principalelor mărfuri agricole și alimente în UE (17), perspectivele pe termen mediu pe piețele agricole ale UE (18), perspectivele pe termen scurt pentru principalele mărfuri (19) și, în fine, actualizări lunare ale bilanțului pentru cereale din anul de comercializare în curs și estimările privind producția (20). În plus, Comisia Europeană a adoptat o serie de propuneri legislative care vizează creșterea transparenței și integrității și îmbunătățirea funcționării piețelor de instrumente derivate pe mărfuri și a piețelor spot. Pentru informații suplimentare, distinsul membru poate consulta ultimele răspunsuri ale Comisiei la întrebările cu solicitare de răspuns scris (21).
La nivel internațional, UE s-a angajat să contribuie la procesul G20, convenit în cadrul summitului de la Pittsburgh, de a îmbunătăți reglementarea, funcționarea și transparența piețelor financiare și de mărfuri pentru a contracara volatilitatea excesivă a prețurilor mărfurilor (22). Acestei priorități i s-a dat deja curs prin lansarea sistemului de informații privind piața agricolă, UE fiind membru cu drepturi depline al acestui sistem, al cărui scop este publicarea periodică de informații de pe piețele de produse agricole (producție, consum, comerț, stocuri) pentru 4 produse — grâu, porumb, orez și soia.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000770/12
to the Commission
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(31 January 2012)

Subject: Speculation in the cereals sector
2009‐10 was a weak year for wheat production, the price of wheat in Romania reaching 1.1 RON/kg. 2011 brought a significantly improved wheat harvest, but the price of wheat was reduced to 0.6‐0.7 RON/kg. Large cereal traders have blocked the cereal market in the expectation that the price of wheat will rise to the level of 2010/early 2011. Can the Commission inform Parliament of the strategies that are envisaged in order to contain the effects of speculation in the cereal domain?
Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(28 February 2012)
The European Commission constantly monitors the cereal price situation in both the EU and international markets. The good functioning of agricultural commodity and commodity derivatives markets is a priority for the European Commission.
At European level, the European Commission aims to enhance the transparency of agricultural markets by publishing the following: the main EU agricultural commodity and food prices (23), the medium-term prospects for EU agricultural markets (24), the short-term outlook for the main commodities (25), and finally the monthly updates of the current marketing year cereals balance sheet and production estimates (26). Moreover, the European Commission has adopted several legislative proposals meant to bring more transparency, enhance integrity and improve the functioning of both commodity derivatives markets and underlying spot markets. For further information, the Honourable Member is referred to recent Commission replies to Written Questions (27).
At international level, the EU has committed itself to the G20 process which agreed at the Pittsburgh summit ‘to improve the regulation, functioning and transparency of financial and commodity markets to address excessive commodity price volatility’ (28). This priority has already been taken forward by the launch of the Agricultural Market Information System of which EU is a full member and whose goal is the publication of agricultural market information (production, consumption, trade, stocks) of four crops — wheat, maize, rice and soybeans — on a regular basis.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-000772/12
adresată Comisiei
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(31 ianuarie 2012)

Subiect: Regulamentul privind identificarea electronică a ovinelor
Regulamentul privind identificarea electronică a ovinelor a intrat în vigoare la 1 ianuarie 2010. În luna iulie 2012 va intra în vigoare obligația de a monitoriza mișcările individuale ale animalelor. Ținând cont de costurile ridicate ale demersurilor necesare, în contextul situației economice existente la nivel mondial și în special la nivelul statelor nou intrate în UE, având în vedere necesitatea de a acorda posibilitatea de consolidare a organizațiilor profesionale din domeniu, având în vedere lipsa de fiabilitate a actualelor dispozitive de identificare, Comisia este rugată să prezinte un punct de vedere cu privire la o eventuală amânare a punerii în aplicare a regulamentului.
Răspuns dat de dl Dalli în numele Comisiei
(6 martie 2012)
Comisia recomandă distinsului membru să consulte răspunsul său la întrebările scrise E-008752/2010 — E-008764/2010 (29).
Pentru a facilita și mai mult implementarea progresivă a identificării electronice a ovinelor și pentru a reduce sarcina administrativă asupra agricultorilor, Comisia a adoptat Regulamentul de punere în aplicare (UE) nr. 45/2012 al Comisiei din 19 ianuarie 2012 de modificare a anexei la Regulamentul (CE) nr. 21/2004 al Consiliului în ceea ce privește conținutul documentelor de circulație (30). 
Regulamentul de punere în aplicare menționat anterior prevede o amânare până la 31 decembrie 2014 a datei de intrare în vigoare a obligației de a înregistra codul individual de identificare în documentul de circulație pentru animalele născute înainte de 1 ianuarie 2010 și pentru deplasările altele decât către un abator. Noile dispoziții sunt aplicabile începând cu 1 ianuarie 2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000772/12
to the Commission
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(31 January 2012)

Subject: Regulation governing the electronic identification of ovine animals
The regulation governing the electronic identification of ovine animals came into force on 1 January 2010. In July 2012, the obligation to monitor the individual movement of animals will come into force. Taking into account the high cost of the necessary measures, in the context of the economic situation existing worldwide and particularly in the new Member States of the EU, as well as the need to offer the possibility of consolidating the professional organisations in this domain and the lack of viability of the current identification devices, can the Commission state its position with regard to a possible postponement of the application of the regulation?
Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(6 March 2012)
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to written questions E‐008752/2010 to E‐008764/2010 (31).
In order to further facilitate the gradual implementation of electronic identification in sheep and to reduce the administrative burden on the farmers, the Commission adopted Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 45/2012 of 19 January 2012 amending the annex to Council Regulation (EC) No 21/2004 as regards the content of the movement documents (32). 
The abovementioned Implementing Regulation provides for a postponement until 31 December 2014 of the date of entry into force of the obligation to record the individual identification code in the movement document for animals born before 1 January 2010 and for movements other than to a slaughterhouse. The new provisions are applicable since 1 January 2012.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-000785/12
an die Kommission
Elisabeth Köstinger (PPE)
(31. Januar 2012)

Betrifft: Zugangssperren durch Internetprovider
Internetprovider innerhalb des EU-Binnenmarktes können durch Unterlassungsansprüche von Rechtsinhabern zum Sperren von Internetzugängen sowie von Webseiten gedrängt werden.
Dies geht aus dem Beschluss C-557/07 des Gerichtshofs der Europäischen Union hervor, der Internetprovider als „Mittelspersonen/Vermittler“ bezeichnet und somit für gerichtliche Anordnungen angreifbar macht.
In der Richtlinie 2004/48/EG sowie in der Richtlinie 2001/29/EG ist normiert, dass gegen „Mittelspersonen/Vermittler“ gerichtliche Anordnungen beantragt werden können. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird die Kommission gebeten, folgende Fragen zu beantworten:







Wie schätzt die Kommission die aktuelle rechtliche Situation hinsichtlich der Haftbarkeit von Internetprovidern innerhalb der EU ein? Welche Unterschiede lassen sich unter den Mitgliedstaaten erkennen?











Hält die Kommission diese rechtlichen Bestimmungen (Sperren des Internetzugangs durch Internetprovider) für angemessen, um illegales File-Sharing oder Online-Streaming zu bekämpfen?











Wie schätzt die Kommission in diesem Zusammenhang die sozialen, wirtschaftlichen und rechtlichen Folgewirkungen ein, wenn Internetprovider für die Verletzung von Rechten des geistigen Eigentums durch ihre Kunden verantwortlich gemacht werden können?




Antwort von Herrn Barnier im Namen der Kommission
(24. Februar 2012)
Gemäß der Richtlinie 2000/31/EG sind die Anbieter von Internetzugangsdiensten unter bestimmten Bedingungen von der Haftung freigestellt. Kürzlich hat die Kommission eine Mitteilung sowie eine Arbeitsunterlage der Kommissionsdienststellen angenommen, anhand derer die Frau Abgeordnete sich einen Überblick über die rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten verschaffen kann (33). Die Frage der generellen Regelung der Haftung der Diensteanbieter in der Informationsgesellschaft ist von der Frage gerichtlicher Anordnungen gegenüber Vermittlern zu trennen, deren Dienste von Dritten zur Verletzung von Rechten des geistigen Eigentums genutzt werden.
Die Bestimmungen der Richtlinien 2001/29/EG und 2004/48/EG in Bezug auf gerichtliche Anordnungen wurden von den Mitgliedstaaten in nationales Recht umgesetzt. Derzeit wird die Anwendung der Richtlinie 2004/48/EG, insbesondere die Frage der Anwendung und der Folgen gerichtlicher Anordnungen gegenüber Vermittlern, geprüft. Gegebenenfalls könnte noch 2012 ein Vorschlag für eine Änderung der Richtlinie 2004/48/EG vorgelegt werden. Zuvor würde jedoch in jedem Fall eine Folgenabschätzung vorgenommen. Hierbei wird die Kommission die Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofes berücksichtigen, insbesondere das Erfordernis der Gewährleistung eines angemessenen Gleichgewichts zwischen dem Schutz der Rechte des geistigen Eigentums einerseits und dem Schutz der unternehmerischen Freiheit, des Rechts auf den Schutz personenbezogener Daten und des Rechts auf freien Empfang oder freie Sendung von Informationen andererseits (34).
(English version)
Question for written answer P-000785/12
to the Commission
Elisabeth Köstinger (PPE)
(31 January 2012)

Subject: Blocking of access by Internet providers
Internet providers within the single European market can be forced to block access to the Internet or to websites when a rightsholder applies for an injunction.
This is clear from the decision in Case C‐557/07 (35) of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which describes Internet providers as ‘intermediaries’, thus making them subject to injunctions.
Directive 2004/48 EC (36) and Directive 2001/29 (37) EC provide for the possibility of applying for an injunction against an ‘intermediary’. In view of this, I should like to ask the Commission the following questions: 







What is the opinion of the Commission on the present legal situation regarding the liability of Internet providers within the EU? What differences exist between Member States? 











Does the Commission deem these legal provisions (blocking of Internet access by Internet providers) to be appropriate as a means of combating illegal file sharing or online streaming?











In this connection, what is the Commission’s opinion regarding the social, economic and legal consequences of Internet providers being held liable by their clients for the infringement of intellectual property rights?




(Version française)
En application de la directive 2000/31/CE, les fournisseurs d'accès à l'Internet bénéficient à certaines conditions d'une exemption de responsabilité. La Commission a récemment adopté une Communication ainsi qu'un document de travail de ses services, auxquels l'Honorable Parlementaire peut se référer pour obtenir un panorama des cadres juridiques existant dans les différents États membres (38). Cette question du régime général de responsabilité des fournisseurs de services de la société de l'information doit être distinguée de celle des injonctions prononcées par une autorité judiciaire à l'encontre des intermédiaires dont les services sont utilisés par un tiers pour porter atteinte à un droit de propriété intellectuelle.
S'agissant des injonctions, les dispositions pertinentes des directives 2001/29/CE et 2004/48/CE ont été transposées par les États membres. Une analyse de la mise en œuvre des dispositions de la directive 2004/48/CE, et notamment la question du fonctionnement et des conséquences des injonctions prononcées à l'encontre d'intermédiaires, est actuellement en cours. Le cas échéant, une proposition de modification de la directive 2004/48 pourrait être faite d'ici la fin de l'année 2012, laquelle serait en tout état de cause précédée d'une étude d'impact préalable. Pour mener à bien cet exercice, la Commission tiendra compte de la jurisprudence de la Cour de Justice, notamment de l'exigence d'assurer le juste équilibre entre, d'une part, le droit de propriété intellectuelle et, d'autre part, la liberté d'entreprise, le droit à la protection des données à caractère personnel et la liberté de recevoir ou de communiquer des informations (39).
(българска версия)
Въпрос с искане за писмен отговор E-000786/12
до Комисията (зам.-председател / върховeн представител)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) и László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 февруари 2012 г.)

Относно: VP/HR — Тибет: нарушаване от китайските власти на човешките права и свободата на изразяване на мнение спрямо народа на Тибет
Само за последните шест месеца не по-малко от 15 тибетски будисти, повечето от тях монаси, са се запалили на обществени места, като са си причинили ужасни наранявания или дори смърт при запалването, с цел да привлекат вниманието на световната общественост към агресивната политика на Китай спрямо Тибет и драматичните събития там.
По време на последния инцидент, четиридесетгодишен монах, който ръководел сиропиталище в Дарланг, се запалил след като се залял с керосин. Въпреки това, на подобни действия на отчаяние китайските власти отговарят чрез полицейски ограничения и засилен контрол, а в същото време самоубийствата и опитите за самоубийства се определят от китайските власти като актове на тероризъм, подбудени от Далай Лама. В допълнение към полицейските мерки за налагане на ограничения, китайските власти въвеждат ускорени задължителни програми за „патриотично допълнително обучение“ на монаси, т.е. принудително втълпяване на доктрини от китайската история, за да се изкорени тибетската култура и религиозна идентичност.
Във връзка с това, би ли съобщил заместник-председателят/върховният представител:







По какъв начин възнамерява да се справи с дълготрайния проблем на повтарящи се нарушения на човешките права в Тибет?











Какви действия могат да бъдат предприети от името на тибетския народ за защита на неговата свобода на изразяване?











Какви действия могат да бъдат предприети за да се гарантира, че Китай ще спазва Всеобщата декларация за правата на човека?











Какво е положението на отношенията ЕС—Китай—Тибет?











Съществуват ли програми на ЕС в подкрепа на тибетския народ?




Отговор, даден от Върховния представител/Заместник-председателя Аштън от името на Комисията
(7 май 2012 г.)






1.—2.


Върховният представител/заместник-председателят е загрижен заради неотдавнашните печални случаи на самозапалване на около 30 тибетци, както и заради съобщенията за все по-насилствени мерки, използвани за потушаване на протестите в тибетските региони, и видимото затягане на правителствения контрол върху манастирите. Делегацията на ЕС в Китай направи два демарша пред Министерството на външните работи, като изрази загрижеността на ЕС заради самозапалванията. ЕС изрази също така загрижеността си относно ситуацията с правата на човека в Тибет на срещата на върха ЕС — Китай на 14 февруари 2012 г. и в изявление на последния кръг на Съвета по правата на човека на 6 март 2012 г. ЕС поиска да посети районите, населени с тибетци, но искането беше отхвърлено.










3.


 При тези контакти ЕС призова Китай да изпълни задълженията си, произтичащи от Всеобщата декларация за правата на човека. По-специално ЕС призова китайските власти да се въздържат от използването на сила, да позволят на тибетския народ да упражнява своите религиозни, езикови и културни права и да премахнат първопричините за самозапалванията, особено усещането за липса на реално участие на тибетския народ в политиката за развитие на региона.










4.


 ЕС не поставя под въпрос факта, че Тибет е неразделна част от Китай, но в същото време е сериозно загрижен относно настоящата ситуация. Загрижеността на ЕС беше изразена ясно пред китайските власти при контактите, посочени по-горе.










5.


 Неправителствените организации, работещи в Тибет, които желаят да кандидатстват за финансова подкрепа по линия на Европейския инструмент за демокрация и права на човека, могат да го направят свободно. Върховният представител/Заместник-председателят уверява всички кандидати, че техните кандидатури ще бъдат разгледани при строга поверителност, и поради това не може да предостави информация относно проектите по линия на ЕИДПЧ (40).




(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-000786/12
a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta / Alta Representante)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) y László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Tíbet: violaciones de los derechos humanos y de la libertad de expresión del pueblo tibetano por parte de las autoridades chinas
Solo durante los últimos seis meses, al menos quince budistas tibetanos, la mayor parte de los cuales eran monjes, se han inmolado con fuego en público, hecho que les ha causado heridas graves o incluso la muerte, con el objetivo de sensibilizar a la opinión pública mundial sobre la política agresiva de China hacia el Tíbet y la dramática situación de dicha zona.
En el suceso más reciente, un monje de cuarenta años que dirigía un orfanato en Darlang se prendió fuego tras verter queroseno sobre su cuerpo. Sin embargo, ante semejantes actos de desesperación, las autoridades chinas han respondido imponiendo restricciones policiales y endureciendo los controles, y han calificado los suicidios y los intentos de suicidio como actos terroristas instigados por el Dalai Lama. Además de las medidas policiales represivas, las autoridades chinas han intensificado los programas de «reeducación patriótica» obligatorios para los monjes, es decir, un adoctrinamiento coercitivo sobre la historia de China con la finalidad de erradicar la identidad cultural y religiosa propia del Tíbet.
En este sentido, ¿puede la Vicepresidenta y Alta Representante dar respuesta a lo siguientes interrogantes?:







¿Cómo tiene previsto abordar la cuestión continuada de violaciones de los derechos humanos en el Tíbet?











¿Qué iniciativas se pondrán en marcha en nombre del pueblo tibetano para proteger su libertad de expresión?











¿Qué medidas se pueden adoptar para garantizar que China observa la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos? 











¿Cuál es el estado de las relaciones entre la UE, China y el Tíbet?











¿Existe algún programa comunitario de ayuda al pueblo tibetano?




Respuesta de la Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Ashton en nombre de la Comisión
(7 de mayo de 2012)






1. y 2.


La Alta Representante está inquieta ante los recientes y sobrecogedores casos de autoinmolación de unos treinta tibetanos, así como ante las noticias del recurso a medidas cada vez más violentas para reprimir las protestas en las regiones tibetanas y del aparente endurecimiento del control de los monasterios por parte del gobierno. La Delegación de la UE en China se ha dirigido en dos ocasiones al Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores para expresar la inquietud de la UE ante las citadas autoinmolaciones. Además, la UE manifestó su preocupación por la situación de los derechos humanos en Tíbet durante la cumbre EU-China de 14 de febrero de 2012 y en una declaración presentada en la última ronda del Consejo de Derechos Humanos de 6 de marzo de 2012. La solicitud de la UE para visitar las regiones habitadas por tibetanos ha sido denegada.










3.


En todos esos contactos, la UE ha instado a China a que cumpla las obligaciones que le impone la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos. Concretamente, le ha dirigido un llamamiento para que se abstenga de utilizar la violencia, permita a la población tibetana ejercer sus derechos religiosos, lingüísticos y culturales y aborde las causas profundas de las autoinmolaciones, concretamente el sentimiento de falta de participación de la población tibetana en la política de desarrollo de la región.










4.


Aunque no discute que el Tíbet es parte integrante de la China, la UE está sumamente preocupada por la situación actual. Esa preocupación ha sido claramente transmitida a las autoridades chinas en todos los contactos antes mencionados.











5.


Las organizaciones no gubernamentales (ONG) activas en Tíbet tienen la posibilidad de presentar solicitudes de ayuda financiera del Instrumento Europeo para la Democracia y los Derechos Humanos. La Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Ashton garantiza a todos los solicitantes que sus solicitudes se tramitarán con la más estricta confidencialidad, por lo que no puede facilitar ninguna información sobre los proyectos del IEDDH










5.


Las organizaciones no gubernamentales (ONG) activas en Tíbet tienen la posibilidad de presentar solicitudes de ayuda financiera del Instrumento Europeo para la Democracia y los Derechos Humanos. La Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Ashton garantiza a todos los solicitantes que sus solicitudes se tramitarán con la más estricta confidencialidad, por lo que no puede facilitar ninguna información sobre los proyectos del IEDDH




 (41).(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-000786/12
til Kommissionen (Næstformand / højtstående repræsentant)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) og László Tőkés (PPE)
(1. februar 2012)

Om: VP/HR — Tibet: krænkelser af det tibetanske folks menneskerettigheder og ytringsfrihed fra de kinesiske myndigheders side
Alene i de seneste seks måneder har ikke mindre end 15 tibetanske buddhister, hvoraf de fleste var munke, offentligt sat ild til sig selv med frygtelige lidelser eller endda døden til følge for at gøre hele verdens befolkning opmærksom på Kinas aggressive politik over for Tibet og den dramatiske situation dér.
I det seneste tilfælde satte en 40‐årig munk, som var leder af et børnehjem i Darlang, ild til sig selv efter at have hældt petroleum ud over sig. De kinesiske myndigheder har imidlertid besvaret disse desperate aktioner med at indføre restriktioner af politimæssig karakter og strammere kontrolforanstaltninger, mens selvmord og selvmordsforsøg er blevet defineret af de kinesiske myndigheder som terrorhandlinger anstiftet af Dalai Lama. I tillæg til politiets hårde linje har de kinesiske myndigheder optrappet de tvungne programmer for »patriotisk omskoling« af munke, dvs. tvangsindoktrinering med kinesisk historie med henblik på at udrydde tibetansk kulturel og religiøs identitet.
Kan næstformanden/den højtstående repræsentant på denne baggrund oplyse følgende:







Hvordan agter hun at tackle det gamle spørgsmål om gentagne krænkelser af menneskerettighederne i Tibet?











Hvilke skridt kan der tages på vegne af det tibetanske folk for at beskytte dets ytringsfrihed?











Hvilke foranstaltninger kan der tages for at sikre, at Kina overholder verdenserklæringen om menneskerettighederne? 











Hvad er den aktuelle status for forbindelserne mellem EU, Kina og Tibet?











Findes der EU‐programmer til støtte af det tibetanske folk?




Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af den højtstående repræsentant/næstformand Catherine Ashton 
(7. maj 2012)






1. & 2.


Den højtstående repræsentant/næstformanden er bekymret over de seneste foruroligende ca. 30 tilfælde, hvor tibetanere har sat ild til sig selv, over beretninger om stadigt mere voldelige foranstaltninger til undertrykkelse af protester i de tibetanske regioner samt over en tilsyneladende stramning af regeringskontrollen med klostrene. EU‐delegationen i Kina har iværksat to demarcher over for udenrigsministeriet, hvormed der gives udtryk for EU's bekymring over selvafbrændingerne. EU udtrykte også bekymring over menneskerettighedssituationen i Tibet på topmødet mellem EU og Kina den 14. februar 2012 og i en erklæring under Menneskerettighedsrådets sidste møderunde den 6. marts 2012. EU har anmodet om at aflægge besøg i de regioner, der er befolket af tibetanere, men den anmodning er ikke blevet imødekommet. 










3.


EU anmodede i forbindelse med disse kontakter Kina om at opfylde sine forpligtelser i henhold til verdenserklæringen om menneskerettigheder. EU henstillede bl.a. til de kinesiske myndigheder, at de afstår fra at bruge vold, at de lader det tibetanske folk udøve deres religiøse, sproglige og kulturelle rettigheder og adresserer de årsager, der ligger til grund for selvafbrændingerne, navnlig den tibetanske befolknings tilsyneladende mangel på reel indflydelse på udviklingspolitikken for regionen. 










4.


EU sætter ikke spørgsmålstegn ved, at Tibet er en integrerende del af Kina, men er samtidigt stærkt bekymret over den nuværende situation. Der er i forbindelse med de ovennævnte kontakter givet tydeligt udtryk for EU's bekymring over for de kinesiske myndigheder. 











5.


Ikke‐statslige organisationer (ngo'er), der arbejder i Tibet, er frit stillet med hensyn til at indsende ansøgninger om finansiel støtte fra Det Europæiske instrument for Demokrati og Menneskerettigheder. Den højtstående repræsentant/næstformanden garanterer alle ansøgere, at deres ansøgninger behandles strengt fortroligt og kan derfor ikke fremlægge oplysninger om EIDHR










5.


Ikke‐statslige organisationer (ngo'er), der arbejder i Tibet, er frit stillet med hensyn til at indsende ansøgninger om finansiel støtte fra Det Europæiske instrument for Demokrati og Menneskerettigheder. Den højtstående repræsentant/næstformanden garanterer alle ansøgere, at deres ansøgninger behandles strengt fortroligt og kan derfor ikke fremlægge oplysninger om EIDHR




 (42)-projekter. (Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-000786/12
an die Kommission (Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) und László Tőkés (PPE)
(1. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: VP/HR — Tibet: Verletzung der Menschenrechte und der Freiheit der Meinungsäußerung des tibetischen Volkes durch die chinesischen Behörden
Allein in den letzten sechs Monaten haben sich nicht weniger als 15 tibetische Buddhisten, die meisten davon Mönche, öffentlich selbst verbrannt und dabei schreckliche Verletzungen oder sogar den Tod erlitten, um die Weltöffentlichkeit auf die aggressive Politik Chinas gegenüber Tibet und die dramatische Situation dort aufmerksam zu machen.
Beim letzten Vorfall zündete sich ein 40-jähriger Mönch, der ein Waisenhaus in Darlang leitete, selbst an, nachdem er sich mit Kerosin überschüttet hatte. Die chinesischen Behörden haben angesichts derartiger Verzweiflungsakte jedoch mit Verhängung polizeilicher Restriktionen und verschärfter Kontrollen reagiert und definierten Selbstmorde und Selbstmordversuche als vom Dalai Lama angestiftete Terroranschläge. Zusätzlich zum polizeilichen Vorgehen haben die chinesischen Behörden obligatorische Programme zur „patriotischen Umerziehung“ für Mönche, d. h. Zwangsindoktrination in chinesischer Geschichte zur Ausmerzung der tibetischen kulturellen und religiösen Identität, intensiviert.
Wird die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin dementsprechend erklären:
1. wie sie das seit langem bestehende Problem wiederholter Menschenrechtsverletzungen in Tibet anzugehen gedenkt?
2. welche Maßnahmen im Namen des tibetischen Volkes ergriffen werden können, um seine Freiheit der Meinungsäußerung zu schützen?
3. welche Maßnahmen ergriffen werden können, um sicherzustellen, dass China die Allgemeine Erklärung der Menschenrechte einhält? 
4. wie der Stand der Beziehungen zwischen der EU, China und Tibet ist?
5. ob es EU-Programme zur Unterstützung des tibetischen Volkes gibt?
Antwort von Frau Catherine Ashton — Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin im Namen der Kommission
(7. Mai 2012)






1.-2.


 Die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin ist besorgt angesichts der jüngsten erschütternden Fälle von Selbstverbrennungen von etwa dreißig Tibetern sowie angesichts der Berichte über die immer gewaltsameren Maßnahmen zur Unterdrückung der Proteste in den tibetischen Regionen und über die Verschärfung der staatlichen Kontrolle über die Klöster. Die EU-Delegation in China hat zwei Demarchen beim Außenministerium unternommen, in denen sie die Besorgnis der EU über die Selbstverbrennungen zum Ausdruck brachte. Die EU hat ihre Bedenken wegen der Menschenrechtssituation in Tibet auch beim Gipfeltreffen EU-China am 14. Februar 2012 sowie in einer Erklärung in der letzten Runde des UN-Menschenrechtsrats am 6. März 2012 geäußert. Die EU hat China ersucht, die von Tibetern bewohnten Regionen besuchen zu dürfen, aber dieser Antrag wurde abgelehnt. 










3.


Im Zuge dieser Kontakte appellierte die EU an China, seinen Verpflichtungen aus der Allgemeinen Erklärung der Menschenrechte nachzukommen. Die EU hat die chinesischen Behörden insbesondere nachdrücklich aufgefordert, auf Gewalt zu verzichten, dem tibetischen Volk zu erlauben, seine religiösen, sprachlichen und kulturellen Rechte auszuüben und bei den eigentlichen Ursachen der Selbstverbrennungen anzusetzen, vor allem bei der Tatsache, dass sich die tibetische Bevölkerung in die Entwicklungspolitik der Region nicht eingebunden fühlt. 










4.


Während die EU nicht infrage stellt, dass Tibet ein fester Bestandteil Chinas ist, ist sie gleichzeitig äußerst besorgt über die derzeitige Lage. Dies hat sie den chinesischen Behörden während der oben genannten Kontakte deutlich zu verstehen gegeben. 











5.


Es steht den in Tibet tätigen Nichtregierungsorganisationen (NRO) offen, finanzielle Unterstützung aus dem Europäischen Instrument für Demokratie und Menschenrechte zu beantragen. Die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin sichert allen Antragstellern zu, dass ihre Anträge streng vertraulich behandelt werden, und kann deshalb keine Auskünfte über EIDHR










5.


Es steht den in Tibet tätigen Nichtregierungsorganisationen (NRO) offen, finanzielle Unterstützung aus dem Europäischen Instrument für Demokratie und Menschenrechte zu beantragen. Die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin sichert allen Antragstellern zu, dass ihre Anträge streng vertraulich behandelt werden, und kann deshalb keine Auskünfte über EIDHR




 (43)-Projekte erteilen.(Eestikeelne versioon)
Kirjalikult vastatav küsimus E-000786/12
komisjonile (Asepresident / kõrge esindaja)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) ja László Tőkés (PPE)
(1. veebruar 2012)

Teema: 
VP/HR — Hiina ametivõimud rikuvad Tiibeti elanike inimõigusi ja sõnavabadust

Ainuüksi viimase kuue kuu jooksul on vähemalt 15 Tiibeti budisti, enamik neist mungad, end avalikkuse ees põlema süüdanud. Üliraskete vigastuste või koguni oma elu hinnaga on nad püüdnud maailma üldsusele teadvustada Hiina agressiivset poliitikat Tiibeti suhtes ja Tiibetis valitsevat pingelist olukorda.
Seni viimane juhtum toimus läinud pühapäeval. Siis süütas end põlema Darlangi orbudekodu juhtinud 40-aastane munk, kes valas end üle petrooleumiga. Hiina ametivõimud on aga sellistele meeleheitest ajendatud tegudele reageerinud poliitiliste piirangute kehtestamise ja kontrolli tugevdamisega, lugedes enesetapud ja enesetapukatsed dalai-laama õhutatud terroriaktideks. Lisaks poliitilistele meetmetele on Hiina ametivõimud hakanud munkade kallal ulatuslikumalt rakendama ka kohustuslikke „patriootilise ümberkasvatamise” programme, millega surutakse peale Hiina ajalookäsitust, et Tiibeti kultuuriline ja usuline identiteet kustutada.
Sellest lähtuvalt küsime liidu välisasjade ja julgeolekupoliitika kõrgelt esindajalt ja komisjoni asepresidendilt järgmist:







Mida on kavas ette võtta inimõiguste pikaajalise ja sagedase rikkumise vastu Tiibetis?











Milliseid meetmeid saab võtta Tiibeti rahva sõnavabaduse kaitseks?











Milliseid meetmeid on võimalik rakendada, et Hiina hakkaks järgima inimõiguste ülddeklaratsiooni? 











Millises seisus on ELi, Hiina ja Tiibeti suhted?











Kas ELil on programme Tiibeti elanike toetamiseks?




Komisjoni nimel vastanud Euroopa Liidu välisasjade ja julgeolekupoliitika kõrge esindaja ning komisjoni asepresident Ashton
(7. mai 2012)






1.-2.


Kõrge esindaja / asepresident on mures hiljutiste juhtumite pärast, kus ligi kolmkümmend tiibetlast süütas ennast põlema, samuti valmistavad muret vägivaldsed meetmed, mida kasutatakse Tiibeti piirkondades protestide allasurumiseks, ja valitsuse kontrolli tugevdamine kloostrite üle. ELi delegatsioon Hiinas on välisministeeriumile esitanud kaks demarši, milles väljendatakse ELi muret enesesüütamisjuhtumite pärast. 14. veebruaril 2012. aastal toimunud ELi-Hiina tippkohtumisel ja 6. märtsil 2012. aastal toimunud Inimõiguste Nõukogu kohtumise viimases voorus esitatud seisukohas väljendas EL kahtlusi ka seoses inimõiguste olukorraga Tiibetis. EL on taotlenud luba külastada piirkondi, kus tiibetlased elavad, kuid sellest on keeldutud.










3.


Nimetatud suhtluses on EL ärgitanud Hiinat täitma inimõiguste ülddeklaratsiooni kohaseid kohustusi. Eeskätt on EL ärgitanud Hiina ametiasutusi hoiduma kasutamast jõudu, lubama Tiibeti elanikel kasutada oma usulisi, keelelisi ja kultuurilisi õigusi ning tegelema enesesüütamiste peapõhjustega, milleks on eelkõige Tiibeti elanikkonna kõrvalejätmine oma piirkonna arengupoliitikast. 










4.


Kuigi EL ei sea kahtluse alla Tiibeti lahutamatust Hiina riigist, on praegune olukord murettekitav. ELi muret on eelnevalt nimetatud kohtumistel selgelt Hiina ametiasutustele väljendatud. 










5.


Tiibetis töötavatel valitsusvälistel organisatsioonidel on õigus taotleda toetust demokraatia ja inimõiguste Euroopa rahastamisvahendist. Kõrge esindaja / asepresident kinnitab kõigile taotlejatele, et nende taotlused vaadatakse läbi täiesti konfidentsiaalselt ja sellest lähtuvalt ei saa ta anda mingit infot EIDHRi projektide kohta (44).




(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-000786/12
à la Commission (Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) et László Tőkés (PPE)
(1er février 2012)

Objet: VP/HR — Tibet: violation par les autorités chinoises des Droits de l'homme et de la liberté d'expression du peuple tibétain
Rien que ces six derniers moins, pas moins de 15 bouddhistes tibétains, dont la plupart des moines, se sont immolés par le feu en public, en souffrant de graves blessures ou même en trouvant la mort au cours de l'incident, afin de sensibiliser l'opinion publique mondiale à la politique agressive menée par la Chine à l'égard du Tibet ainsi qu'à la situation dramatique de cette région.
Lors du dernier incident, un moine âgé de 40 ans, qui gérait un orphelinat à Darlang, s'est immolé par le feu après s'être versé du kérosène sur le corps. Face à de tels actes de désespoir, les autorités chinoises ont réagi en imposant des restrictions policières et en renforçant les contrôles tout en définissant les suicides et les tentatives de suicides comme des actes de terrorisme incités par le dalaï-lama. Outre les mesures de répression, les autorités chinoises ont instauré des programmes obligatoires de «rééducation patriotique» pour les moines, à savoir des programmes coercitifs d'endoctrinement sur l'histoire chinoise destinés à éradiquer l'identité culturelle et religieuse tibétaine.
En conséquence, la Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante précisera-t-elle:







la façon dont elle prévoit de traiter la question de longue date des violations répétées des Droits de l'homme au Tibet;











les mesures que le peuple tibétain peut prendre pour protéger sa liberté d'expression;











les mesures à prendre pour veiller au respect de la Déclaration universelle des Droits de l'homme par la Chine;











l'état des relations entre l'Union européenne, la Chine et le Tibet;











s'il existe des programmes de l'Union européenne en faveur du peuple tibétain?




Réponse donnée par la Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante Mme Ashton  au nom de la Commission
(7 mai 2012)






1-2.


La Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante est préoccupée par les épouvantables cas récents d'immolation par le feu de quelque trente Tibétains, ainsi que par le signalement de mesures de plus en plus violentes prises pour réprimer les mouvements de contestation dans les régions du Tibet et le durcissement apparent du contrôle gouvernemental exercé sur les monastères. La délégation de l'Union européenne en Chine a entrepris deux démarches auprès du ministère des affaires étrangères exprimant les inquiétudes de l'UE concernant ces immolations par le feu. Au cours du sommet Union européenne — Chine, le 14 février 2012, de même que dans une déclaration faite au cours de la dernière réunion du Conseil de Droits de l'homme, le 6 mars 2012, l'UE a également fait part de ses préoccupations en ce qui concerne la situation des Droits de l'homme au Tibet. L'UE a demandé à pouvoir se rendre dans les régions habitées par des Tibétains, mais cette demande a été rejetée.










3.


Lors de ces contacts, l'UE a exhorté le Chine de respecter les obligations qui lui incombent en vertu de la Déclaration universelle des Droits de l'homme. L'UE a en particulier incité les autorités chinoises à s'abstenir de tout recours à la force, à permettre aux populations tibétaines d'exercer leurs droits religieux, linguistiques et culturels et à s'attaquer aux causes premières des immolations par le feu et, en particulier, au manque de participation véritable dans la politique de développement de la région que perçoit la population tibétaine.










4.


Bien que l'UE ne remette pas en question le fait que le Tibet fait partie intégrante de la Chine, elle est, dans le même temps, très inquiète de la situation actuelle. Ces inquiétudes ont été clairement communiquées aux autorités chinoises lors des contacts évoqués ci‐dessus. 











5.


Les organisations non-gouvernementales (ONG) travaillant au Tibet peuvent introduire des demandes de soutien financier au titre de l'instrument européen pour la démocratie et les Droits de l'homme. La 










5.


Les organisations non-gouvernementales (ONG) travaillant au Tibet peuvent introduire des demandes de soutien financier au titre de l'instrument européen pour la démocratie et les Droits de l'homme. La 



Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante assure à tous les demandeurs que leurs demandes seront traitées dans la confidentialité la plus stricte et, en conséquence, elle ne peut fournir aucune information concernant les projets IEDDH (45). (Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-000786/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto rappresentante)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) e László Tőkés (PPE)
(1o febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Tibet: violazioni dei diritti umani e della libertà di espressione del popolo tibetano da parte delle autorità cinesi
Soltanto negli ultimi sei mesi, non meno di 15 buddisti tibetani, la maggior parte dei quali monaci, si sono dati fuoco pubblicamente provocando a se stessi terribili ferite o addirittura la morte, al fine di rendere note all'opinione pubblica mondiale la politica aggressiva della Cina nei confronti del Tibet e la drammatica situazione dei tibetani.
Nel caso più recente, un monaco quarantenne che gestiva un orfanotrofio a Darlang si è dato fuoco dopo essersi cosparso di cherosene. Tuttavia, di fronte a simili atti di disperazione, le autorità cinesi hanno reagito imponendo restrizioni di polizia e inasprendo i controlli, mentre il suicidio e il tentativo di suicidio sono stati definiti dalle autorità cinesi atti di terrorismo commessi su istigazione del Dalai Lama. Oltre alla repressione da parte delle forze di polizia, le autorità cinesi hanno intensificato i programmi obbligatori di «rieducazione patriottica» destinati ai monaci, cioè programmi di indottrinamento coercitivo sulla storia cinese volti a sradicare l'identità culturale e religiosa del Tibet.
Di conseguenza, può il Vicepresidente/Alto rappresentante rispondere ai seguenti quesiti:







Come intende affrontare l'annosa questione delle ripetute violazioni dei diritti umani in Tibet?











Quali azioni è possibile intraprendere a nome del popolo tibetano per tutelarne la libertà di espressione?











Quali azioni è possibile intraprendere per garantire che la Cina rispetti la Dichiarazione universale dei diritti dell'uomo? 











Qual è lo stato delle relazioni UE-Cina-Tibet?











Esistono programmi dell'UE a sostegno della popolazione tibetana?




Risposta data dall’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(7 maggio 2012)






1.-2.


L’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente è preoccupata dei terribili casi di auto-immolazione compiuti di recente da una trentina di tibetani, dei resoconti sulle misure sempre più violente adottate per reprimere la protesta nelle regioni tibetane e dell’inasprimento evidente del controllo statale sui monasteri. A due riprese la delegazione dell’UE in Cina ha espresso al ministero degli Affari esteri cinese l’inquietudine dell’Unione per le auto-immolazioni. Inoltre, nel corso del vertice UE-Cina del 14 febbraio 2012 e in una dichiarazione rilasciata il 6 marzo 2012 in occasione dell’ultima riunione del Consiglio per i diritti umani, l’UE si è detta preoccupata per la situazione dei diritti umani nel Tibet. L’Unione ha chiesto di visitare le regioni a popolazione tibetana, ma tale richiesta è stata respinta. 










3.


In questi incontri l’UE ha sollecitato la Cina a rispettare gli obblighi che le incombono in forza della dichiarazione universale dei diritti dell’uomo. In particolare, l’Unione ha esortato le autorità cinesi ad astenersi dall’uso della forza, a consentire al popolo tibetano di esercitare i propri diritti religiosi, linguistici e culturali e a eliminare le cause profonde delle auto-immolazioni, in particolare la mancanza evidente di un coinvolgimento reale della popolazione tibetana nella politica di sviluppo della regione. 










4.


L’Unione non mette in discussione l’appartenenza territoriale del Tibet alla Cina, ma allo stesso tempo nutre profonda preoccupazione per la situazione attuale. Tale preoccupazione è stata espressa chiaramente alle autorità cinesi negli incontri suddetti. 











5.


Le organizzazioni non governative (ONG) che operano nel Tibet possono presentare domanda di sostegno finanziario mediante lo strumento europeo per la democrazia e i diritti umani. L’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente assicura a tutti i richiedenti che le domande saranno trattate con la massima riservatezza; di conseguenza, non è possibile fornire informazioni riguardanti i progetti EIDHR










5.


Le organizzazioni non governative (ONG) che operano nel Tibet possono presentare domanda di sostegno finanziario mediante lo strumento europeo per la democrazia e i diritti umani. L’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente assicura a tutti i richiedenti che le domande saranno trattate con la massima riservatezza; di conseguenza, non è possibile fornire informazioni riguardanti i progetti EIDHR




 (46).(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)
Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-000786/12
Komisijai (Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotojai-vyriausiajai įgaliotinei)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) ir László Tőkés (PPE)
(2012 m. vasario 1 d.)

Tema: VP/HR – Kinijos valdžios institucijų pažeidžiamos Tibeto gyventojų žmogaus teisės ir saviraiškos laisvė
Vien per pastaruosius šešis mėnesius ne mažiau kaip 15 Tibeto budistų, daugelis kurių buvo vienuoliai, bandė viešai susideginti ir smarkiai susižalojo ar netgi mirė, siekdami pasaulio visuomenę informuoti apie agresyvią Kinijos politiką Tibeto atžvilgiu ir sukrečiančią padėtį Tibete.
Naujausio incidento metu keturiasdešimtmetis vienuolis, vadovavęs našlaičių prieglaudai Darlang vietovėje, bandė susideginti apsiliejęs visą kūną žibalu. Tačiau į tokius veiksmus iš nevilties Kinijos valdžios institucijos reagavo nustatydamos viešosios tvarkos apribojimus ir sugriežtindamos kontrolę, o savižudybę ir pasikėsinimą nusižudyti Kinijos valdžios institucijos apibūdino kaip Dalai Lamos pakurstytus terorizmo aktus. Be griežtų policijos priemonių, Kinijos valdžios institucijos paspartino privalomas „patriotinio perauklėjimo“ programas vienuoliams, t. y. priverstinai mokoma Kinijos istorijos siekiant išnaikinti Tibeto kultūrą ir religinę tapatybę.
Todėl ar galėtų Sąjungos vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotoja atsakyti į šiuos klausimus:







Kaip ji ketina spręsti ilgai besitęsiančią pasikartojančių žmogaus teisių pažeidimų Tibete problemą?











Kokių veiksmų galima imtis Tibeto gyventojų naudai siekiant apginti jų išraiškos laisvę?











Kokių veiksmų galima imtis siekiant užtikrinti, kad Kinija laikytųsi Visuotinės žmogaus teisių deklaracijos? 











Kokia yra ES, Kinijos ir Tibeto santykių padėtis?











Ar yra ES programų, kuriomis būtų remiami Tibeto gyventojai?




Sąjungos vyriausiosios įgaliotinės ir Komisijos pirmininko pavaduotojos Catherine Ashton atsakymas Komisijos vardu
(2012 m. gegužės 7 d.)






1-2.


Vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Pirmininko pavaduotoja yra susirūpinusi dėl daugiau kaip trisdešimties tibetiečių susideginimo, pranešimų apie vis didėjantį smurtą malšinant protestus Tibeto regionuose ir vienuolynams taikomą akivaizdžiai griežtesnę vyriausybės kontrolę. ES delegacija Kinijoje šios šalies Užsienio reikalų ministerijai pateikė du protesto pareiškimus, kuriuose išreiškė ES susirūpinimą dėl susideginimų. Susirūpinimą dėl tokios padėties ES išsakė ir 2012 m. vasario 14 d. vykusiame ES ir Kinijos aukščiausio lygio susitikime ir pareiškime, padarytame 2012 m. kovo 6 d. įvykusiame Žmogaus teisių tarybos susitikimo paskutiniame raunde. ES paprašė leisti aplankyti tibetiečių gyvenamus regionus, tačiau šis prašymas buvo atmestas.










3.


Minėtuose pareiškimuose ir susitikimuose ES paragino Kiniją vykdyti įsipareigojimus pagal Visuotinę žmogaus teisių deklaraciją. ES Kinijos institucijas pirmiausia paragino nenaudoti jėgos, leisti Tibeto gyventojams naudotis savo teisėmis į religiją, kalbą ir kultūrą ir spręsti esmines problemas, dėl kurių žmonės ryžtasi susideginti, visų pirma riboto faktinio Tibeto gyventojų dalyvavimo regiono plėtros politikoje problemą.










4.


ES neabejoja, kad Tibetas yra neatskiriama Kinijos dalis, tačiau jai didelį susirūpinimą kelia dabartinė padėtis. Minėtuose pareiškimuose ir susitikimuose Kinijos institucijos buvo išsamiai informuotos apie ES susirūpinimą.











5.


Tibete veikiančios nevyriausybinės organizacijos gali teikti paraiškas gauti finansinę paramą pagal Europos demokratijos ir žmogaus teisių rėmimo priemonę. Vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Pirmininko pavaduotoja visiems paraiškų teikėjams užtikrina, kad paraiškos bus nagrinėjamos laikantis pačių griežčiausių slaptumo reikalavimų. Dėl to ji negali pateikti jokios informacijos apie projektus, vykdomus pagal Europos demokratijos ir žmogaus teisių rėmimo priemonę










5.


Tibete veikiančios nevyriausybinės organizacijos gali teikti paraiškas gauti finansinę paramą pagal Europos demokratijos ir žmogaus teisių rėmimo priemonę. Vyriausioji įgaliotinė ir Pirmininko pavaduotoja visiems paraiškų teikėjams užtikrina, kad paraiškos bus nagrinėjamos laikantis pačių griežčiausių slaptumo reikalavimų. Dėl to ji negali pateikti jokios informacijos apie projektus, vykdomus pagal Europos demokratijos ir žmogaus teisių rėmimo priemonę




 (47).(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-000786/12
a Bizottság számára (alelnök/főképviselő)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Gál Kinga (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) és Tőkés László (PPE)
(2012. február 1.)

Tárgy: Alelnök/főképviselő – Tibet: a tibeti nép emberi jogainak és véleménynyilvánítási szabadságának kínai hatóságok általi megsértése
Egyedül az elmúlt hat hónapban nem kevesebb mint 15 tibeti buddhista – közöttük túlnyomó részt szerzetesek – gyújtotta magát fel a nyilvánosság előtt, és szenvedett súlyos sérüléseket vagy halt bele e cselekménybe. A céljuk az volt, hogy felhívják a világ közvéleményének figyelmét Kína Tibettel szembeni agresszív politikájára, illetve a Tibetben kialakult drámai helyzetre.
A legújabb esetben egy darlangi árvaházat vezető 40 éves szerzetes gyújtotta fel magát, miután kerozinnal locsolta le a testét. Ezen elkeseredett cselekményekre a kínai hatóságok azonban rendőri korlátozások bevezetésével és az ellenőrzések szigorításával válaszoltak, az öngyilkosságot és annak kísérletét pedig a dalai láma által szított terrorista cselekménynek nyilvánították. A rendőrségi rajtaütéseken felül a kínai hatóságok fokozták a szerzeteseknek szóló kötelező „hazafias átnevelési” programokat, azaz a kínai történelem kényszerű, a tibeti kulturális és vallási önazonosság kiirtását célzó oktatását.
Ennek megfelelően választ adna az alelnök/főképviselő a következő kérdésekre?






1.


Miként kívánja kezelni Tibetben az emberi jogok ismétlődő megsértésének hosszú ideje fennálló kérdését?










2.


Milyen intézkedéseket kíván tenni a tibeti nép nevében a véleménynyilvánítás szabadságának védelme érdekében?










3.


Milyen fellépés tehető annak érdekében, hogy Kína betartsa az Emberi Jogok Egyetemes Nyilatkozatát?










4.


Hogyan alakulnak jelenleg az Unió, Kína és Tibet közötti kapcsolatok?










5.


Léteznek-e a tibeti nép számára támogatást nyújtó uniós programok?




Catherine Ashton alelnök/főképviselő válasza a Bizottság nevében
(2012. május 7.)






1–2.


Az alelnök/főképviselő aggodalmát fejezi ki a közelmúltban történt megdöbbentő esetek miatt, amikor mintegy harminc tibeti felgyújtotta magát, valamint a tibeti régióban a tiltakozások elfojtására alkalmazott egyre erőszakosabb intézkedésről szóló jelentések és a kolostorok feletti állami ellenőrzés megszigorítása miatt. Az Európai Unió Kínába akkreditált küldöttsége két demarsot intézett a külügyminisztériumhoz, amelyekben kifejezte az Európai Unió önégetések miatti aggodalmait. Az EU felvetette aggályait a tibeti emberi jogi helyzet miatt a 2012. február 14-i EU–Kína csúcsértekezleten is, valamint az ENSZ Emberi Jogi Tanácsának legutóbbi ülésén 2012. március 6-án kiadott nyilatkozatában. Az EU kérte, hogy tegyék lehetővé a tibetiek által lakott régiók meglátogatását, azonban ezt a kérést elutasították.










3.


Ezeken a találkozókon az EU sürgette Kínát, hogy tegyen eleget az Emberi Jogok Egyetemes Nyilatkozata szerinti kötelezettségeinek. Az Európai Unió különösen arra sürgette a kínai hatóságokat, hogy tartózkodjanak az erő alkalmazásától, engedjék a tibeti lakosok számára a vallási, a nyelvhasználattal kapcsolatos és kulturális jogaik szabad gyakorlását és kezeljék az önégetéseket kiváltó okokat, különösen a tibetiek tényleges részvételének érezhető hiányát a régió fejlesztési politikájában.










4.


Bár az EU nem kérdőjelezi meg, hogy Tibet Kína szerves része, ugyanakkor mély aggodalmát fejezi ki a jelenlegi helyzet miatt. Az Európai Unió egyértelműen a kínai hatóságok tudomására hozta ezeket az aggályokat a fent felsorolt találkozók során.











5.


A Tibetben működő nem kormányzati szervezetek kérelmet nyújthatnak be a demokrácia és az emberi jogok európai eszköze (EIDHR) által nyújtott pénzügyi támogatásra. Az alelnök/főképviselő biztosítja valamennyi kérelmezőt, hogy kérelmeiket a legszigorúbb titoktartás mellett kezelik és ennek megfelelően nem adnak semmilyen információt az EIDHR-projektekre










5.


A Tibetben működő nem kormányzati szervezetek kérelmet nyújthatnak be a demokrácia és az emberi jogok európai eszköze (EIDHR) által nyújtott pénzügyi támogatásra. Az alelnök/főképviselő biztosítja valamennyi kérelmezőt, hogy kérelmeiket a legszigorúbb titoktartás mellett kezelik és ennek megfelelően nem adnak semmilyen információt az EIDHR-projektekre




 (48) vonatkozóan.(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-000786/12
aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter/Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Tho.a. Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) en László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 februari 2012)

Betreft: VP/HR — Tibet: schendingen van de mensenrechten en vrijheid van meningsuiting van het Tibetaanse volk door de Chinese autoriteiten
Tijdens de afgelopen zes maanden alleen al hebben 15 Tibetaanse boeddhisten, waarvan de meesten monniken waren, zichzelf in het openbaar in brand gestoken, waarbij ze verschrikkelijke verwondingen opliepen of zelfs om het leven kwamen, om de publieke opinie in de wereld bewust te maken van het agressieve beleid van China ten opzichte van Tibet en de dramatische toestand daar.
Bij een recent voorval stak een 40-jarige monnik, die de leiding had over een weeshuis in Darlang, zichzelf in brand nadat hij kerosine over zijn lichaam gegoten had. Wanneer de Chinese autoriteiten met dergelijke wanhoopsdaden geconfronteerd worden, antwoorden ze echter met een beperking van de bewegingsvrijheid door de politie en verscherpte controles, omdat zelfmoord en zelfmoordpogingen door de Chinese autoriteiten worden gezien als  terroristische daden waarvan de Dalai Lama de aanstichter is. Naast het harde politieoptreden hebben de Chinese autoriteiten de verplichte „patriottische heropvoedingsprogramma's” voor monniken opgevoerd, d.w.z. gedwongen indoctrinatie van de Chinese geschiedenis, om de Tibetaanse culturele en religieuze identiteit uit te roeien.
Kan de vicevoorzitter — hoge vertegenwoordiger zeggen:







hoe zij dit al lang bestaande vraagstuk van herhaalde schendingen van de mensenrechten in Tibet gaat aanpakken;











welke actie namens het Tibetaanse volk ondernomen kan worden om zijn recht op vrije meningsuiting te beschermen;











welke actie ondernomen kan worden om te waarborgen dat China zich houdt aan de Universele Verklaring van de rechten van de mens; 











wat de status van de verhoudingen tussen EU-China-Tibet is;











of er EU-programma's zijn om het Tibetaanse volk te ondersteunen?




Antwoord van hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter Ashton namens de Commissie
(7 mei 2012)
1.-2. De hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter is bezorgd om de recente, verontrustende gevallen van zelfverbranding van een dertigtal Tibetanen, alsook om de meldingen van de steeds gewelddadigere maatregelen die worden aangewend om de protesten in de Tibetaanse regio’s te onderdrukken en de duidelijke aanscherping van de controle van de regering over kloosters. De EU-delegatie in China heeft twee demarches ondernomen bij het ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken om uitdrukking te geven aan de bezorgdheid van de EU over deze zelfverbrandingen. De EU heeft ook haar verontrusting geuit over de situatie van de mensenrechten in Tibet tijdens de topontmoeting tussen de EU en China op 14 februari 2012 en in een verklaring tijdens de Raad voor de mensenrechten op 6 maart 2012. De EU heeft verzocht de regio’s die worden bewoond door Tibetanen te bezoeken, maar dit verzoek is afgewezen. 






3.


Bij deze contacten heeft de EU er bij China op aangedrongen te voldoen aan de verplichtingen in het kader van de universele verklaring van de rechten van de mens. De EU dringt er bij de Chinese autoriteiten in het bijzonder op aan af te zien van het gebruik van geweld, de rechten van het Tibetaanse volk op het gebied van geloof, taal en cultuur te eerbiedigen en de achterliggende oorzaken van de zelfverbrandingen aan te pakken, met name het vastgestelde gebrek aan echte deelname van de Tibetaanse bevolking aan het ontwikkelingsbeleid van de regio. 










4.


Hoewel de EU niet betwist dat Tibet integraal deel uitmaakt van China, is zij tegelijk zeer bezorgd over de huidige situatie. De EU heeft dit duidelijk te kennen gegeven in haar contacten met de Chinese autoriteiten, zoals hierboven beschreven. 











5.


Niet-gouvernementele organisaties die actief zijn in Tibet, kunnen financiële steun aanvragen in het kader van het Europees instrument voor democratie en mensenrechten (EIDHR)










5.


Niet-gouvernementele organisaties die actief zijn in Tibet, kunnen financiële steun aanvragen in het kader van het Europees instrument voor democratie en mensenrechten (EIDHR)




 (49). De hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter garandeert de strikt vertrouwelijke behandeling van deze aanvragen en bijgevolg kan zij geen informatie verstrekken over EIDHR-projecten. (Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-000786/12
do Komisji (Wiceprzewodniczącej / Wysokiej Przedstawiciel)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) oraz László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 lutego 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Wiceprzewodnicząca/Wysoka Przedstawiciel – Tybet: naruszenia praw człowieka i wolności wypowiedzi Tybetańczyków przez chińskie władze
Tylko w ciągu ostatnich sześciu miesięcy aż 15 tybetańskich buddystów, z czego większość to mnisi, dokonało publicznego samopodpalenia, w wyniku którego niektórzy odnieśli poważne rany a inni nawet zginęli. Celem tych działań było zwrócenie uwagi światowej opinii publicznej na agresywną politykę Chin wobec Tybetu oraz na dramatyczną sytuację, jaka panuje w tym regionie.
Ostatnio tego typu incydentem było oblanie się naftą i samopodpalenie przez czterdziestoletniego mnicha, który prowadził sierociniec w Darlang. Reakcją chińskich władz na takie akty desperacji było jednak nałożenie ograniczeń policyjnych i zaostrzenie kontroli, a samobójstwa i próby samobójcze zostały określone przez te władze jako akty terroryzmu, do których namawia Dalajlama. Oprócz przedsięwzięcia surowych środków policyjnych chińskie władze zwiększyły zakres obowiązkowych programów z zakresu „patriotycznej reedukacji” mnichów, tj. narzucania chińskiej wizji historii, których celem jest wyeliminowanie kulturowej i religijnej tożsamości Tybetańczyków.
W związku z tym czy Wiceprzewodnicząca/Wysoka Przedstawiciel może powiedzieć:







w jaki sposób zamierza rozwiązać ten stały problem ciągłych naruszeń praw człowieka w Tybecie?











jakie działania można podjąć w imieniu Tybetańczyków w celu ochrony wolności wypowiedzi?











jakie działania można podjęć w celu dopilnowania tego, by Chiny przestrzegały Powszechnej deklaracji praw człowieka? 











jak prezentują się stosunki UE-Chiny?











czy istnieją unijne programy ukierunkowane na wspieranie Tybetańczyków?




Odpowiedź udzielona przez Wysoką Przedstawiciel i Wiceprzewodniczącą Komisji Catherine Ashton w imieniu Komisji
(7 maja 2012 r.)
1.–2. Wysoka Przedstawiciel i Wiceprzewodnicząca Komisji jest zaniepokojona niedawnymi smutnymi doniesieniami o przypadkach samopodpalenia co najmniej 30 mnichów tybetańskich oraz o coraz brutalniejszych środkach stosowanych w celu stłumienia protestów w regionach Tybetu, a także o wzmożeniu przez rząd kontroli nad klasztorami. Delegacja Unii Europejskiej w Chinach dwukrotnie podejmowała kroki dyplomatyczne wobec Ministerstwa Spraw Zagranicznych, wyrażając swoje obawy w związku z przypadkami samopodpalenia. Na szczycie UE-Chiny zorganizowanym dnia 14 lutego 2012 r. oraz w oświadczeniu zaprezentowanym podczas ostatniej rundy Rady Praw Człowieka dnia 6 marca 2012 r. Unia wyraziła także zaniepokojenie sytuacją w zakresie przestrzegania praw człowieka w Tybecie. Unia wystąpiła o zgodę na złożenie wizyty w regionach zamieszkanych przez Tybetańczyków, lecz jej wniosek został odrzucony.






3.


UE wezwała Chiny do przestrzegania zobowiązań, jakie Chiny podjęły, przystępując do Powszechnej deklaracji praw człowieka. Przede wszystkim Unia zaapelowała do władz chińskich, by powstrzymały się od stosowania siły, pozwoliły ludności tybetańskiej na korzystanie z jej praw do religii, języka i kultury oraz by zajęły się podstawowymi przyczynami samopodpalenia, zwłaszcza dostrzegalnym brakiem prawdziwego zaangażowania się Tybetańczyków w politykę rozwoju regionu.










4.


UE nie kwestionuje tego, że Tybet stanowi integralną część Chin, jednakże jest bardzo zaniepokojona obecną sytuacją. Swoje obawy w sposób wyraźny przekazała władzom chińskim przy okazji wspominanych wyżej kontaktów.











5.


Organizacje pozarządowe działające w Tybecie mogą składać wnioski o wsparcie finansowe w ramach Europejskiego Instrumentu na rzecz Wspierania Demokracji i Praw Człowieka (EIDHR)










5.


Organizacje pozarządowe działające w Tybecie mogą składać wnioski o wsparcie finansowe w ramach Europejskiego Instrumentu na rzecz Wspierania Demokracji i Praw Człowieka (EIDHR)




 (50). Wysoka Przedstawiciel i Wiceprzewodnicząca Komisji zapewnia wszystkich wnioskodawców, że ich wnioski będą rozpatrywane z zachowaniem ścisłej tajemnicy i w związku z tym nie może przekazywać żadnych informacji dotyczących projektów realizowanych w ramach Europejskiego Instrumentu na rzecz Wspierania Demokracji i Praw Człowieka.(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-000786/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente / Alta Representante)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) e László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 de Fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Tibete: violações dos direitos humanos e da liberdade de expressão do povo tibetano por parte das autoridades chinesas
Só nos últimos seis meses, pelo menos 15 budistas tibetanos, na sua maioria monges, atearam fogo a si próprios em público, sofrendo ferimentos terríveis ou até mesmo morrendo, para que a opinião pública mundial tomasse consciência das políticas agressivas da China relativamente ao Tibete e da situação dramática vivida neste país.
No incidente mais recente, um monge de 40 anos de idade, diretor de um orfanato em Darlang, ateou fogo a si próprio, derramando querosene sobre o corpo. No entanto, confrontadas com tais atos de desespero, as autoridades chinesas responderam com a imposição de restrições policiais e controlos apertados, enquanto o suicídio e as tentativas de suicídio foram definidos como atos de terrorismo instigados pelo Dalai Lama. Para além das medidas policiais repressivas, as autoridades chinesas reforçaram os programas de «reeducação» obrigatórios para os monges, isto é, a doutrinação coerciva da história chinesa, para erradicar a identidade cultural e religiosa do povo tibetano.
Atendendo ao exposto, pergunta-se à Vice-Presidente/Alta-Representante da União para os Negócios Estrangeiros e a Política de Segurança:







de que forma tenciona resolver a questão de longa data das violações reiteradas dos direitos humanos no Tibete?











que ações podem ser desenvolvidas a favor do povo tibetano de forma a proteger a sua liberdade de expressão?











que medidas podem ser adotadas para garantir que a China respeite a Declaração Universal dos Direitos Humanos? 











qual a situação das relações entre a UE, a China e o Tibete?











existem programas comunitários de apoio ao povo tibetano?




Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão
(7 de maio de 2012)






1. e 2.


A Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente está preocupada com os casos recentes e inquietantes de autoimolação de cerca de trinta tibetanos, bem como com as notícias que dão conta do recurso a medidas cada vez mais violentas para reprimir os protestos nas regiões do Tibete e de um aparente reforço do controlo governamental sobre os mosteiros. A Delegação da UE na China efetuou duas diligências junto do Ministério dos Negócios Estrangeiros para exprimir a preocupação da UE relativamente às autoimolações. A UE também manifestou a sua apreensão relativamente à situação dos direitos humanos no Tibete aquando da Cimeira UE‐China, realizada em 14 de fevereiro de 2012, e numa declaração apresentada na última sessão do Conselho dos Direitos do Homem, em 6 de março de 2012. A UE solicitou autorização para visitar as regiões habitadas por tibetanos, mas o seu pedido foi recusado. 










3.


No âmbito destes contactos, a UE instou a China a dar cumprimento às obrigações que lhe incumbem por força da Declaração Universal dos Direitos do Homem. Em especial, a UE instou as autoridades chinesas a abster-se do uso da força, a autorizar o povo tibetano a exercer os seus direitos religiosos, linguísticos e culturais e a atacar as causas profundas das autoimolações, nomeadamente a falta de envolvimento efetivo na política de desenvolvimento da região sentida pela população tibetana. 










4.


Embora não ponha em causa o facto de o Tibete fazer parte integrante da China, a UE está muito inquieta com a situação atual. As suas preocupações foram claramente transmitidas às autoridades chinesas no âmbito dos contactos acima referidos. 











5.


As organizações não-governamentais (ONG) que trabalham no Tibete podem apresentar pedidos de ajuda financeira a título do Instrumento Europeu para a Democracia e os Direitos Humanos. A Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente garante a todos os requerentes que os seus pedidos serão tratados com a maior confidencialidade, não podendo por este motivo transmitir quaisquer informações sobre os projetos IEDDH










5.


As organizações não-governamentais (ONG) que trabalham no Tibete podem apresentar pedidos de ajuda financeira a título do Instrumento Europeu para a Democracia e os Direitos Humanos. A Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente garante a todos os requerentes que os seus pedidos serão tratados com a maior confidencialidade, não podendo por este motivo transmitir quaisquer informações sobre os projetos IEDDH




 (51). (Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-000786/12
adresată Comisiei (Vice-președinte / Înaltul Reprezentant)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) şi László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 februarie 2012)

Subiect: VP/HR — Tibet: încălcările drepturilor omului și ale libertății de exprimare ale poporului tibetan de către autoritățile chineze
Numai în ultimele șase luni, nu mai puțin de 15 budiști tibetani, cei mai mulți călugări, și-au dat foc în public, suferind leziuni grave sau chiar murind, pentru a face opinia publică mondială conștientă de politica agresivă a Chinei față de Tibet și de situația dramatică de acolo.
În cel mai recent incident, un călugăr în vârstă de 40 de ani, care administra un orfelinat din Darlang, și-a dat foc după ce și-a turnat kerosen pe corp. Cu toate acestea, confruntându-se cu astfel de acte de disperare, autoritățile chineze au răspuns prin impunerea de restricții polițienești și înăsprirea controalelor, în timp ce sinuciderile și tentativele de suicid au fost definite de către autoritățile chineze ca acte de terorism la care instigă Dalai Lama. Pe lângă impunerea de restricții polițienești, autoritățile chineze au intensificat programele obligatorii de „reeducare patriotică” pentru călugări, adică de îndoctrinare impusă cu istoria Chinei, în scopul eradicării identității culturale și religioase tibetane.
În consecință, va arăta Vicepreședintele/Înaltul Reprezentant:







cum intenționează să abordeze această problemă aflată în discuție de mult timp privind încălcările repetate ale drepturilor omului în Tibet?











ce măsuri pot fi luate în numele poporului tibetan în vederea protejării libertății sale de exprimare?











ce măsuri pot fi luate pentru a asigura respectarea de către China a Declarației universale a drepturilor omului? 











care este situația relațiilor UE-China-Tibet?











există programe ale UE pentru susținerea poporului tibetan?




Răspuns dat de dna Ashton  în numele Comisiei
(7 mai 2012)






1.–2.


Dna Ashton, Înalt Reprezentant/Vicepreședinte, este preocupată de cazurile tulburătoare survenite recent, în care aproximativ 30 de tibetani și-au dat foc, precum și de informațiile primite privind măsurile din ce în ce mai violente utilizate pentru a reprima protestele din regiunile tibetane și înăsprirea vizibilă a controlului exercitat de guvern asupra mănăstirilor. Delegația UE în China a efectuat două demersuri pe lângă Ministerul afacerilor externe, exprimând preocuparea UE în ceea ce privește cazurile de autoincendiere. Cu ocazia reuniunii la nivel înalt UE-China care a avut loc la 14 februarie 2012 și în cadrul unei declarații în cursul ultimei sesiuni a Consiliului pentru drepturile omului, de la 6 martie 2012, UE și-a exprimat, de asemenea, îngrijorarea privind situația drepturilor omului în Tibet. UE a cerut să viziteze regiunile locuite de tibetani, însă această cerere a fost refuzată. 










3.


În cadrul acestor întâlniri, UE a cerut Chinei să își respecte obligațiile care îi revin în temeiul Declarației Universale a Drepturilor Omului. În special, UE le-a cerut autorităților chineze să se abțină de la utilizarea forței, să permită populației tibetane să își exercite drepturile religioase, lingvistice și culturale și să abordeze cauzele profunde ale cazurilor de autoincendiere, în special lipsa evidentă a unei participări reale a populației tibetane la politica de dezvoltare din regiune. 










4.


UE nu contestă faptul că Tibetul face parte integrantă din China, însă, în același timp, este profund îngrijorată de situația actuală. Preocupările UE au fost clar comunicate autorităților chineze în cadrul întâlnirilor enumerate mai sus. 










5.


Organizațiile neguvernamentale (ONG-uri) active în Tibet pot depune cereri pentru a solicita sprijin financiar în temeiul Instrumentului european pentru democrație și drepturile omului. Înaltul Reprezentant/ dna vicepreședinte Ashton le garantează tuturor solicitanților că cererile lor vor fi tratate în deplină confidențialitate; în consecință, nu poate furniza nicio informație privind proiectele IEDDO (52). 




(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-000786/12
Komisii (podpredsedníčka / vysoká predstaviteľka)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) a László Tőkés (PPE)
(1. februára 2012)

Vec: VP/HR — Tibet: porušovanie ľudských práv a slobody prejavu Tibeťanov čínskymi orgánmi
Len za posledných šesť mesiacov sa najmenej 15 tibetských budhistov, väčšinou mníchov, zapálilo na verejnosti, v dôsledku čoho utrpeli vážne zranenia alebo dokonca zomreli, aby upriamili pozornosť svetovej verejnej mienky na agresívnu čínsku politiku voči Tibetu a dramatickú situáciu v Tibete.
Pri najnovšom incidente 40-ročný mních, ktorý spravoval sirotinec v Darlangu, vylial na seba petrolej a zapálil sa. Čínske orgány konfrontované takýmito prejavmi zúfalstva však odpovedali uvalením policajných zákazov a sprísnením kontrol, pričom samovražda a pokus o samovraždu boli čínskymi orgánmi vymedzené ako teroristické činy podnecované dalajlámom. Okrem policajných zásahov čínske orgány zintenzívnili povinné „vlastenecké reedukačné“ programy pre mníchov, t. j. vynútené osvojovanie si čínskych dejín, s cieľom odstrániť tibetskú kultúrnu a náboženskú identitu.
Môže sa teda podpredsedníčka Komisie/vysoká predstaviteľka vyjadriť k tomu:







ako mieni riešiť dlhodobo pretrvávajúcu otázku opakovaného porušovania ľudských práv v Tibete?











aké opatrenia je možné prijať v záujme Tibeťanov na ochranu ich slobody prejavu?











aké opatrenia je možné prijať na zabezpečenie toho, aby Čína dodržiavala Všeobecnú deklaráciu ľudských práv? 











aký je stav vzťahov EÚ — Čína — Tibet?











či existujú programy EÚ na podporu Tibeťanov?




Odpoveď podpredsedníčky Komisie/vysokej predstaviteľky Ashtonovej v mene Komisie
(7. mája 2012)






1. – 2.


Podpredsedníčka Komisie/vysoká predstaviteľka je znepokojená nedávnymi prípadmi samoupálenia asi tridsiatich Tibeťanov, ako aj správami o čoraz násilnejšom charaktere opatrení, ktoré sa používajú na potlačenie protestov v regiónoch Tibetu, a zjavným posilňovaním kontroly vlády nad kláštormi. Delegácia EÚ v Číne zaslala ministerstvu zahraničných vecí dva demarše, v ktorých vyjadrila znepokojenie EÚ nad prípadmi samoupaľovania. Európska únia vyjadrila znepokojenie nad situáciou v oblasti ľudských práv v Tibete na samite EÚ a Číny 4. februára 2012 a vo vyhlásení v Rade pre ľudské práva 6. marca 2012. Požiadala o povolenie navštíviť regióny obývané Tibeťanmi, ale táto žiadosť bola zamietnutá. 










3.


V rámci týchto kontaktov EÚ vyzvala Čínu, aby dodržala záväzky, ktoré jej vyplývajú zo Všeobecnej deklarácie ľudských práv. Osobitne čínske úrady požiadala, aby sa zdržali použitia sily, umožnili tibetskému obyvateľstvu uplatňovať jeho náboženské, jazykové a kultúrne práva a aby sa snažili riešiť hlavnú príčinu samoupaľovania, ktorým je najmä vnímaná nedostatočná skutočná participácia tibetského obyvateľstva na politike rozvoja regiónu. 










4.


Hoci EÚ nespochybňuje, že Tibet je integrálnou súčasťou Číny, súčasná situácia ju veľmi znepokojuje. EÚ tlmočila svoje obavy Číne v rámci uvedených kontaktov. 











5.


Mimovládne organizácie, ktoré pôsobia v Tibete, majú možnosť predkladať žiadosti o finančnú podporu z európskeho nástroja pre demokraciu a ľudské práva. Vysoká predstaviteľka/podpredsedníčka Komisie všetkým žiadateľom garantuje, že s ich žiadosťami sa bude zaobchádzať s maximálnou dôvernosťou, a preto nemôže poskytnúť žiadne informácie o projektoch ENDĽP










5.


Mimovládne organizácie, ktoré pôsobia v Tibete, majú možnosť predkladať žiadosti o finančnú podporu z európskeho nástroja pre demokraciu a ľudské práva. Vysoká predstaviteľka/podpredsedníčka Komisie všetkým žiadateľom garantuje, že s ich žiadosťami sa bude zaobchádzať s maximálnou dôvernosťou, a preto nemôže poskytnúť žiadne informácie o projektoch ENDĽP




 (53). (Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-000786/12
till kommissionen (vice-ordföranden / höga representanten)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) och László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 februari 2012)

Angående: VP/HR‐ibet: kinesiska myndigheters kränkningar av det tibetanska folkets mänskliga rättigheter och yttrandefrihet
Bara under det senaste halvåret har inte mindre än 15 tibetanska Buddhister, de flesta munkar, satt eld på sig själva på offentliga platser, med fruktansvärda skador och till och med dödsfall som följd, för att göra den allmänna världsopinionen medveten om Kinas aggressiva politik mot Tibet och om den dramatiska situationen i landet.
I den senaste incidenten satte en 40-årig munk som drev ett barnhem i Darlang eld på sig själv efter att ha hällt fotogen over sig. Ställd inför sådana desperata handlingar har de kinesiska myndigheterna emellertid svarat med att låta polisen införa begränsningar och införa strängare kontroller, medan självmord och försök till självmord har definierats av de kinesiska myndigheterna som terroristhandlingar anstiftade av Dalai Lama. Förutom polisingripanden har de kinesiska myndigheterna utökat de obligatoriska programmen för ”patriotisk omskolning” för munkar, dvs. tvingande indoktrinering i kinesisk historia i syfte att utplåna tibetanernas kulturella och religiösa identitet.
Jag vill därför be vice ordföranden/höga representanten svara på följande:







Hur tänker hon angripa det långvariga problemet med upprepade kränkningar av de mänskliga rättigheterna i Tibet?











Vilka åtgärder kan vidtas för att skydda det tibetanska folkets yttrandefrihet?











Vilka åtgärder kan vidtas för att se till att Kina följer den allmänna förklaringen om de mänskliga rättigheterna? 











Hur ser förbindelserna mellan EU, Kina och Tibet ut?











Finns det EU-program till stöd för det tibetanska folket?




Svar från den höga representanten/vice ordförande Catherine Ashton på kommissionens vägnar
(7 maj 2012)






1-2.


Den höga representanten/vice ordföranden är bekymrad över de uppskakande fallen av självbränningar som har ägt rum på senare tid av ett trettiotal tibetaner, liksom rapporterna om att allt våldsammare metoder tas i bruk för att kväva protester i de tibetanska regionerna, samt regeringens tydligt skärpta kontroll över klostren. EU:s delegation i Kina har gjort två demarscher till utrikesdepartementet och förmedlat EU:s farhågor över självbränningarna. EU har också uttryckt sin oro över situationen i fråga om mänskliga rättigheter i Tibet vid toppmötet mellan EU och Kina den 14 februari 2012, samt i ett uttalande vid det sista mötet i rådet för mänskliga rättigheter den 6 mars 2012. EU har begärt att få besöka de tibetanska regionerna men begäran har avslagits.










3.


Vid dessa kontakter har EU uppmanat Kina att uppfylla sina förpliktelser enligt den allmänna förklaringen om de mänskliga rättigheterna. EU uppmanade särskilt de kinesiska myndigheterna att avstå från att använda våld, att tillåta den tibetanska befolkningen att utöva sina religiösa, språkliga och kulturella rättigheter samt att ta itu med de bakomliggande orsakerna till självbränningarna, i synnerhet den uppfattade bristen på verklig delaktighet för tibetaner i regionens utvecklingspolitik.










4.


EU ifrågasätter inte att Tibet är en integrerad del av Kina, men hyser ändå oro över den nuvarande situationen. Detta har tydligt framförts till de kinesiska myndigheterna vid de kontakter som beskrivits ovan.











5.


Icke-statliga organisationer som arbetar i Tibet kan lämna in ansökningar om finansiellt stöd från det europeiska instrumentet för demokrati och mänskliga rättigheter (EIDHR)










5.


Icke-statliga organisationer som arbetar i Tibet kan lämna in ansökningar om finansiellt stöd från det europeiska instrumentet för demokrati och mänskliga rättigheter (EIDHR)




 (54). Den höga representanten/vice ordföranden försäkrar att alla ansökningar kommer att hanteras med sträng sekretess och kan således inte sprida någon information om EIDMR:s projekt.(English version)
Question for written answer E-000786/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Roberta Angelilli (PPE), Gianni Pittella (S&D), Gabriele Albertini (PPE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Paolo Bartolozzi (PPE), Mario Borghezio (EFD), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE), Antonio Cancian (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Leonidas Donskis (ALDE), Kinga Gál (PPE), Lidia Joanna Geringer de Oedenberg (S&D), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Salvatore Iacolino (PPE), Philippe Juvin (PPE), Filip Kaczmarek (PPE), Othmar Karas (PPE), Tunne Kelam (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Giovanni La Via (PPE), Vytautas Landsbergis (PPE), Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE), Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE), Thomas Mann (PPE), Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Claudio Morganti (EFD), Tiziano Motti (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Kristiina Ojuland (ALDE), Mariya Nedelcheva (PPE), Alfredo Pallone (PPE), Aldo Patriciello (PPE), Mario Pirillo (S&D), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Licia Ronzulli (PPE), Anna Rosbach (ECR), Oreste Rossi (EFD), Matteo Salvini (EFD), Amalia Sartori (PPE), Giancarlo Scottà (EFD), Marco Scurria (PPE), Joanna Senyszyn (S&D), Debora Serracchiani (S&D), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE), Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE), Peter Šťastný (PPE), Gianluca Susta (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Manfred Weber (PPE), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Keith Taylor (Verts/ALE), Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE) and László Tőkés (PPE)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Tibet: violations of the Tibetan people's human rights and freedom of expression by the Chinese authorities
In the last six months alone, no fewer than 15 Tibetan Buddhists, most of whom were monks, have set themselves on fire in public, suffering terrible injury or even dying in the process, to make world public opinion aware of China’s aggressive policy towards Tibet and the dramatic situation there.
In the most recent incident, a 40-year-old monk who ran an orphanage in Darlang set himself on fire after pouring kerosene over his body. However, faced with such acts of desperation, the Chinese authorities have responded by imposing police restrictions and tightening controls, while suicide and attempted suicide have been defined by the Chinese authorities as acts of terrorism instigated by the Dalai Lama. In addition to a police crack-down, the Chinese authorities have stepped up mandatory ‘patriotic re-education’ programmes for monks, i.e. coercive indoctrination of Chinese history in order to eradicate Tibetan cultural and religious identity.
Accordingly, will the Vice-President/High Representative say:







how she intends to tackle the long-standing issue of repeated violations of human rights in Tibet;











what action can be taken on behalf of the Tibetan people to protect its freedom of expression?











what action can be taken to ensure that China complies with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? 











what the state of EU‐China-Tibet relations is?











whether there are EU programmes in support of the Tibetan people?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(7 May 2012)
1-2. The HR/VP is concerned about the recent distressing cases of self-immolation of some thirty Tibetans, as well as reports of increasingly violent measures used to suppress protests in the Tibetan regions and the apparent tightening of government control over monasteries. The EU Delegation to China has made two demarches to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressing the EU’s concern at the self-immolations. The EU also raised its concerns regarding the human rights situation in Tibet at the EU‐China Summit on 14 February 2012 and in a statement at the last round of the Human Rights Council on 6 March 2012. The EU has asked to visit the regions inhabited by Tibetans but this request has been refused. 






3.


In these contacts, the EU urged China to comply with its obligations under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In particular, the EU urged the Chinese authorities to refrain from the use of force, to allow the Tibetan people to exercise their religious, linguistic and cultural rights and to address the root causes of the self-immolations, in particular the perceived lack of genuine participation by the Tibetan population in the development policy of the region. 










4.


While the EU does not question that Tibet is an integral part of China, at the same time it is greatly concerned about the current situation. The EU’s concerns have been clearly conveyed to the Chinese authorities in the contacts listed above. 











5.


It is open to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) working in Tibet to submit applications for financial support from the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights. The HR/VP assures all applicants that their applications will be handled in the strictest confidence and accordingly cannot provide any information concerning EIDHR










5.


It is open to non-governmental organisations (NGOs) working in Tibet to submit applications for financial support from the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights. The HR/VP assures all applicants that their applications will be handled in the strictest confidence and accordingly cannot provide any information concerning EIDHR




 (55) projects. (English version)
Question for written answer P-000810/12
to the Commission
Liam Aylward (ALDE)
(31 January 2012)

Subject: Future of adult and community education under the ‘Erasmus for All’ programme
Under the new ‘Erasmus for All’ programme, the European Commission has stated that ‘investing in education and training is the best investment we can make for Europe‘s future’. EUR 19 million has currently been allocated to this programme. It has been stated that ‘Erasmus for All’ will bring together all the current EU and international schemes for education, training, youth and sport, replacing seven existing programmes, including the Grundtvig adult education programme, with one combined programme from 2014 onwards.
How does the Commission plan to provide for non-formal and non-vocational education as part of this programme? Non-formal and non-vocational education are a vital part of the education system in terms of their ability to foster basic skills and competences and of supporting social inclusion for the most educationally disadvantaged individuals.
With the amalgamation of the Grundtvig programme into this newly combined ‘Erasmus for All’, how does the Commission plan to support the adult learners and adult learning organisations that had previously benefited from the Grundtvig programme?
Can the Commission give information regarding the heading in the ‘Erasmus for All’ programme under which adult education appears?
Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission
(20 February 2012)
The Commission's proposal for the ‘Erasmus for All’ programme aims to increase coherence between the different sectors of education, and strengthen the lifelong learning approach, mainly by linking support to formal and non-formal learning throughout the education and training spectrum. All three of the programme's main actions — learning mobility, cooperation between institutions, and policy reform — will support non-formal learning.
Adult education will be covered under the heading ‘Erasmus training’. The programme as proposed will allow a significant increase in funds for non-vocational adult learning. The communication accompanying the Commission's draft Regulation puts forward an annual average of EUR 110 million for non-vocational adult learning, 80 % more than under the present programme. 
Secondly, learning partnerships and joint projects among adult education providers will continue to be at the heart of activities supported in the adult learning sector. The programme will also provide for support for the development of IT platforms for the different educational sectors, including a new Electronic Platform for Adult Learning in Europe. 
Thirdly, support for policy reform will be enhanced within the new programme with a view to the achievement of the objectives of the Strategic Framework for European cooperation in education and training, ET2020, and the Europe 2020 strategy, including its headline targets in the field of education and human capital.
(České znění)
Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení E-000815/12
Komisi
Robert Dušek (S&D)
(1. února 2012)

Předmět: Implementace směrnice Rady 1999/74/ES a postih za její nedodržení
Směrnice Rady 1999/74/ES v kapitole II článku 5 zakazuje ve všech členských státech EU od 1. 1. 2012 chov nosnic v nezdokonalených klecích.
V řadě států EU však nebyl dosud obsah směrnice naplněn.
Táži se Komise, jakým způsobem budou potrestány členské státy, příp. jejich producenti, kteří svoji povinnost v termínu nesplnili?
Zdůrazňuji, že nedodržením uvedeného předpisu s nulovou penalizací ze strany Komise jsou trestáni odpovědní producenti, kteří předpis splnili řádně a v termínu.
Odpověď Johna Dalliho jménem Komise
(8. března 2012)
Komise přistupuje k této záležitosti velmi vážně a v souladu se svými pravomocemi podniká příslušné kroky, aby zajistila dodržování zákazu chovu nosnic v nezdokonalených klecích v rámci celé EU.
Komise proto oslovila členské státy, které podle údajů, jež byly k dispozici v listopadu 2011, nebudou pravděpodobně schopny plně ukončit chov nosnic v nezdokonalených klecích k datu 1. ledna 2012. ((NI)I)ěkolik členských států od té doby přijalo příslušná opatření a prohlásilo, že tato povinnost byla splněna. Komise bude ověřovat správné splnění těchto povinností. Přibližně polovina členských států však v řádném termínu chov nosnic v nezdokonalených klecích zcela neukončila. Komise zahájila dne 27. ledna 2012 řízení o nesplnění povinnosti zasláním výzvy Belgii, Bulharsku, Řecku, Španělsku, Francii, Itálii, Kypru, Lotyšsku, Maďarsku, ((NI)I)izozemsku, Polsku, Portugalsku a Rumunsku, v níž požaduje, aby uvedené členské státy přijaly opatření k řešení nedostatků v provádění právních předpisů EU týkajících se dobrých životních podmínek zvířat a zejména aby uplatnily zákaz chovu nosnic v nezdokonalených klecích.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000815/12
to the Commission
Robert Dušek (S&D)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Implementation of Council Directive 1999/74/EC and sanctions for non-compliance
Chapter II, Article 5 of Council Directive 1999/74/EC prohibits the keeping of laying hens in unenriched cages after 1 January 2012 in all EU Member States.
In many EU states, however, the directive has not yet been implemented.
I would like to ask the Commission how Member States or producers therein who fail to fulfil their obligations within the deadline will be punished?
I would like to emphasise that a failure on the part of the Commission to punish non‐compliance with the regulation would penalise responsible producers who have complied with the provisions of the directive properly and within the deadline.
Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(8 March 2012)
The Commission is taking this issue seriously and is taking the appropriate steps in line with its legal powers to ensure compliance with the ban on unenriched cages for laying hens across the EU.
The Commission therefore initiated contacts with the Member States which, according to the data available in November 2011, would possibly not be able to fully phase out unenriched cages by 1 January 2012. Since then, a few Member States have taken action and declared to have achieved compliance. The Commission will verify the accuracy of that information. However, around half of the Member States did not fully phase out unenriched cages on time. On 27 January 2012 the Commission initiated infringement proceedings by sending a letter of formal notice to Belgium, Bulgaria, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal and Romania requesting those Member States to take action to address deficiencies in the implementation of EU legislation concerning animal welfare, and specifically to implement the ban on unenriched cages for laying hens.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-000816/12
an die Kommission
Renate Sommer (PPE)
(1. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Diffamierung christlicher Minderheiten in türkischen Schulbüchern
In der Neuauflage eines Geschichtsbuchs für den Schulunterricht in der Türkei werden Aramäer als Landesverräter und Wirtschaftsflüchtlinge diffamiert, die im Westen „zum Werkzeug der politischen und religiösen Interessen der dortigen Länder“ geworden seien. Dieser Angriff auf aramäische Christen in der Türkei ist nur ein Beispiel für die Hasspropaganda, die in türkischen Schulbüchern sowie in türkischen Medien gegen christliche Minderheiten verbreitet wird. Auch die Kommission erwähnt diese Hasspropaganda im jüngsten Fortschrittsbericht.
1. Ist der Kommission der jüngste Vorwurf der Volksverhetzung in der Neuauflage des Geschichtsbuchs bekannt?
2. Wenn ja: Hat die Kommission im Rahmen der Beitrittsverhandlungen eine Richtigstellung in den Schulbüchern gefordert?
3. Welche Sanktionen gedenkt die Kommission einzusetzen, wenn die türkische Regierung der Forderung nicht nachkommt?
Antwort von Herrn Füle  im Namen der Kommission
(2. März 2012)
Der Kommission ist die Problematik der in türkischen Schulbüchern verwendeten Formulierungen bekannt und sie hat dieses Thema der Türkei gegenüber bereits angesprochen.
Die Türkei teilte mit, dass Schulbücher nach geltendem Recht keine Äußerungen enthalten dürfen, die gegen die Grundrechte verstoßen oder Diskriminierungen aufgrund des Geschlechts, der Rasse, der Religion, der Sprache, der Hautfarbe, der politischen Meinung oder weltanschaulicher Ansichten enthalten. Sie bestätigte ferner, dass das besagte, im Sekundarbereich (10. Klasse) verwendete Geschichtsbuch nach diesen gesetzlichen Vorgaben verfasst wurde. Zudem sei beabsichtigt, Abschnitte und Inhalte dieses Schulbuches, die zu Irritationen oder Missverständnissen führen könnten, bei der Aktualisierung des Buches für das Schuljahr 2012/2013 zu überarbeiten.
Die Kommission wird weiterhin überwachen, ob die Türkei als EU-Beitrittskandidat die Grundrechte und Grundfreiheiten ihrer Bürgerinnen und Bürger gemäß den Bestimmungen der Europäischen Menschenrechtskonvention und dem Fallrecht des Europäischen Menschenrechtsgerichtshofs garantiert.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000816/12
to the Commission
Renate Sommer (PPE)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Defamation of Christian minorities in Turkish school textbooks
A new edition of a history textbook for Turkish schools defames Assyrians as traitors to their country and economic refugees who have become the ‘tools of political and religious interests in the West’. This attack on Assyrian Christians in Turkey is just one example of the propaganda of hatred being spread in Turkish schoolbooks and in the Turkish media against Christian minorities. The Commission also mentions this propaganda in its latest progress report.
1. Is the Commission aware of the latest accusation of incitement to racial hatred in the new edition of the history book?
2. If so, has the Commission demanded that the schoolbooks should be corrected as part of accession negotiations?
3. What sanctions is the Commission considering if the Turkish Government fails to meet this demand?
Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(2 March 2012)
The Commission is aware of the language used in Turkish textbooks, and has raised the issue with the Turkish authorities.
The Turkish authorities responded that under current legislation school textbooks cannot contain language that contradicts fundamental rights or is discriminatory based on sex, race, religion, language, colour, political opinion, or philosophical views; and that the history textbook in question used at the secondary education level for the 10th grade was drafted based on this legislation; finally, sections and information of this textbook that may lead to confusion and misunderstandings will be reviewed in the updating of the book for the 2012-2013 school year.
The Commission will continue to monitor whether Turkey, as a country negotiating accession to the EU, guarantees the fundamental rights and freedoms of all its citizens in line with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000817/12
to the Commission
Liam Aylward (ALDE)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Airline consumers and ETS
Directive 2008/101/EC amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) came into effect on 1 January 2012. The Aviation Directive requires all (EU and non-EU) operators of fixed or rotary-wing aircraft over 5 700 kg (12 566 pounds) who fly to, from or within EU countries to participate in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. ETS charges are based on the emissions an airline will produce, in order to cope with aviation’s contribution to global warming.
There are now concerns as to how airlines will deal financially with this new charge, and the possibility that consumers may incur a further cost as a result of airlines trying to deal with the charge.
What is the Commission’s position in relation to concerns that consumers will be negatively affected by the ETS tax?
Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission
(27 February 2012)
The EU has included aviation in its emissions trading system (EU ETS), a system which caps the total emissions of aviation. It is important to clarify that the EU ETS is not a tax or charge but rather a ‘pollution ceiling’ — if an airline can limit emissions below the ceiling it need not incur any costs at all.
The ceiling or ‘
cap
’
 consists of an absolute number of emissions allowances being issued in respect of aviation activities. The majority of the allowances for aviation, 85 % in 2012 and 82 % starting from 2013, will be distributed to the aviation industry free of charge. The remainder will be auctioned by Member States. The extra cost of the EU ETS per passenger is therefore expected to be very low. By way of example, and assuming a carbon price of EUR 8 (the current level), if airlines pass through the full value of allowances, these costs will be less than EUR 3 each way on a typical flight between Dublin and New York. As most allowances are provided for free, the actual costs would typically be much lower and probably less than EUR 2 for the roundtrip. Either way, this is a modest cost and should not significantly impact the demand for air travel. The Commission believes it is consistent with the polluter-pays-principle that passengers bear the costs of the pollution associated with their flights.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-000819/12
aan de Commissie
Lambert van Nistelrooij (PPE), Nuno Teixeira (PPE) en Wim van de Camp (PPE)
(1 februari 2012)

Betreft: Status van Aruba in het transformatieproces naar ultraperifere regio en financiële steun van proefproject 13 03 32
In 2011 heeft het Europees Parlement een proefproject (13 03 32) goedgekeurd en opgenomen in de begroting van 2012 om Mayotte of andere gebieden die mogelijk worden geraakt door de overgang naar de status van ultraperifere regio te steunen. Het beschikbare bedrag voor dit proefproject is 2 miljoen EUR. De regering van Aruba, een van de Nederlandse overzeese gebieden, heeft belangstelling getoond om ultraperifere regio te worden. In deze fase zal naar verwachting in 2012 een referendum voorbereid worden.
We willen onderzoeken of dit proefproject Aruba direct kan steunen in het overgangsproces om ultraperifere regio te worden. Naar aanleiding daarvan hebben we de volgende vragen:







Komt Aruba in aanmerking voor financiële steun onder deze begrotingsrubriek om de regering te steunen in het overgangsproces van overzees gebied naar ultraperifere regio?











Zo ja, wat zijn de criteria waaraan Aruba moet voldoen om dergelijke financiële steun te ontvangen?











Wat is de procedure voor het indienen van een aanvraag om financiële steun te ontvangen van dit proefproject?











Kan de Commissie een actueel overzicht geven van de vooruitgang van Aruba in het overgangsproces naar een ultraperifere regio? Heeft de Commissie contact gehad met de regering van Aruba en Nederland over dit vraagstuk na mei 2011? Zo ja, wat was het resultaat van deze gesprekken?




Antwoord van de heer Hahn namens de Commissie
(12 maart 2012)
De voorbereidende actie „Begeleiding van Mayotte of eventuele andere gebieden bij het proces van verkrijging van de status van ultraperifere regio” is goedgekeurd in de EU-begroting voor 2012. Zoals vermeld in de titel, komt elk ander gebied dat zich in dezelfde positie bevindt als Mayotte voor deze actie in aanmerking. Bij de implementatie van dit begrotingsonderdeel worden dezelfde criteria toegepast op alle gebieden die zich in dezelfde situatie bevinden. 
Voor Aruba, anders dan voor Mayotte, is bij de Europese Raad geen initiatief overeenkomstig artikel 355, lid 6, van het VWEU ingediend om de status te wijzigen. Er hebben informele contacten plaatsgevonden tussen de diensten van de Commissie en vertegenwoordigers van de Nederlandse nationale en de Arubaanse autoriteiten, die hoofdzakelijk tot doel hadden duidelijkheid te scheppen over aspecten van het proces voor en de gevolgen van de eventuele verkrijging van de status van ultraperifere regio.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-000819/12
à Comissão
Lambert van Nistelrooij (PPE), Nuno Teixeira (PPE) e Wim van de Camp (PPE)
(1 de fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: Estatuto de Aruba no processo de transformação numa região ultraperiférica e ajuda financeira a título do Projeto-Piloto 13 03 32
Em 2011, o Parlamento Europeu aprovou um projeto-piloto (13 03 32) no orçamento de 2012 para apoiar Mayotte ou qualquer outro território potencialmente afetado pela transição de estatuto para região ultraperiférica. O orçamento disponível para este projeto-piloto é de 2 milhões de euros. O governo de Aruba, um dos territórios ultramarinos dos Países Baixos, expressou o seu interesse em tornar-se numa região ultraperiférica. Nesta fase, está prevista a preparação de um referendo para 2012.
Gostaríamos de saber se este projeto-piloto pode ajudar diretamente Aruba no processo de transição para se tornar numa região ultraperiférica. Assim, pergunta-se à Comissão:







Pode Aruba candidatar-se ao financiamento a título desta rubrica orçamental a fim de apoiar o governo no processo de transição de território ultramarino para região ultraperiférica?











Em caso afirmativo, quais são os critérios que Aruba deve cumprir para beneficiar destefinanciamento?











Que procedimento deve seguir para requerer o financiamento a título deste projeto-piloto?











Pode a Comissão fornecer uma atualização do estatuto de Aruba relativamente aos seus progressos no que respeita ao processo de transição para se tornar numa região ultraperiférica? Tem a Comissão estado em contacto com os governos de Aruba e dos Países Baixos relativamente a esta questão desde maio de 2011? Em caso afirmativo, qual foi o resultado dessas conversações?




Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão
(12 de março de 2012)
A ação preparatória intitulada «Assistência técnica para apoiar Mayotte ou qualquer outro território potencialmente afetado com a transição para o estatuto de região ultraperiférica» foi adotada na decisão relativa ao orçamento da UE para 2012. Em princípio, e como indicado no título, esta ação pode aplicar-se a qualquer outro território em situação idêntica à de Mayotte. Na execução desta rubrica orçamental, serão aplicados os mesmos critérios a todos os territórios em situação idêntica. 
No que diz respeito à situação de Aruba, e contrariamente à posição existente em relação a Mayotte, ainda não foi apresentada nenhuma iniciativa ao Conselho Europeu para alterar o seu estatuto, em conformidade com o artigo 355.°, n.° 6, do TFUE. Verificaram-se alguns contactos informais entre os serviços da Comissão e representantes das autoridades nacionais dos Países Baixos e de Aruba, essencialmente com vista a clarificar questões relacionadas com o processo, bem como o impacto de qualquer alteração ao estatuto de região ultraperiférica.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000819/12
to the Commission
Lambert van Nistelrooij (PPE), Nuno Teixeira (PPE) and Wim van de Camp (PPE)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Status of Aruba in the process of transformation to an outermost region and financial support from Pilot Project 13 03 32
In 2011 the European Parliament adopted a Pilot Project (13 03 32) in the 2012 budget to support Mayotte or any other territory potentially affected by the switchover to outermost region status. The available budget for this pilot project is EUR 2 million. The government of Aruba, one of the Dutch overseas territories, has expressed interest in becoming an outermost region. In this phase the preparation of a referendum is foreseen in 2012.
We would like to find out whether this pilot project can directly support Aruba in the process of transition to becoming an outermost region. Therefore we have the following questions:







Is Aruba eligible for funding under this budget heading to support the government in the process of transformation from an overseas territory to an outermost region?











If so, what are the criteria Aruba must meet in order to receive such funding?











What is the procedure for filing a request to receive funding from this pilot project?











Can the Commission provide a status update with regard to Aruba’s progress in the transition to becoming an outermost region? Has the Commission been in touch with the governments of Aruba and the Netherlands on this matter since May 2011? If so, what was the outcome of these talks?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(12 March 2012)
The preparatory action titled ‘Technical assistance on supporting Mayotte, or any other territory potentially affected with the switchover to outermost-region status’ has been adopted in the 2012 EU budget decision. In principle, and as mentioned in the title, this action may apply to any other territory in a similar position to Mayotte. In the implementation of this budget line, the same criteria will apply to all territories in the same situation. 
As regards the situation of Aruba, and contrary to the position obtaining for Mayotte, no initiative for its change of status has yet been presented to the European Council in accordance with Article 355(6) TFEU. There have been some informal contacts between the Commission services and representatives of the Dutch national and Aruban authorities essentially seeking clarification on issues relating to the process for, and the impact of, any change to outermost regions status.
(České znění)
Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení E-000820/12
Komisi (místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoká představitelka)
Jan Březina (PPE)
(1. února 2012)

Předmět: VP/HR – Reakce místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoké představitelky na nedávný vývoj situace v Barmě
Moje otázka se týká nedávného vývoje situace v Barmě a způsobu, jak na něj reaguje místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoká představitelka. Spojené státy reagovaly jako první, když ministryně zahraničí Hillary Clintonová během své návštěvy v Barmě v prosinci 2011 uvedla, že se zde objevují „náznaky pokroku“. Následovali představitelé z Evropy. Ministr zahraničí Spojeného království, William Hague, navštívil Barmu na začátku ledna a ujistil, že vláda bude souzena „podle svých činů“. Rovněž naznačil, že je zapotřebí provést „mnohem více“ reforem, než bude EU připravena zrušit sankce. Tento signál však byl významný kvůli tomu, jakou váhu má Spojené království v definování politik EU.
Barmu navštívil rovněž dánský ministr pro rozvoj, který nabídl dodatečné finanční prostředky na rozvoj rostoucí se občanské společnosti. Ministr čekal o jeden den déle na vhodné letecké spojení, aby se vyhnul cestování s leteckou společností barmského režimu, která stále podléhá sankcím.
Francouzský ministr zahraničí Alain Juppé se rovněž zapojil do diplomatických návštěv Barmy. Předal čestné vyznamenání Aun Schan Su Ťij a uvedl, že jeho srdce „bilo rychleji než obvykle“. V dohledné době budou pravděpodobně následovat představitelé z Německa.
Místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoká představitelka se však do této záležitosti zatím nezapojila činy, ale pouze slovy. V nedávném prohlášení uvítala „propuštění politických vězňů“ a dodala, že musí následovat další propouštění a že se zde objevila příležitost pro „nový vztah“ s EU. Nedomnívá se však, že to, že nenavštívila Barmu, je ostudné a představuje to ztracenou příležitost? Nemyslí si, že to postavení EU vůči Barmě oslabuje?
Odpověď vysoké představitelky a místopředsedkyně Komise Ashtonové  jménem Komise
(16. dubna 2012)
Vysoká představitelka a místopředsedkyně Komise vede přezkum politiky EU vůči Barmě/Myanmaru od roku 2010, prodloužila mandát zvláštního vyslance EU Pietra Fassina (do srpna minulého roku) a pověřila diplomata Roberta Coopera, aby se spojil s Do Aun Schan Su Ťij po jejím propuštění z domácího vězení koncem roku 2010.
V dubnu 2011 se ministři zahraničí EU na podnět vysoké představitelky dohodli, že pozastaví uplatňování restriktivních opatření vůči téměř třetině vlády. Dali tak jasné znamení, že pozitivní změna ze strany této vlády vzbudí odpovídající reakci ze strany EU.
Návštěvy pánů Fassina a Coopera v červnu a prosinci minulého roku Evropské unii umožnily příznivě ovlivňovat vývoj událostí prostřednictvím tiché diplomacie.
Na zasedání ministrů zahraničí EU, které se konalo dne 23. ledna letošního roku, získala vysoká představitelka souhlas s pozastavením uplatňování restriktivních opatření pro celou vládu a vyzvala mezinárodní finanční instituce, aby postupně obnovily spolupráci s touto zemí. Evropská unie tak vždy působila v úzké koordinaci se stejně smýšlejícími partnery a stála v čele mezinárodního diplomatického úsilí o vyřešení situace v Barmě/Myanmaru.
Vysoká představitelka a místopředsedkyně Komise navíc intenzivně spolupracuje s komisařkou Georgievovou a komisařem Piebalgsem, kteří Barmu/Myanmar navštívili v září 2011, respektive v únoru 2012, čímž politické působení EU zahájili. Vysoká představitelka a místopředsedkyně Komise plánuje návštěvu země po přezkumu rozhodnutí Rady v dubnu, kdy budou možné další konkrétní diskuse o začátku nové kapitoly ve vztazích mezi EU a Barmou/Myanmarem.
Vysoká představitelka a místopředsedkyně Komise rovněž zanedlouho, po dohodě mezi Radou a Komisí, přijme formální rozhodnutí o otevření kanceláře EU v Yangonu. Oficiální zahájení provozu této kanceláře se plánuje na duben/květen tohoto roku.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000820/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Jan Březina (PPE)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Response by the Vice-President/High Representative to the recent developments in Burma
My question concerns the recent developments in Burma and the response to it by the Vice-President/High Representative. The US responded first, citing ‘flickers of progress’, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s visit in December 2011. Representatives from Europe followed. UK Foreign Secretary William Hague visited Burma in early January and gave assurances that the government would be judged ‘by its actions’. He also signalled that ‘much more’ reform would be needed before the EU was ready to lift sanctions; but this was an important signal because of the weight which the UK carries in defining the EU's policies.
The Danish Minister for Development has also visited Burma, offering additional development funding for what is a growing civil society. The minister waited an extra day for the right flight connection out of the country so as to avoid flying with the regime’s airline, which is still subject to sanctions.
French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe has also joined in the shuttle diplomacy involving Burma. He presented Aung San Suu Kyi with an honorary medal, reporting that his heart ‘beat faster than normal’. Representatives from Germany are likely to follow soon.
The Vice-President/High Representative, however, has so far only been present through words rather than actions. In a recent statement, she welcomed the ‘release of political prisoners,’ adding that more needed to follow and that there was opportunity for a ‘new relationship’ with the EU. Yet does she not consider it a shame and a missed opportunity not to visit Burma? Does she not think that this undermines the EU’s position in Burma?
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton  on behalf of the Commission
(16 April 2012)
The High Representative/Vice-President has been guiding the review of EU policy towards Myanmar since 2010, extending the mandate of EU Special Envoy Piero Fassino (until August last year) and mandating Counsellor Robert Cooper to take contact with Daw Aung San Suu Kyi when she was released from house arrest in late 2010. 
In April 2011, at her initiative, EU Foreign Ministers agreed to suspend the application of restrictive measures in respect of nearly a third of the government, sending a concrete signal that positive change on their part would meet a corresponding response from the EU. 
Subsequent visits of Messrs. Fassino and Cooper in June and December last year enabled the EU, through quiet diplomacy, to influence the positive evolution of events. 
At the meeting of EU Foreign Ministers on 23 January this year, the High Representative obtained agreement to suspend application of restrictive measures for the full Government and called for the International Financial Institutions to reengage progressively with the country. Thus, always coordinating closely with like minded partners, the EU has been well to the fore in international diplomatic efforts to advance the situation in Myanmar. 
Furthermore, the High Representative/Vice-President has worked closely together with Commissioners Georgieva and Pieblags who visited the country, respectively in September 2011, and Piebalgs in February 2012, thereby launching EU political engagement. The HR/VP plans to visit after the review of the Council Decision in April, when it will be possible to have further concrete discussions about beginning a new chapter in relations between the EU and Burma/Myanmar.
The HR/VP will shortly adopt the formal Decision to open an EU Office in Yangon, in agreement with the Council and the Commission. Its official opening is foreseen in April/May this year.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-000841/12
an die Kommission
Daniel Caspary (PPE)
(1. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Angabe von Amperestunden (Ah) auf Batterien
Trotz der Vielzahl an Batterien fehlt auf keiner Batterie die wichtige Angabe ihrer Spannung in Volt (V). Es fehlt allerdings die Angabe der gespeicherten elektrischen Ladung einer Batterie in Amperestunden (Ah), die nach Meinung des Fragestellers ein wesentliches Eigenschaftsmerkmal einer Batterie ist. Bei Autobatterien oder wiederaufladbaren Batterien ist diese Ladung in Ah angegeben, auf Batterien des Typs A, AA, AAA usw. allerdings nicht.






1.


Inwieweit ist der Kommission dieser Sachverhalt bekannt?










2.


Inwieweit sieht die Kommission die Angabe der elektrischen Ladung bei einer Batterie als wesentliche Eigenschaft an?










3.


Beabsichtigt die Kommission, eine solche Angabe verpflichtend vorzuschreiben?




Gemeinsame Antwort von Herrn Potočnik im Namen der Kommission
(22. März 2012)
Da sich die Gestaltung einer einheitlichen und aussagekräftigen Kennzeichnung für nicht wiederaufladbare Gerätebatterien und ‐akkumulatoren als technisch schwierig erwiesen hat, hat die Kommission die Normungsgremien (CEN/Cenelec) beauftragt, zu prüfen, ob bis Juni 2012 eine Kennzeichnung zur Angabe der Kapazität eingeführt werden kann. Eine solche Kennzeichnung zur Angabe der Kapazität würde auch eine Angabe in Amperestunden (Ah) enthalten. 
Bis zum Inkrafttreten EU-weit harmonisierter Rechtsvorschriften für nicht wiederaufladbare Gerätebatterien und ‐akkumulatoren sind die Mitgliedstaaten nicht verpflichtet, Kennzeichnungen zur Angabe der Kapazität einzuführen oder vorzuschreiben. Auch Batteriehersteller sind nicht verpflichtet, ihre Erzeugnisse mit einer Kapazitätskennzeichnung zu versehen, sofern dies nicht in den innerstaatlichen Rechtsvorschriften vorgesehen ist. Jegliche Kennzeichnungsvorschriften der einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten gelten nur bis zum Inkrafttreten von harmonisierten EU-Anforderungen (56). Bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt müssen die EU-Mitgliedstaaten die Kommission im Einklang mit der Richtlinie 98/34/EG über ein Informationsverfahren auf dem Gebiet der Normen und technischen Vorschriften (57) über alle neuen technischen Durchführungsmaßnahmen unterrichten.
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-001504/12
till kommissionen
Carl Schlyter (Verts/ALE)
(8 februari 2012)

Angående: Kapacitetsmärkning av alla bärbara batterier
Enligt artikel 21.2 i batteridirektivet 2006/66/EG ska medlemsstaterna ”se till att kapaciteten hos alla bärbara batterier och bilbatterier anges på produkterna på ett synligt, lättläst och outplånligt sätt senast den 26 september 2009. Närmare föreskrifter för genomförandet av detta krav, däribland harmoniserade metoder för att fastställa kapacitet och lämplig användning, skall fastställas i enlighet med förfarandet i artikel 24.2 senast den 26 mars 2009”.
Kommissionen antog den 29 november 2010 förordning (EU) nr 1103/2010 vari det fastställdes regler för kapacitetsmärkning av laddningsbara batterier och ackumulatorer, men inte för icke-laddningsbara batterier. Det finns därför ännu inte någon ordentlig kapacitetsmärkning för icke-laddningsbara batterier i medlemsstaterna. Europaparlamentets huvudmotiv för att introducera märkningsbestämmelsen under medbeslutandeförfarandet var att ta itu med frågan om icke-laddningsbara batterier, vilkas kapacitet och pris skiljer sig mycket åt utan att någon ordentlig information ges. I stället för att konsumenter får objektiv information som skulle göra det möjligt för dem att göra ett välinformerat val utsätts de fortfarande för marknadsföring med påståenden som saknar vetenskaplig grund. Ett billigare batteri kan i själva verket bli dyrare på medellång sikt eftersom dess relativa kapacitet kan vara mycket lägre än kapaciteten hos ett annat märke, vilket gör att konsumenten måste köpa ett nytt batteri efter en kortare tid. Detta vilseleder konsumenterna och bidrar till att skapa fler förbrukade batterier vilket i sin tur kan leda till miljöföroreningar.






1.


Vilka åtgärder kommer kommissionen att vidta med tanke på att den än så länge inte har uppfyllt de ovannämnda skyldigheterna i enlighet med batteridirektivet?










2.


Bryter de medlemsstater som inte har infört kapacitetsmärkning i enlighet med artikel 21.2 mot de tillämpliga bestämmelserna i direktivet även om det inte finns några riktlinjer? Om så är fallet, kommer kommissionen se till att dessa bestämmelser tillämpas fullt ut av alla medlemsstater?




Samlat svar från Janez Potočnik på kommissionens vägnar
(22 mars 2012)
Med tanke på den tekniska komplexiteten när det gäller att utforma en enhetlig och meningsfull märkning för bärbara icke-laddningsbara batterier och ackumulatorer har kommissionen gett standardiseringsorganen (CEN/Cenelec) i uppdrag att undersöka möjligheterna att inrätta en standardiserad kapacitetsmärkning senast i juni 2012. En sådan kapacitetsmärkning skulle innehålla en uppgift om amperetimmar. 
Fram till dess att harmoniserad EU-lagstiftning om bärbara icke-laddningsbara batterier och ackumulatorer har införts måste inte medlemsstaterna införa kapacitetsmärkning eller kräva att sådan används, och batteriproducenter måste inte kapacitetsmärka sina produkter, om inte detta krävs enligt nationell lagstiftning. Nationella märkningskrav kommer endast att gälla till dess att harmoniserade EU-krav införts (58). Fram till dess måste EU-medlemsstaterna till kommissionen anmäla eventuella nya tekniska genomförandebestämmelser i enlighet med direktiv 98/34/EG om standardisering och tekniska föreskrifter (59).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000841/12
to the Commission
Daniel Caspary (PPE)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Labelling of ampere hours (Ah) on batteries
Despite the multitude of batteries available, every battery displays the important labelling of its potential in volts (V). However, there is no indication in ampere hours (Ah) of the electric charge stored in a battery, which in the opinion of the questioner is an essential feature of a battery. In automotive or rechargeable batteries this capacity is stated in Ah, but on batteries of types A, AA, AAA, etc. it is not.
1. To what extent is the Commission aware of these facts?
2. To what extent does the Commission consider the labelling of the electric charge on a battery to be an essential feature?
3. Does the Commission intend to make such labelling compulsory?
Question for written answer E-001504/12
to the Commission
Carl Schlyter (Verts/ALE)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: Capacity labelling of all portable batteries
According to Article 21(2) of the Batteries Directive 2006/66/EC, ‘Member States shall ensure that the capacity of all portable and automotive batteries and accumulators is indicated on them in a visible, legible and indelible form by 26 September 2009. Detailed rules for the implementation of this requirement, including harmonised methods for the determination of capacity and appropriate use, shall be laid down in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 24(2) no later than 26 March 2009’.
While the Commission adopted Regulation (EU) No 1103/2010 establishing rules as regards capacity labelling of rechargeable batteries and accumulators on 29 November 2010, it failed to do so for non-rechargeable batteries. As a result, there is still no proper capacity labelling for non-rechargeable batteries in Member States. However, the key motivation for the European Parliament to introduce the labelling provision during the co-decision procedure was to address non-rechargeable batteries, as capacities and costs differ widely without any proper information. Instead of receiving objective indications that would allow an informed choice, consumers are still confronted with all kinds of marketing claims without any scientific basis. As such, a cheaper battery may actually become more expensive in the medium-term, as its relative capacity may well be far lower than that of another brand, thus requiring the purchase of new batteries sooner. This misleads the consumer and contributes to creating more waste batteries, which in turn can lead to environmental pollution.
1. What measures are you going to take and when, given that you have so far not complied with your obligations as referred to above, pursuant to the Batteries Directive?
2. Are Member States that have not ensured the capacity indication pursuant to Article 21(2) violating the relevant provisions of this directive even if no guidelines exist? If so, what action will the Commission take to ensure full application of this provision by all Member States?
Joint answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(22 March 2012)
Given the technical complexity to design a single and meaningful label for portable non-rechargeable batteries and accumulators, the Commission has issued a mandate to the standardisation bodies (CEN/CENELEC) to study the feasibility of establishing a standardised capacity label by June 2012. Such capacity label would provide an indication in ampere hours (Ah). 
Until EU harmonised legislation for portable non-rechargeable batteries and accumulators is in place, Member States are not obliged to introduce or require the use of capacity labels, and battery producers are not obliged to place capacity labels on them, unless required under national law. Any national labelling requirements will apply only until harmonised EU requirements are in place (60). Meanwhile, EU Member States must notify the Commission of any new technical implementing measure(s), in accordance with Directive 98/34/EC for standardisation and technical regulations (61).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000852/12
to the Commission
Liam Aylward (ALDE) and Brian Crowley (ALDE)
(1 February 2012)

Subject: Flexibility for young farmers under the CAP 2014-2020
In relation to the proposed single farm payment top-up for young farmers under CAP 2014-2020, can the Commission outline what degree of flexibility will be given to Member States in its implementation?
At present, Ireland has 6.9 % of farmers under 35 years of age, but for the Commission’s aims and objectives for young farmers under this top-up to be met, the full allocation of 2 % must be made available to young farmers. At present, Ireland does not have enough young farmers listed for this top-up to make any measurable impact.
In this regard, does the Commission anticipate giving flexibility to Member States to set the criteria for this measure in accordance with the profile and needs of young farmers in their respective countries?
Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(2 March 2012)
The Commission proposal on direct payments to farmers after 2013 (62) includes a new payment scheme for young farmers, additional to the basic payment scheme, as a way of better targeting CAP first pillar support to farmers whose income is more fragile. Through this proposal the Commission acknowledges that generational renewal in agriculture is an issue throughout the EU, where only a limited percentage of farmers are under 40 years of age (approximately 14 % in EU‐27, according to the most recent statistics). 
The young farmers scheme is compulsory to the Member States. The proposal provides that the Member States fix the budget allocation to the scheme depending on their national peculiarities, provided that the amount does not exceed 2 % of their national ceilings for direct payments. The chosen percentage could be reviewed by the Member States by 1 August 2016. 
The possibility to set additional eligibility criteria for young farmers at the Member States level is not included in the proposal, in line with the generalized implementation of CAP first pillar. The eligibility criteria set in Article 36(1) and 36(2) of the proposal would apply. The proposal of CAP reform foresees that Member States can design more targeted measures addressing young farmers' needs under their rural development programmes.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-000870/12
aan de Commissie
Saïd El Khadraoui (S&D)
(2 februari 2012)

Betreft: Herlaadpalen elektrische voertuigen
De Europese Commissie stelt in haar witboek transport dat de uitstoot van ons transportsysteem tegen 2050 met 60 % gedaald moet zijn. Een zeer ambitieuze doelstelling die enkel bereikt kan worden via een mix van maatregelen. Een van de voorgestelde maatregelen is om de wagens met klassieke verbrandingsmotoren uit onze steden te weren en meer te investeren in andere brandstoffen. Steeds meer autofabrikanten brengen dan ook een elektrische of hybride wagen op de markt. Dit brengt natuurlijk de noodzaak aan het installeren van voldoende oplaadpunten voor deze wagens met zich mee.






1.


Beschikt de Commissie over vergelijkende cijfers over het aantal oplaadpunten in de verschillende lidstaten?










2.


Heeft de Commissie weet van geplande projecten in de lidstaten om het aantal herlaadpunten te verhogen?










3.


Wordt er volgens de Commissie voldoende aandacht besteed aan de ontwikkeling en toepassing van een gelijke Europese standaard voor deze herlaadpalen en zullen bestuurders dus ook in andere lidstaten hun wagen gemakkelijk kunnen opladen?




Antwoord van de heer Kallas namens de Commissie
(12 maart 2012)
De Commissie verwijst het geachte Parlementslid naar haar antwoord op schriftelijke vragen E-008744/2011, E-000021/2012 en E-000671/2012 van de heer Jim Higgins (PPE), mevrouw Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D) en de heer Andreas Mölzer (NI) (63).
Wat de normen voor laadstations voor elektrische voertuigen betreft, heeft de Commissie het CEN, het CENELEC en het ETSI (Europese normalisatie-instellingen, ESO's) in juni 2010 opdracht gegeven nieuwe normen vast te stellen (of bestaande normen te herzien) om te zorgen voor interoperabiliteit en connectiviteit tussen oplaadpunten en laders van elektrische voertuigen. 
Tegelijkertijd hebben stekkerproducenten op verzoek van de Commissie en in het kader van het CARS 21-proces de afgelopen maanden verdere besprekingen gevoerd. Bij de normalisering van de oplaadinterface moet rekening worden gehouden met de standpuntenvan de verschillende belanghebbenden en de activiteiten die ontplooid worden door internationale normalisatiefora. De Europese Commissie volgt de werkzaamheden van de ESO's op de voet en zal de meest geschikte maatregel nemen om tot een toereikende en aanvaardbare oplossing te komen.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000870/12
to the Commission
Saïd El Khadraoui (S&D)
(2 February 2012)

Subject: Charging stations for electric vehicles
According to the European Commission’s White Paper on transport, we should achieve a 60 % reduction in emissions from our transport system by 2050. This is a very ambitious target, which can only be achieved through a mixture of measures. One of the proposed measures is to phase out cars with conventional internal combustion engines from our cities and to invest more in other fuels. This is why more and more car manufacturers are bringing electric or hybrid cars onto the market. This, of course, makes it necessary to install a sufficient number of charging stations for those cars.






1.


Does the Commission have comparative figures for the number of charging stations in the different Member States?










2.


Does the Commission know of any plans in the Member States to increase the number of charging stations?










3.


Does the Commission believe that enough attention is being given to developing and implementing a pan-European standard for such charging stations, which will allow drivers to easily charge their cars in other Member States?




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(12 March 2012)
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Questions E‐008744/2011, E‐000021/2012 and E‐000671/2012 by Mr Jim Higgins (PPE), Ms Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D) and Andreas Mölzer (NI) (64).
On the standards of the electric vehicle charging stations, the Commission delivered a Mandate to CEN, CENELEC and ETSI (ESOs — European Standardisation Organisations) in June 2010 to adopt new standards (or revise existing ones) with the aim to ensure the interoperability and the connectivity between the electricity supply point and the charger of electric vehicles. 
In parallel to the standardisation process, further discussions have also been held between plug producers in recent months at the request of the Commission and within the CARS 21 process. The standardisation of the recharging interface will need to take into account the positions of different stakeholders and the ongoing activities in international 
standardisation fora. The European Commission follows closely the work of ESOs and will take the most appropriate solution to ensure a satisfactory and acceptable outcome on this issue.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-000929/12
adresată Comisiei
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(2 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Schemă de ajutor de stat pentru calitatea laptelui
Comisia a aprobat, pentru România, prelungirea până în 2013 a perioadei de tranziție pentru alinierea la cerințele comunitare de igienă a laptelui crud produs. Având în vedere solicitările producătorilor, Comisia este rugată să precizeze în ce condiții poate statul român să pună la dispoziția acestora o schemă de ajutor de stat pentru calitatea laptelui.
Răspuns dat de domnul Cioloș în numele Comisiei
(29 februarie 2012)
Ajutoarele care pot fi acordate pentru adaptarea exploatațiilor din sectorul laptelui la normele comunitare în vigoare sunt de două tipuri:






—


un ajutor pentru investiții destinat tinerilor agricultori, care poate atinge 60% din costul suplimentar asociat punerii în aplicare a normei în zonele defavorizate și 50% în celelalte zone, în măsura în care acest cost este suportat în termen de 36 de luni de la instalarea tânărului agricultor, iar acesta din urmă este identificat ca atare în planul de dezvoltare agricolă la care se face referire la articolul 22 alineatul (1) litera (c) din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 1698/2005 al Consiliului (65), cu condiția ca acest lucru să fie prevăzut în programul de dezvoltare rurală al României;










—


un ajutor de minimis care poate atinge 7 500 EUR pentru fiecare beneficiar și fiecare perioadă de trei ani fiscali, în limitele unui cuantum maxim stabilit, pentru România, la 98 685 000 EUR pentru aceeași perioadă, conform dispozițiilor Regulamentului (CE) nr. 1535/2007 al Comisiei (66).




Ajutoarele menționate nu sunt accesibile întreprinderilor în dificultate, nici celor care ar avea de rambursat ajutoare declarate incompatibile cu piața internă, atâta vreme cât nu s-a efectuat rambursarea sau cât cuantumul acesteia nu a fost depus într-un cont blocat (cu dobânzile aferente în ambele cazuri).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000929/12
to the Commission
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(2 February 2012)

Subject: State aid scheme for milk quality
The Commission has approved the extension up to 2013 of the transition period for the alignment of Romanian raw milk production with Community hygiene standards. Taking into consideration the producers’ requests, can the Commission specify under what conditions the Romanian government can make a state aid scheme for milk quality available to them?
(Version française)
Les aides pouvant être accordées pour l'adaptation des exploitations laitières à des normes communautaires en vigueur sont de deux types:






—


une aide aux investissements pour les jeunes agriculteurs, pouvant atteindre 60 % du coût supplémentaire dû à la mise en œuvre de la norme, dans les zones défavorisées, et 50 % dans les autres zones, pour autant que ce coût soit supporté dans les 36 mois suivant l'installation du jeune agriculteur et que ce dernier soit identifié comme tel dans le plan de développement agricole visé à l'article 22, paragraphe 1, point c) du règlement (CE) no 1698/2005 du Conseil (67), à condition que cela soit prévu dans le programme de développement rural de la Roumanie;










—


une aide de minimis pouvant atteindre 7 500 euros par bénéficiaire et par période de trois exercices fiscaux, dans les limites d'un montant maximal fixé, pour la Roumanie, à 98 685 000 euros pour la même période, conformément aux dispositions du règlement (CE) no 1535/2007 de la Commission (68).




Les aides précitées ne sont pas accessibles aux entreprises en difficulté ni à celles qui auraient des aides déclarées incompatibles avec le marché intérieur à rembourser, tant que le remboursement n'aura pas été effectué ou que le montant à rembourser n'aura pas été placé sur un compte bloqué (avec les intérêts dus dans les deux cas).
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-000941/12
aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter — Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)
Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE)
(3 februari 2012)

Betreft: VP/HR — EU rapport Oost Jeruzalem 2011, wetgeving tegen nederzettingenpolitiek en zwarte lijsten voor kolonisten
In het door de missieleiders van de EU in Tel Aviv en Ramallah opgemaakte en in de pers verschenen rapport over Oost-Jeruzalem van 2011 wordt vermeld dat de situatie in Oost-Jeruzalem erop achteruit gaat, en de systematische nederzettingentoename in toenemende mate de kans op een tweestatenoplossing ondermijnt. Volgens het rapport volgt Israel een beleid van het verplaatsen van de Joodse bevolking naar bezet Palestijns gebied in tegenspraak met de 4e Geneefse Conventie en internationaal humanitair recht. Israël ondermijnt ook systematisch de Palestijnse aanwezigheid in Oost-Jeruzalem, bv. door strikte bouwvoorschriften in Palestijnse buurten op te leggen, Palestijnse huizen te vernielen, en Palestijnse woonvergunningen in te trekken of te weigeren.
Het rapport roept op tot concrete actie om de nederzettingengroei van Israel een halt toe te roepen. Zo zou er wetgeving moeten komen om financiële transacties  ter ondersteuning van de nederzettingen te vermijden en Europese bedrijven te verhinderen of te ontmoedigen handelsactiviteiten te ontplooien die de illegale nederzettingenpolitiek van Israel zouden ondersteunen. Dit zou beter werken dan een politiek ingestelde boycot.
Een tweede suggestie in het rapport is dat gewelddadige kolonisten die zich in het door Israël bezette Oost-Jeruzalem hebben gevestigd, geïdentificeerd moeten worden en op een zwarte lijst van de EU zouden moeten komen te staan. Op die manier kan hen de toegang tot de EU worden ontzegd.
Dit rapport, dat de woordvoerder van het Israelisch Ministerie van Buitenlandse Zaken omschreef als „een onaangenaam geluid op de achtergrond” („an unpleasant background noise”), komt bovenop gelijkaardige EU-rapporten over Oost-Jeruzalem van vorige jaren, en een ander recent in de pers bekendgeraakt intern EU-rapport van juli 2011 over Area C, het gebied van de Westelijke Jordaanoever dat voor 62 % onder Israëlische controle staat. In dat rapport wordt gezegd dat ook de nederzettingen daar een tweestatenoplossing onmogelijk maken.
Zal de Hoge Vertegenwoordiger beide concrete suggesties van de missieleiders in Tel Aviv en Ramallah  ter harte nemen en ze actief bepleiten?
Hoe zal de EU concreet de Israëlische nederzettingproblematiek helpen doorbreken?
Antwoord van hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter Ashton namens de Commissie
(23 april 2012)
Het rapport waarnaar het geachte Parlementslid in zijn vraag verwijst, wordt jaarlijks opgemaakt door de EU-missies in Jeruzalem en Ramallah om verslag uit te brengen over de ontwikkelingen  ter plaatse. Het gaat om een intern en periodiek verslag dat niet openbaar is, en dat gebruikt wordt als informatiebron en input voor discussies over het EU-beleid voor het Midden-Oosten en Oost-Jeruzalem. Om deze reden acht de hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter het niet opportuun opmerkingen te maken over de inhoud en aanbevelingen uit dit vertrouwelijke verslag. 
Het officiële standpunt van de EU ten aanzien van Oost-Jeruzalem en het vredesproces in het Midden-Oosten is  terug te vinden in de conclusies van de Raad van december 2009 en 2010. Ook het oordeel van de EU over de nederzettingen komt duidelijk naar voren in bovengenoemde conclusies. De EU oefent voortdurend toezicht uit op de situatie  ter plaatse en betreurt geregeld uitdrukkelijk de uitbreiding van de nederzettingen op de Westelijke Jordaanoever (inclusief Oost-Jeruzalem), zowel in haar contacten met de regering van Israël als in haar publieke verklaringen. In samenwerking met het Midden-Oostenkwartet streeft de EU ook actief naar een alomvattende oplossing voor het Arabisch-Israëlische conflict, met name op grond van de resoluties van de Veiligheidsraad van de Verenigde Naties en de „Roadmap”, waarin ertoe wordt opgeroepen de nederzettingen niet verder uit te breiden. 
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-001493/12
till kommissionen (Vice-ordföranden/Höga representanten)
Marita Ulvskog (S&D)
(8 februari 2012)

Angående: VP/HR–örhindrande av finansiella transaktioner från EU till stöd för Israels bosättningsverksamhet
Det finns ett brådskande behov av att komma fram till en rättvis lösning på konflikten mellan Israel och Palestina under 2012 för att få slut på den ockupation som nu är inne på sitt 45:e år. Den systematiska utvidgningen av israeliska bosättningar är olaglig enligt folkrätten och utgör även det största hotet mot den tvåstatslösning som ni arbetar hårt för att få till stånd.
Vid tidpunkten för Venedigdeklarationen år 1980 fanns det uppskattningsvis 20 000 illegala bosättare på Västbanken. Nu finns det över 300 000 bosättare, och dessutom fler än 190 000 bosättare i östra Jerusalem. Om detta tillåts fortsätta kommer en tvåstatslösning inte att komma till stånd.
EU:s beskickningschefer rekommenderar i sin rapport från 2012 om östra Jerusalem kommissionen att ”överväga att lägga fram lämplig EU-lagstiftning för att förhindra/försvåra finansiella transaktioner till stöd för bosättningsverksamhet”.
Accepterar ni denna rekommendation, såsom jag hoppas och förväntar mig? Hur tänker ni genom EU-åtgärder, för vilka jag kan försäkra er om att ni skulle ha överväldigande stöd i parlamentet, genomföra denna rekommendation med tanke på ert mandat som fördragens väktare och upprätthållare av internationell humanitär rätt?
Samlat svar från den höga representanten/vice ordförande Catherine Ashton på kommissionens vägnar
(23 april 2012)
Den rapport som parlamentsledamoten nämner i sin fråga är en årlig rapport om utvecklingen i Jerusalem och Ramallah som utarbetas av EU:s beskickningar. Det är en intern, rutinmässig, faktabaserad rapport och inte en offentlig handling. Rapporten utgör en informationskälla och bidrar till diskussionerna om EU:s politik gentemot Mellanöstern och östra Jerusalem. Av denna anledning anser den höga representanten/vice ordföranden att det inte är lämpligt att yttra sig om innehållet i den konfidentiella rapporten eller de rekommendationer den innehåller.
EU:s officiella ståndpunkt om östra Jerusalem och fredsprocessen i Mellanöstern återspeglas i rådets slutsatser från december 2009 och 2010. EU:s ståndpunkt om bosättningar är också tydlig och anges i de ovannämnda slutsatserna. EU övervakar kontinuerligt läget på plats och beklagar regelbundet utvidgningen av bosättningar på Västbanken, inklusive i östra Jerusalem, både i sina kontakter med Israels regering och i sina offentliga uttalanden. Inom ramen för Mellanösternkvartetten söker EU också aktivt en övergripande lösning på den arabisk–israeliska konflikten, bland annat på grundval av relevanta resolutioner från Förenta nationernas säkerhetsråd och färdplanen där man efterlyser ett stopp för utvidgningen av bosättningar.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000941/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE)
(3 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — EU report on East Jerusalem 2011, legislation against the settlement policy and black lists for settlers
The report on East Jerusalem (2011) by the EU heads of mission in Tel Aviv and Ramallah, which has appeared in the press, states that the situation in East Jerusalem is deteriorating and the systematic increase in settlement activity increasingly undermines a two-state solution. According to the report, Israel is pursuing a policy of relocating Jews to the occupied Palestinian territory in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and international humanitarian law. Israel is also systematically undermining the Palestinian presence in East Jerusalem, for example by imposing restrictive planning regulations in Palestinian neighbourhoods, demolishing Palestinian houses and revoking or denying building permits to Palestinians.
The report calls for concrete action to put a stop to the expansion of Israeli settlements. Thus, it calls for legislation which would prevent financial transactions in support of settlement activities and prevent or discourage European companies from engaging in commercial activities supporting Israel’s illegal settlement policy. This would be more effective than a politically-driven motivated boycott.
The second recommendation in the report is that violent settlers who have moved to Israel-occupied East Jerusalem should be identified and included in an EU black list. This will ensure that they are denied entry to the EU.
This report, described by the Israeli Foreign Ministry’s spokesman as ‘an unpleasant background noise’ comes in the wake of similar EU reports on East Jerusalem from previous years and another internal EU report of July 2011, recently highlighted in the press, about Israeli-run Area C, which makes up 62 % of the West Bank. This report notes that the settlements are making a two-state solution impossible there too.
Will the High Representative heed the two concrete recommendations of the mission leaders in Tel Aviv and Ramallah and actively advocate them?
What concrete action will the EU take to help resolve the Israeli settlement problem?
Question for written answer E-001493/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Marita Ulvskog (S&D)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Prevention of EU financial transactions in support of Israeli settlement activity
A fair solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is urgently needed in 2012, in order to end an occupation that is now in its 45th year. The systematic expansion of Israeli settlement is illegal under international law, and is also the biggest threat to the two-state solution for which you are working so hard.
At the time of the EU’s Venice Declaration of 1980, there were approximately 20 000 illegal settlers on the West Bank. Now, there are over 300 000, plus more than 190 000 in East Jerusalem. If this is allowed to go on, there will be no two-state solution.
In their 2012 report on East Jerusalem, the EU heads of mission unanimously recommend that the Commission ‘consider proposing appropriate EU legislation to prevent/discourage financial transactions in support of settlement activity’.
Do you accept this recommendation, as I hope and expect? Under your mandate in terms of guardianship of the treaties and upholding international humanitarian law, how do you intend to implement this recommendation, through EU measures which I assure you will have the overwhelming support of this Parliament?
Joint answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(23 April 2012)
The report referred to in the Honourable Member's question is an annual exercise by the EU missions in Jerusalem and Ramallah reporting on developments on the ground. It is an internal, routine, factual report, and is not a public document. The report serves as a source of information and input into discussions surrounding EU policy towards the Middle East and East Jerusalem. For this reason, the High Representative/Vice-President does not consider it appropriate to comment on the contents of the confidential report or its recommendations.
The EU’s official position on East Jerusalem and the Middle East peace process is reflected in the Council conclusions from December 2009 and 2010. The EU’s position on settlements is also clear and outlined in the aforementioned conclusions. The EU is constantly monitoring the situation on the ground and regularly deplores settlement expansion in the West Bank including East Jerusalem both in its contacts with the Government of Israel and in its public statements. Through the Quartet it is also actively seeking a comprehensive resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict, on the basis of, inter alia, the relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions and the roadmap which calls for a halt to settlement expansion.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-000958/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(3. februára 2012)

Vec: Európsky systém obchodovania s emisiami
Od 1. januára 2012 sú v Európe platné poplatky za prichádzajúce aj odchádzajúce lety. Európska únia sa týmto spôsobom snaží obmedziť skleníkové plyny v ovzduší. Aerolíniám, ktoré odmietnu platiť, hrozí pokuta či dokonca zákaz letov do krajín EÚ. Čínske aerolínie sa však do európskeho systému obchodovania s emisiami zapojiť odmietajú, pretože sa obávajú, že to spôsobí prekážku vo vzájomnom obchode, ktorú pocítia aj čínski turisti cestujúci do Európy. Čína vypočítala, že vstup do systému by stál čínske spoločnosti v prvom roku okolo 95 miliónov eur a do roku 2020 by sa tieto náklady strojnásobili. Zvažuje preto podanie žaloby. Platenie za emisie sa nepáči ani indickým, kanadským alebo austrálskym prepravcom. Americké aerolínie už na EÚ žalobu podali, Súdny dvor Európskej únie však rozhodol, že predmetná európska legislatíva je v súlade s medzinárodným právom.
Mieni Komisia medzinárodným leteckým spoločnostiam v určitom smere ustúpiť alebo bude na súčasne platnej legislatíve trvať aj naďalej?
Odpoveď pani Hedegaardovej v mene Komisie
(19. marca 2012)
Komisia si uvedomuje, že tretie krajiny hľadia na systém EÚ na obchodovanie s emisiami (ETS) s obavami, a aktívne sa zapája do diskusií na bilaterálnej aj medzinárodnej úrovni v rámci ICAO, aby tieto obavy odstránila.
EÚ sa pevne zasadzuje za vykonávanie svojich právnych predpisov týkajúcich sa ETS v oblasti leteckej dopravy a zároveň sa v rámci Medzinárodnej organizácie civilného letectva pozitívne zapája do zrýchlenej činnosti zameranej na trhové opatrenia. Komisia nemôže pozastaviť platnosť právnych predpisov Únie. Naše právne predpisy sú však pružné a v súvislosti s príletmi je možné udeliť výnimku na nediskriminačnom základe tak, aby sa zohľadnili opatrenia, ktoré prijímajú tretie krajiny. Okrem toho naše právne predpisy preskúmame a pravdepodobne navrhneme ich zmenu a doplnenie, ak a keď sa v ICAO dosiahne dohoda o trhových opatreniach.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000958/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(3 February 2012)

Subject: European Emissions Trading System
From 1 January 2012, charges have been imposed for both incoming and outgoing flights in Europe. In taking this step, the European Union seeks to limit the presence of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Airlines which refuse to pay may be fined or even banned from flying to EU Member States. Chinese airlines have refused to participate in the European emissions trading scheme, however, fearing that it will cause a barrier to mutual trade, which will also affect Chinese tourists travelling to Europe. China has calculated that signing up to the system would cost Chinese companies around EUR 95 million in the first year, and by 2020 these costs would increase three‐fold. It is therefore considering legal action. Indian, Canadian and Australian carriers do not like paying for emissions either. American Airlines has already filed an action against the EU; however, the European Court of Justice has ruled that this piece of European legislation is in accordance with international law.
Does the Commission intend to make any concessions to international airlines, or will it persist with the current legislation?
Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission
(19 March 2012)
The Commission recognises that third countries have concerns about the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), and is engaging actively in discussions both bilaterally and internationally in ICAO in order to address these concerns.
The EU is firm on the implementation of its aviation ETS legislation, while engaging positively in the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO)'s accelerated work on market based measures. The Commission cannot suspend Union legislation. However, our legislation foresees flexibility to exempt incoming flights on a non-discriminatory basis to take into account action by third countries. Furthermore, we will review and possibly propose an amendment to our legislation if and when an agreement on market-based measures is found in ICAO.
(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés P-000961/12
a Bizottság számára
Gáll-Pelcz Ildikó (PPE)
(2012. február 3.)

Tárgy: A Magyarország elleni túlzott hiány miatt folyó eljárásról, és annak lehetséges további hatásairól
Tekintettel Olli Rehn január 24-i kijelentésére, miszerint Magyarországnak további lépéseket kell tennie a hiánycélok elérésében, különben a Bizottság szankciókat kezdeményezhet, kérdezem:







Mi az oka annak, hogy a Bizottság képtelen elismerni, hogy a nagy strukturális átalakítások — amelyek az egészségügy, oktatás és közigazgatás mellett a magyar nyugdíjrendszert is érintették –, bár egyszeri módon hozzájárulnak a költségvetési hiány leszorításához, alapvetően hosszú távon segítenek stabillá és kiszámíthatóvá tenni egy korábban fenntarthatatlan rendszert?











Más országok esetében (pl.: Görögország, Spanyolország, Portugália) a fizetések és a nyugdíjak csökkentése, a privatizáció — amelyek alapvetően szintén egyszeri kiigazítások — elfogadottak, ugyanakkor Magyarország ugyanilyen intézkedései negatív megítélés alá esnek? Számomra ez egyértelműen kettős mérce, kérem, hogy válaszában tegye egyértelművé, hogy ez az elbírálás nem az országgal szembeni ellenszenv, hanem nyilvánvaló közgazdasági okok miatt van.











Kérem, mutassa be közgazdaságtanilag, hogy melyik ország tud növekedési pályára állni úgy, hogy csak megszorításokat eszközöl, sőt szankcióként, még a növekedést szolgáló kohéziós források megvonását is el kell viselnie?











Az eurózónán belül számos ország hiánya a 3%-os plafon felett van. Ön szerint melyik gazdaság tekinthető stabilabbnak: az, amelyik akár egyszeri kiigazításokkal a 3%-os szint felé tart, vagy amelyik ilyen intézkedések nélkül meghagyja a 8‐10%-os hiánycélt?




Olli Rehn válasza a Bizottság nevében
(2012. március 8.)






1.


A Bizottság a magyar költségvetési helyzetre vonatkozó valamennyi értékelésében körültekintően számításba vette az Ön által említett strukturális reformokat. A horizontális elveknek megfelelően e reformok hatása a Bizottság előrejelzéseiben csak akkor vehető figyelembe, ha a hozzájuk kapcsolódó intézkedések részletei kellőképpen kidolgozottak és alátámasztottak.










2.


A Bizottság biztosítani igyekszik azt, hogy a költségvetési felügyelet során az egyszeri és az egyéb, átmeneti intézkedéseket konzisztens módon szűrje ki. A Magyarország esetében egyszerinek tekintett konkrét intézkedések (elsősorban a magánnyugdíj-pénztári vagyon átcsoportosítása) mindig is egyszeri tételnek minősültek (69).










3.


A gazdasági kormányzás keretének jelenleg is folyamatban lévő megerősítése mögött az a megfontolás áll, hogy a rendezett államháztartás nélkülözhetetlen feltétele az egészséges gazdasági környezetnek. Az évek folyamán a túlzotthiány-eljárás alatt álló számos tagállam hajtott végre gyors konszolidációs lépéseket, és teremtette meg ezáltal a kiegyensúlyozott növekedés alapjait. A Kohéziós Alapból nyújtott támogatás felfüggesztése – feltéve, hogy azt a Tanács megerősíti – csak a kötelezettségvállalásokat érinti, és bármilyen pénzügyi következmény nélkül megszüntethető, amennyiben Magyarország megteszi a szükséges intézkedéseket.










4.


Magyarország az a tagállam, amelyik a leghosszabb ideje áll túlzotthiány-eljárás alatt az EU eddigi története folyamán. Amikor a Bizottság azt vizsgálja, hogy a tagállamok eleget tesznek-e a Stabilitási és Növekedési Paktumnak, az nem csupán a kiigazítás nagyságára vonatkozó kérdés, hanem egyúttal azt is érinti, hogy a túlzott hiány korrekciója a kitűzött határidőig fenntartható módon valósul-e meg. Ennek értelmében a strukturális intézkedések és a számon kérhető konszolidációs lépések figyelembevételével a hiánynak a korrekcióra kitűzött határidő évében és az előrejelzési időtávnak megfelelő években is bőven a GDP 3%-a alatt kell lennie. Ez különösen fontos annak fényében, hogy a Tanács az eddigiek folyamán már három évvel meghosszabbította a Magyarország esetében megállapított eredeti határidőt.




(English version)
Question for written answer P-000961/12
to the Commission
Ildikó Gáll-Pelcz (PPE)
(3 February 2012)

Subject: The ongoing excessive deficit procedure against Hungary and its possible future impact
With regard to the statement made on 24 January by Olli Rehn, according to which Hungary needs to take further steps in order to achieve its deficit targets, otherwise the Commission may initiate sanctions, I would like to ask the following:







Why does the Commission fail to recognise that large-scale structural changes — which, besides healthcare, education and public administration, have also affected the Hungarian pension system — fundamentally help make a previously unsustainable system stable and predictable in the long term in addition to making a one-off contribution to reducing the budget deficit?











In the case of other countries (e.g. Greece, Spain, Portugal), wage and pension reductions and privatisation — which are also basically one-off adjustments — were approved. Why, then, are the same measures taken by Hungary subject to negative judgment? For me this is clearly an application of double standards. In your answer would you please make it clear that this judgment does not result from antipathy for the country but is due to obvious economic reasons.











Will you please give an example, in terms of economics, of a country that would be able to put itself on a path towards growth by implementing only austerity measures and, in addition, even has to put up with the sanction of the withdrawal of growth-promoting cohesion funds.











Within the euro area the deficit of numerous countries is above the 3 % ceiling. In your opinion, which economy can be viewed as more stable: an economy which, with just one-off adjustments, is heading towards the 3 % level, or which without such measures remains with a deficit of 8-10 %?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(8 March 2012)






1.


In all of its assessments on the Hungarian budgetary situation, the Commission has duly considered all structural reform steps you referred to. In line with horizontal principles, their impacts on our forecasts can only be taken into account once the related measures are sufficiently detailed and substantiated. 











2.


The Commission strives to ensure that in fiscal surveillance one-off and other temporary measures are filtered out in a consistent way. The specific measures treated as one-offs for Hungary (notably, the transfer of private pension funds' assets) have always been categorised as one-offs










2.


The Commission strives to ensure that in fiscal surveillance one-off and other temporary measures are filtered out in a consistent way. The specific measures treated as one-offs for Hungary (notably, the transfer of private pension funds' assets) have always been categorised as one-offs




 (70). 





3.


The underlying rationale of the currently reinforced economic governance framework is that sound public finances are the only way to create a healthy economic environment. Over the years a number of EU Member States (MS) under the Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP) have taken swift consolidation steps and therefore created successfully the basis for sound growth. The suspension of the cohesion fund, if confirmed by the Council, concerns commitments only and can be lifted without any financial consequences if Hungary takes the necessary action.










4.


Hungary is the MS with the longest EDP in EU history. When the Commission monitors whether MS comply with the Stability and Growth Pact, this is not just a question of size but also whether the correction of the excessive deficit by the set deadline is achieved in a sustainable manner. That is, the deficit in the target year of the correction as well as over the forecast horizon should be comfortably below the 3 % of GDP deficit threshold based on structural and verifiable consolidations steps. This is all the more important when the Council granted already 3 years of extension from the original deadline as in the case of Hungary.




(Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-000966/12
do Komisji
Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE)
(3 lutego 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Proponowana reorganizacja w zakresie dystrybucji środków w nowej perspektywie budżetowej na lata 2014-2020
Znaczenie wsparcia UE dla edukacji formalnej i nieformalnej oraz aktywizacji społecznej wymaga gruntownego przemyślenia i przeanalizowania wszelkich zmian, które mogą wpłynąć na efektywność, a więc w konsekwencji celowość prowadzonych działań. Dlatego w związku z proponowaną reorganizacją w zakresie dystrybucji środków w nowej perspektywie budżetowej na lata 2014-2020, która wiąże się z przekształceniem programów edukacyjnych takich jak „Młodzież w działaniu” i „Uczenie się przez całe życie” w program „Erasmus dla wszystkich”, zwracam się do Komisji z pytaniem o konsekwencje takich zmian.
W szczególności chciałbym wiedzieć, czy efektem wspomnianej reorganizacji nie będzie utrudnienie i zarazem ograniczenie możliwości korzystania ze wsparcia nieformalnym grupom młodzieżowym. 
Dodatkowo mam wątpliwości w kwestii, czy proponowane zmiany nie będą wiązały się z uzyskiwaniem lepszych wyników ilościowych kosztem oferowanej jakości.
Równocześnie chciałbym uzyskać informację, w jaki sposób wprowadzenie programu „Erasmus dla wszystkich” wpłynie na realizację programów wspierających kształcenie pozaformalne. 
Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarz Androullę Vassiliou w imieniu Komisji
(17 kwietnia 2012 r.)
W przedstawionym przez Komisję wniosku w sprawie rozporządzenia sektor kształcenia pozaformalnego został jednoznacznie zaliczony do beneficjentów programu, w szczególności w ramach wspierania Strategii UE na rzecz młodzieży (2010-2018). Wszystkie trzy rodzaje zaproponowanych działań (mobilność edukacyjna, współpraca na rzecz innowacyjności i wymiany dobrych praktyk oraz wsparcie reform politycznych) są nakierowane zarówno na sektor kształcenia formalnego, jak i sektor kształcenia pozaformalnego. Ponadto program jako całość powinien dysponować budżetem większym niż suma budżetów obecnie funkcjonujących analogicznych programów; sektor kształcenia pozaformalnego skorzysta zatem ze zwiększenia środków finansowych.
W celu uproszczenia i racjonalizacji europejskich instrumentów wspierania kształcenia i szkolenia, przedstawiona przez Komisję w czerwcu 2011 r. propozycja wieloletnich ram finansowych przewiduje, że działania wspierane obecnie w ramach programów „Młodzież w działaniu” i „Uczenie się przez całe życie” zostaną w przyszłości zgrupowane w programie „Erasmus dla wszystkich”.
Propozycja połączenia tych programów stanowi realizację celu uproszczenia i harmonizacji zasad, z korzyścią także dla beneficjentów programów, nie wpływając znacznie na konkretną treść działań finansowanych w ramach programów.
Komisja nie zamierza również rezygnować z jakości prowadzonych działań na rzecz ich ilości. Wręcz przeciwnie, we wniosku dotyczącym rozporządzenia podkreśla się europejską wartość dodaną projektów, które będą wspierane dzięki programowi Erasmus dla wszystkich, niezależnie od sektora, którego dotyczą (kształcenie formalne lub pozaformalne). 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-000966/12
to the Commission
Jarosław Leszek Wałęsa (PPE)
(3 February 2012)

Subject: Proposed reorganisation of the distribution of funds in the new budget perspective for 2014-2020
The significance of EU support for formal and informal education and social development requires thorough consideration and analysis of any changes that can have an impact on the effectiveness, and thus the efficiency of the activities being carried out. That is why in relation to the proposed reorganisation of the distribution of funds in the new budget perspective for 2014-2020, which includes the transformation of educational programmes such as ‘Youth in action’ and ‘Lifelong learning’ into the ‘Erasmus for everyone’ programme, I should like to ask the Commission about the consequences of such changes.
In particular, will the result of the said reorganisation not impede and at the same time limit the possibility of informal youth groups using this support?
Additionally, I have doubts as to whether the proposed changes would not involve obtaining better quantitative results at the cost of the quality offered.
What impact will the introduction of the ‘Erasmus for everyone’ programme have on the implementation of programmes supporting non-formal learning?
(Version française)
La proposition de règlement présentée par la Commission inclut explicitement le secteur de l'éducation non formel parmi les bénéficiaires du programme, notamment en soutien de la Stratégie européenne pour la jeunesse (2010-2018). Les trois types d'actions proposés (mobilité apprenante des individus, coopération pour l'innovation et l'échange de bonnes pratiques, soutien aux réformes politiques) visent autant le secteur non formel que le secteur formel. Enfin, l'ensemble du programme devrait bénéficier d'une enveloppe budgétaire en augmentation par rapport à la somme des budgets des programmes actuels correspondants et le secteur de l'éducation non formelle devrait bénéficier de cette augmentation des moyens financiers.
Afin de simplifier et rationaliser les instruments européens de soutien à l'éducation et à la formation, la proposition de Cadre financier pluriannuel présentée par la Commission en juin 2011 prévoit que les activités actuellement soutenues par les programmes Jeunesse en Action et Éducation et formation tout au long de la vie soient à l'avenir regroupées au sein du programme Erasmus pour tous.
La proposition de fusion de ces programmes répond à un objectif de simplification et d'harmonisation des règles également utiles pour les bénéficiaires de ces programmes, sans un impact majeur sur le contenu spécifique des actions financées par ces programmes.
De la même manière, la Commission n'entend pas sacrifier la qualité des actions soutenues à leur quantité. Au contraire, la proposition de règlement met l'accent sur la valeur ajoutée européenne des projets que le programme «Erasmus pour tous» permettra de subventionner, quel que soit le secteur (éducation formelle ou éducation non formelle) concerné. 
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-001002/12
til Kommissionen
Jens Rohde (ALDE)
(6. februar 2012)

Om: Ungdomsarbejdsløshed i EU
Hver femte unge mellem 15‐29 år i Europa står hverken uden arbejde, praktikplads eller er under uddannelse. Det svarer til i alt 14 millioner mennesker, og ifølge en rapport fra Eurofond — Det Europæiske Institut til Forbedring af Leve‐ og Arbejdsvilkårene — anslås det at koste op mod 1 007 milliarder kroner om året. Ifølge rapporten er denne udgift beregnet ved at se på den tabte arbejdsfortjeneste og udgifter til overførselsindkomster.
En opgørelse fra Eurostat i 2010 viser at ungdomsarbejdsløsheden blandt EU's medlemslande er særlig stor i lande som Bulgarien (22 %), Irland (19 %) og Italien (18 %). Siden den globale finanskrise for alvor begyndte at tage fart i efteråret 2008, har især lande som Italien og Storbritannien haft en stor stigning i antallet af ungdomsarbejdsløse i aldersgruppen 15‐29 år.
En del af forklaringen for den høje ungdomsarbejdsløshed er naturligvis den økonomiske krise. Det gælder dog for de medlemslande, som er hårdest ramt, at selv i økonomiske højkonjunkturer, finder unge det svært at komme ind på arbejdsmarkedet. OECD’s analyser har gennem flere år påpeget ufleksible arbejdsmarkeder, som går det dyrt at hyre og fyre, som en del af årsagen til den høje ungdomsarbejdsløshed. I deres seneste analyse »Off to a good start? Jobs for youth« fra 2011 påpeges det eksempelvis, at regeringer i flere EU‐lande såsom Spanien, Frankrig og Polen mangler at etablere effektive jobaktiverings-programmer, som er rettet mod unge arbejdsløse.
Derudover har en række cheføkonomer fra tænketanken European Policy Center vurderet, at EU bør iværksætte tiltag, som vil skabe et stærkere fælleseuropæisk arbejdsmarked, hvilket vil gøre det nemmere for især unge at krydse deres landegrænse og få arbejde i andre EU‐lande.
Hvad vil Kommissionen gøre for at presse de enkelte medlemslande i EU til at iværksætte de nødvendige arbejdsmarkedsreformer samt fremlægge af EU‐initiativer, som kan være med til at mindske ledigheden blandt de unge i aldersgruppen 15‐29 år?
Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af László Andor
(14. marts 2012)
Med meddelelsen om initiativet for muligheder for unge (71), som blev vedtaget for nylig, har Kommissionen optrappet sin indsats for at støtte medlemsstaterne, når de sætter ind på at bekæmpe ungdomsarbejdsløshed. Initiativet fokuserer på at gøre større brug af Den Europæiske Socialfond til dette formål, og der foreslås en række EU‐finansierede innovative tilgange til at støtte unges overgang fra uddannelse til arbejde, f.eks. »ungdomsgarantien« og ordningen »Dit første EURES-job«. Ordningen er et pilotinitiativ for unge mobile arbejdstagere (18‐30). Den første gennemførelsesrunde skal begynde i foråret i samarbejde med arbejdsformidlinger i Tyskland, Spanien, Danmark og Italien. Denne og de følgende runder forventes at resultere i 5 000 jobformidlinger i 2012‐2013. 
Efter erklæringen fra Det Europæiske Råds uformelle møde den 30. januar 2012, hvori denne tilgang godkendes, har Kommissionen oprettet udrykningshold, som i februar vil besøge de otte medlemsstater (72) med den højeste ungdomsarbejdsløshed. Målet er at fastlægge, hvorledes der kan gøres bedre brug af EU‐finansiering til bekæmpelse af ungdomsarbejdsløshed og udarbejdelse af nationale ungdomsbeskæftigelsesplaner, der bygger på foranstaltninger i initiativet for muligheder for unge og Rådets konklusioner vedrørende bekæmpelse af ungdomsarbejdsløshed fra juni 2011. Kommissionen har også etableret yderligere bilaterale kontakter med syv andre medlemsstater med en ungdomsarbejdsløshed, der ligger over gennemsnittet (73).
Kommissionen vil fremlægge en første evaluering af gennemførelsen af initiativet for muligheder for unge på Det Europæiske Råds uformelle møde (beskæftigelse og sociale anliggender) i april. Endvidere vil Kommissionen lægge særlig vægt på ungdomsbeskæftigelse og strukturelle arbejdsmarkedsreformer til fordel for unge ved fremlæggelsen af udkastet til de landespecifikke anbefalinger for 2012 under det europæiske semester. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001002/12
to the Commission
Jens Rohde (ALDE)
(6 February 2012)

Subject: Youth unemployment in the EU
One in five young people in Europe aged 15-29 is either not in work or a work experience placement or is in training. This corresponds to 14 million people in total and a report from Eurofound — the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions — estimates that this costs up to DKK 1 007 billion per year. According to the report, this cost is calculated by considering loss of earnings and social security expenditure.
A report from Eurostat in 2010 indicates that youth unemployment in EU Member States is particularly high in countries such as Bulgaria (22 %), Ireland (19 %) and Italy (18 %). Since the global financial crisis began to really bite in the autumn of 2008, countries such as Italy and the UK in particular have experienced a significant increase in the number of young unemployed in the 15-29 year-old age group.
The economic crisis is of course one of the reasons for the high rate of youth unemployment. In the countries which have been hardest hit, however, young people find it difficult to enter the labour market, even when economic conditions are favourable. Analyses by the OECD over many years have suggested that inflexible labour markets, which make it difficult to hire and fire, are one of the reasons for the high rate of youth unemployment. Their latest analysis from 2011 ‘Off to a good start? Jobs for youth’ points out by way of example that governments in many EU countries, such as Spain, France and Poland, are failing to establish effective job activation programmes aimed at the young unemployed.
A number of senior economists at the European Policy Centre think-tank have also suggested that the EU should implement measures to create a stronger pan-European labour market which will make it easier for young people especially to cross national borders to find work in other EU countries.
What pressure will the Commission bring to bear on individual EU Member States to implement the necessary labour market reforms and put forward EU initiatives aimed at reducing unemployment in the 15-29 year-old age group?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(14 March 2012)
With the recently adopted communication on the Youth Opportunities Initiative (74) the Commission has stepped up its efforts to support Member States in taking action to fight youth unemployment. The Initiative focuses on making greater use of the European Social Fund to this end and proposes a set of EU‐financed innovative approaches to support young people's transition from education to work, such as the Youth Guarantee and the ‘Your first EURES job’ scheme. The scheme is a pilot initiative for young mobile workers (18-30). Its first implementation wave shall start this spring with the cooperation of employment services from Germany, Spain, Denmark and Italy. This and the following waves are expected to secure 5 000 job placements in 2012-2013. 
Following the statement by the informal European Council of 30 January 2012 endorsing this approach, the Commission has set up action teams who in February will visit the eight Member States (75) with the highest youth unemployment rates. The aim is to find ways to make better use of EU funding to fight youth unemployment and to establish national youth employment plans building on the measures in the Youth Opportunities Initiative and the June 2011 Council conclusions on tackling youth employment. The Commission has also launched further bilateral contacts with seven other Member States with above-average youth unemployment rates (76).
The Commission will present a first assessment of the implementation of the Youth Opportunities Initiative to the informal Employment and Social Affairs Ministers' Council meeting in April. Furthermore, the Commission will pay special attention to youth employment and structural labour market reforms benefiting young people when presenting the draft 2012 country-specific recommendations under the European Semester. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-001007/12
alla Commissione
Giovanni La Via (PPE)
(6 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Programma INTERREG III B ARCHIMED: mancato pagamento ai beneficiari finali
Il programma INTERREG III B ARCHIMED, che è stato approvato il 3 marzo 2003 con decisione della Commissione europea n. C(2003)117, modificata il 13 dicembre 2004 dalla decisione della Commissione europea n. C(2004)5056, ha come obiettivo generale quello di migliorare l’integrazione tra i paesi del sudest europeo ed il bacino del Mediterraneo.
Nel quadro del suddetto programma ARCHIMED sono stati finanziati i progetti ConACT e MedTourNet. Oggi, dopo 4 anni dalla certificazione delle spese, risulta rimborsato soltanto 1/3 delle somme anticipate per la realizzazione dei progetti.
Occorre rilevare che il versamento dell'importo residuo è subordinato al pagamento del saldo al programma, eseguito successivamente all'approvazione da parte della Commissione europea del rapporto finale di esecuzione del programma (entro cinque mesi dalla trasmissione della domanda di saldo).
Si consideri che la trasmissione della domanda di saldo è stata effettuata il 31 marzo 2011 e che, quindi, i previsti 5 mesi sono scaduti il 31 agosto 2011.
Alla luce di quanto precede, può la Commissione far sapere a che punto si trova il procedimento di controllo sulla suddetta istanza di saldo e quali sono i tempi previsti per il concreto pagamento delle somme ai beneficiari?
Risposta data da Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione
(13 marzo 2012)
La Commissione è spiacente per la situazione dei beneficiari in attesa di pagamento delle spese relative a progetti selezionati nel quadro dei programmi Interreg.
La Commissione ha rimborsato alle autorità di pagamento dei programmi Interreg tutte le spese ammissibili e certificate, comprese quelle legate alle domande di pagamento intermedie presentate dal programma Interreg IIIB Archimed. L'ultima domanda di pagamento intermedia trattata dalla Commissione è stata inviata il 31 dicembre 2007 dall'autorità di pagamento di tale programma.
Tuttavia, in seguito a violazioni degli obblighi di cui agli articoli 10 e 12 del regolamento (CE) n. 438/2001 (77), la Commissione, con decisione C(2009)4426 del 12 giugno 2009, ha sospeso i pagamenti intermedi per il programma Archimed. Questa sospensione è stata abrogata con decisione C(2010)3583 del 31 marzo 2010. La Commissione ha ritenuto appropriata una correzione finanziaria forfettaria corrispondente al 5 % del FESR, pari cioè a 1 267 205,31 euro da detrarsi dal pagamento finale alla chiusura del programma.
Il 31 marzo 2011 le autorità del programma hanno presentato alla Commissione i documenti di chiusura. Il 28 agosto 2011 la Commissione ha informato l'autorità di gestione del programma del fatto che le relazioni nonché il pagamento finale non potevano essere perfezionati prima che la correzione delle irregolarità e delle comunicazioni fosse passata al vaglio dell'Ufficio europeo per la lotta antifrode. Nel frattempo, la Commissione ha chiesto alle autorità greche le informazioni complementari necessarie per procedere al pagamento finale del programma Interreg IIIB Archimed. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001007/12
to the Commission
Giovanni La Via (PPE)
(6 February 2012)

Subject: Interreg III B Archimed programme: non-payment of final beneficiaries
The global aim of the Interreg II B Archimed programme, adopted on 3 March 2003 by Commission Decision No C (2003) 117 and modified on 13 December 2004 by Commission Decision No C (2004) 5056, is to improve integration among the countries of south-eastern Europe and the Mediterranean basin.
In the framework of the Archimed programme, the projects ConACT and MedTourNet have been financed. Today, after four years of certifying expenditure, it appears that only one-third of the sums advanced for carrying out the project have been repaid.
It should be noted that the remaining amount may only be released if the balance is paid to the programme after its final implementation report has been approved by the Commission (within five months of forwarding of the request for payment of the balance).
The payment request was sent on 31 March 2011 and, therefore, the five-month deadline expired on 31 August 2011.
In the light of this, can the Commission provide an update on the monitoring process regarding the aforementioned payment request, and also indicate the anticipated schedules for the actual payment of these sums to their beneficiaries?
(Version française)
La Commission regrette la situation des bénéficiaires qui sont en attente du paiement des dépenses relatives à des projets sélectionnés dans le cadre des programmes Interreg.
La Commission a remboursé aux autorités de paiement des programmes Interreg toutes les dépenses éligibles et certifiées, y compris les demandes de paiement intermédiaires présentées par le programme Interreg IIIB Archimed. La dernière demande de paiement intermédiaire traitée par la Commission a été envoyée le 31 décembre 2007 par l'autorité de paiement de ce programme.
Cependant, à la suite de manquements aux obligations découlant des articles 10 et 12 du Règlement (CE) no 38/2001 (78), la Commission, par décision C(2009)4426 du 12 juin 2009, a suspendu les paiements intermédiaires pour le programme Archimed. Cette suspension a été levée par décision C(2010)3583 du 31 mars 2010. La Commission a considéré appropriée une correction financière forfaitaire correspondant à 5 % du FEDER, à savoir 1 267 205,31 euros à déduire du paiement final à la clôture du programme.
Le 31 mars 2011, les autorités du programme ont présenté à la Commission les documents de clôture. Le 28 août 2011 la Commission a informé l'autorité de gestion du programme du fait que le rapport ainsi que le paiement final ne pouvaient pas être finalisés avant la réconciliation des irrégularités et communications à l'office européen de lutte antifraude. Entre-temps, la Commission a demandé aux autorités grecques les informations complémentaires nécessaires pour .procéder au paiement final du programme Interreg IIIB Archimed. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001013/12
to the Commission
Liam Aylward (ALDE), Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE) and Brian Crowley (ALDE)
(7 February 2012)

Subject: Proposed revision of the European Good Distribution Practice Guidelines
The recent Commission proposal concerning revision of the European Good Distribution Practice Guidelines states that:
‘The wholesale distribution of medicinal products is an important activity in the integrated supply chain management. Today’s distribution network for medicinal products is increasingly complex and involves many players. The quality and the integrity of medicinal products can be affected by a lack of adequate control over the numerous activities, which occur during distribution and it is also necessary to address the threat that falsified medicinal products pose to the distribution channel. It is necessary to exercise control over the entire chain of distribution objectives by observing good manufacturing practice of medicinal products. This policy ensures that products manufactured in, or imported into the European Union are of the appropriate quality. This level of quality should be maintained throughout the distribution network without any alteration.’
1. Could the Commission clarify its procedure as regards the process of consulting the relevant stakeholders concerning the revision of these guidelines?
2. How does it plan to implement further guidelines concerning the storage and transportation of essential medicinal products?
3. Has it carried out extensive feasibility studies regarding the proposed changes to the transportation and storage of medicinal products?
4. Does it plan to provide any assistance to wholesale distributors and pharmaceutical companies in connection with the proposed revision of these guidelines?
Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(8 March 2012)







1.


The Commission launched a public consultation on the revised guidelines on Good Distribution Practice of Medicinal Products for human use from July 2011 to December 2011. The comments from stakeholders are now publicly available on the Europa website










1.


The Commission launched a public consultation on the revised guidelines on Good Distribution Practice of Medicinal Products for human use from July 2011 to December 2011. The comments from stakeholders are now publicly available on the Europa website




 (79). The Commission will conduct an in-depth assessment of each comment, in collaboration with the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and will then consult the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use at the EMA, and the Pharmaceutical Committee where all Member States are represented.





2.


The Commission does not plan to implement further guidelines concerning the storage and transportation of medicinal products.










3.


There are no extensive feasibility studies. However, the revised Good Distribution Practice guide is based on advancements of practices for an appropriate storage and distribution of medicinal products in the European Union. It takes into account extensive feedback from various experts conducting inspections of the wholesale distributors and the Good Distribution Practice guide from the World Health Organisation.










4.


The Commission does not intend to provide specific assistance to wholesale distributors and pharmaceutical companies in this respect.




(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001026/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Georgios Koumoutsakos (PPE)
(7 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Μετάλλαξη του ιού της γρίπης των πτηνών και προληπτική δράση
Σύμφωνα με δημοσιεύματα, ολλανδός ερευνητής του πανεπιστημίου Εράσμους στο Ρόντερνταμ παρασκεύασε σε συνθήκες εργαστηρίου ένα θανατηφόρο ιό, μετάλλαξη του ιού της γρίπης των πτηνών Η5Ν1. Ο ιός αυτός μπορεί να εξαπλωθεί γρήγορα ανάμεσα σε ζώα, ενώ θα μπορούσε να μεταφερθεί ακόμα και με τον αέρα μεταξύ των θηλαστικών. Σε περιπτώσεις μόλυνσης ανθρώπινου οργανισμού, το ποσοστό θνησιμότητας ξεπερνά το 50 %.
Η είδηση προκάλεσε έντονη ανησυχία κατά την ανακοίνωση της είδησης σε συνέδριο στη Μάλτα τον περασμένο Σεπτέμβριο. Ο ερευνητής υποστηρίζει ότι αν απελευθερωθεί ο ιός αυτός, είτε με φυσική μετάλλαξη, είτε διαφεύγοντας από το εργαστήριο, οι αρχές υγείας όλου του κόσμου θα πρέπει να είναι προετοιμασμένες να το αντιμετωπίσουν.
Επισημαίνεται ότι η δημοσίευση των λεπτομερειών του πειράματος έχει απαγορευθεί από την Αμερικανική Εθνική Επιτροπή Βιοασφάλειας.
Σε συνέχεια των ανωτέρω, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Έχει υπόψη της το εν λόγω πείραμα; Η διεξαγωγή τέτοιου είδους πειραμάτων είναι σύμφωνη με την ευρωπαϊκή νομοθεσία, παρά το γεγονός ότι ενέχουν σοβαρότατους κινδύνους για την δημόσια υγεία;











Διαθέτει στοιχεία σχετικά με τις συνέπειες πιθανής μετάδοσης του ιού στους ανθρώπους;











Προτίθεται να λάβει προληπτικά μέτρα για την αποφυγή της μετάδοσης του ιού, αλλά και μέτρα για την αντιμετώπισή του ιού σε περίπτωση διάδοσής του-




Απάντηση του κ. Dalli εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(28 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή είναι ενήμερη σχετικά με το ερευνητικό σχέδιο που χρηματοδοτείται από τις ΗΠΑ και διεξάγεται στο Ιατρικό Κέντρο Erasmus του Ρότερνταμ. Ύστερα από έρευνες της Επιτροπής και ανταλλαγές πληροφοριών στο πλαίσιο της επιτροπής υγειονομικής ασφάλειας (80), οι ολλανδικές αρχές εξήγησαν ότι η νομοθεσία τους σχετικά με την εργαστηριακή ασφάλεια η οποία εφαρμόζεται στο εν λόγω σχέδιο ευθυγραμμίζεται με την αντίστοιχη νομοθεσία της ΕΕ (81)
 (82). Επιπλέον, επισημάνθηκε ότι είχαν χορηγηθεί οι απαραίτητες άδειες πριν από την έναρξη του σχεδίου, το οποίο πληροί τις απαιτήσεις των ΗΠΑ για τη βιολογική ασφάλεια και τα διεθνή πρότυπα ISΟ. 
Δεν έχουν επισήμως δημοσιευθεί επιστημονικά στοιχεία σχετικά με το εν λόγω γενετικά τροποποιημένο στέλεχος του ιού H5N1 και, συνεπώς, η Επιτροπή δεν είναι σε θέση να κάνει οποιοδήποτε σχόλιο σχετικά με τις πιθανές επιπτώσεις του συγκεκριμένου στελέχους. Η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί στενά κάθε εξέλιξη στον τομέα αυτό λαμβάνοντας υπόψη τη σχετική νομοθεσία της ΕΕ και σε συνεργασία με την επιτροπή υγειονομικής ασφάλειας και με την Παγκόσμια Οργάνωση Υγείας και με την υποστήριξη του Ευρωπαϊκού Κέντρου Πρόληψης και τον Ελέγχου των Νόσων. 
Εφαρμόζεται ήδη η νομοθεσία της ΕΕ (2) (3) για τη μείωση τυχόν κινδύνων που συνδέονται με τον εργαστηριακό χειρισμό των ιών της γρίπης και για τη διασφάλιση της προστασίας των εργαζόμενων στα εργαστήρια. Επιπλέον, τα μέτρα για την πρόληψη και τον έλεγχο της γρίπης των πτηνών στα πουλερικά και στα πτηνά εναρμονίζονται και συντονίζονται σε επίπεδο ΕΕ (83). Αυτό περιλαμβάνει μέτρα για την πρόληψη της εξάπλωσης της γρίπης των πτηνών και την ενίσχυση των μηχανισμών εποπτείας τα οποία έχουν αποδειχθεί επιτυχή για τη μείωση του αντίκτυπου της νόσου στο ελάχιστο. Οι νομοθετικές διατάξεις ενημερώνονται συνεχώς για να αντιμετωπιστούν οι νέες εξελίξεις. Τέλος, μια νέα νομοθετική πρόταση της Επιτροπής για τις σοβαρές διασυνοριακές απειλές κατά της υγείας (84) αποσκοπεί να ενισχύσει την ικανότητα της ΕΕ να συντονίσει την απάντησή της στις έκτακτες ανάγκες στον τομέα της υγείας.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001026/12
to the Commission
Georgios Koumoutsakos (PPE)
(7 February 2012)

Subject: Mutation of the bird flu virus and pre-emptive action
It has been reported that, a Dutch researcher at the Erasmus University in Rotterdam has manufactured, under laboratory conditions, a deadly virus that is a mutated form of the Η5Ν1 bird flu virus. The virus is able to spread very rapidly among animals and could even be communicated through airborne contamination to mammals. In cases of infection of the human organism the mortality rate is in excess of 50 %.
This news item aroused extreme concern when it was announced at a conference in Malta last September. The researcher maintains that if the virus is allowed to spread, either through natural mutation or through escaping from the laboratory, the health authorities of the entire world will have to be prepared to deal with it.
It should be noted that publication of the details of the experiment has been banned by the American National Committee on Biosecurity.
In view of this:







Is the Commission aware of the experiment in question? Is the conduct of such experiments in accordance with European legislation, despite the fact that they involve serious risks for public health?











Does it possess data on the consequences of possible transmission of the virus to humans?











Will it take measures to prevent communication of the virus, as well as measures to deal with the virus in the event of its diffusion?




Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(28 February 2012)
The Commission is aware of the US-funded research project carried out at the Rotterdam Erasmus Medical Centre. Further to enquiries from the Commission, and exchanges in the context of the Health Security Committee (85), the Dutch authorities clarified that their laboratory security legislation governing this project aligns with the EU legislation (86)
 (87). In addition, it was indicated that the necessary permits had been granted prior to commencing this project and that the latter was in line with the US bio safety requirements and international ISO standards. 
No scientific information has been formally published on this genetically altered H5N1 virus strain, and therefore the Commission is not in a position to comment on the potential effects of this particular strain. The Commission closely follows any developments on this matter in taking account of relevant EU legislation, and in cooperation with the Health Security Committee and the World Health Organisation with the support of the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. 
EU legislation is already in place to reduce any risk related to laboratory handling of influenza viruses and to ensure the protection of laboratory workers. In addition, measures to prevent and control avian influenza in poultry and birds are harmonised and coordinated at EU level (88). This includes measures to prevent the spread of avian influenza and strengthened surveillance mechanisms which have proven successful in limiting the impact of the disease to a minimum. Legislative provisions are continually updated to address new developments. Finally, a new legal proposal from the Commission on serious cross border threats to health (89) intends to step up the EU capacity to coordinate response to health emergencies.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001071/12
to the Commission
Sir Graham Watson (ALDE)
(7 February 2012)

Subject: Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 and orphan diseases
Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 was designed to encourage drug companies to conduct research into rare diseases and develop novel treatments for orphan diseases. Once a company has obtained a licence in a Member State, the legislation then gives the company sole rights to supply the drug across the EU, in part to allow it to recoup its development costs, however this also creates a monopoly for the company for it to market the drug.
In 2010 the US company BioMarin was awarded a European licence for amifampridine (Firdapse), a slightly modified version of 3,4-Diaminopyridine, which is unlicensed but has been used for more than 20 years to treat Lambert Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS), an autoimmune disease that causes muscle weakness. Treatment with Diaminopyridine costs between EUR 940 and EUR 1 200, whereas the licensed amifampridine costs between EUR 47 000 and EUR 83 000.
I understand BioMarin were able to rely on existing evidence about the drug to help obtain the licence. This case highlights the fact that some drug companies are focusing their efforts on licensing orphan drugs at vastly inflated prices, rather than developing new treatments.
1. Is the Commission aware:






—


of the situation that led to the licensing of amifampridine?










—


that some drug companies are focusing their efforts on licensing orphan drugs at vastly inflated prices, rather than developing new treatments?










2.


Is the Commission considering changes to the legislation to address the problems highlighted in question 1 above?




Answer given by Mr Dalli  on behalf of the Commission
(22 March 2012)
The regulation on orphan medicinal products (90), in force since 2000, provides incentives for the research and development of medicinal products for patients suffering from rare diseases in the EU for which otherwise no medicine would be developed due to the small market size. 
The incentives cover a period of market exclusivity. It is restricted to the therapeutic indication for which the orphan medicinal product has been authorised. There are also other restrictions and limitations and a possibility is given to Member States to request it's shortening including where it is shown on the basis of available evidence that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify the maintenance of market exclusivity. 
The EU pharmaceutical legislation (91) requires that medicinal products receive a marketing authorisation before being placed on the market. This relates to the objective to ensure that medicinal products are safe, efficacious and of quality. The legislation allows certain, albeit limited, exceptions to the requirement of marketing authorisation. The implementation of this exception is left for the national laws of the Member States (92). 
Firdapse — amifampridine, is authorised by the Commission, after a scientific assessment of the product at the European Medicines Agency, for the Symptomatic treatment of Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS) in adults. 
Although the Commission fully agrees on the need for new medicines to address the vast area of un-met medical needs in rare diseases, it considers that the regulation on orphan medicinal products is an important and successful instrument in promoting the development of orphan medicinal products. The Commission does not consider it necessary to propose changes to this legislation.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001087/12
προς την Επιτροπή (Αντιπρόεδρος/Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος)
Charalampos Angourakis (GUE/NGL)
(7 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: VP/HR — Βασανιστήρια κρατουμένων στη Λιβύη
Πληθαίνουν οι καταγγελίες για βασανιστήρια και κακοποίηση μέχρι θανάτου κρατουμένων στη Λιβύη είτε από το στρατό της χώρας είτε από ένοπλες ομάδες. Ανακοινώθηκε ότι 115 ασθενείς στη Μισράτα έφεραν σοβαρές πληγές από βασανιστήρια. Παρόμοια κατάσταση έχει παρατηρηθεί στην Τρίπολη και αλλού.
Το φαινόμενο κατήγγειλε και η επικεφαλής της Ύπατης Αρμοστείας Ανθρωπίνων Δικαιωμάτων του ΟΗΕ, υπογραμμίζοντας ότι, σε περίπου 60 κέντρα κράτησης, βρίσκονται περισσότεροι από 8 500 άνθρωποι που στην πλειοψηφία τους βασανίζονται. Παρά τις αλλεπάλληλες εκκλήσεις η κατάσταση επιδεινώνεται κάθε μέρα. Όπως κατήγγειλε ο ειδικός απεσταλμένος του ΟΗΕ στην Τρίπολη, οι διάφορες ένοπλες ομάδες των «απελευθερωτών», που έχουν την υποστήριξη του ΝΑΤΟ, της ΕΕ και Κυβερνήσεων χωρών μελών της ΕΕ, δρουν εντελώς ανεξέλεγκτες, συγκρούονται μεταξύ τους, συλλαμβάνουν, βασανίζουν και εκτελούν κατά το δοκούν.
Ερωτάται η Αντιπρόεδρος της Επιτροπής και Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος, κυρία Catherine Ashton, αν καταδικάζει την πρακτική αυτή αλλά και την άρνηση της νέας «ηγεσίας» της Λιβύης να λάβει μέτρα για τον τερματισμό των βασανισμών χιλιάδων κρατουμένων;
Κοινή απάντηση της Ύπατης Εκπροσώπου/Αντιπροέδρου Ashton εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(27 Μαρτίου 2012)
Στο πλαίσιο του διαλόγου της με τις λιβυκές αρχές, η ΕΕ έθιξε το ζήτημα της κακομεταχείρισης των κρατουμένων. Πολύ πρόσφατα η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος/Αντιπρόεδρος εξέδωσε δήλωση με την οποία ζητούσε τον σεβασμό όλων των κρατουμένων στη Λιβύη σύμφωνα με τα διεθνή πρότυπα. Η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος/Αντιπρόεδρος κάλεσε επίσης τις αρχές να επισπεύσουν τις διαδικασίες, ώστε να ελέγξουν όλους τους τόπους κράτησης και να διερευνήσουν τους ισχυρισμούς για παραβίαση των δικαιωμάτων των κρατουμένων. Η λιβυκή κυβέρνηση αντέδρασε θετικά σ’ αυτές τις εκκλήσεις και δήλωσε ότι έχουν ήδη ληφθεί μέτρα με στόχο τη μεταφορά του ελέγχου των εγκαταστάσεων κράτησης στα χέρια των αρχών. Η ΕΕ έχει προσφέρει επείγουσα ενίσχυση σε πρόσωπα που χρήζουν προστασίας λόγω της σύγκρουσης και είναι έτοιμη να προσφέρει κάθε δυνατή βοήθεια στις αρχές στην προσπάθεια τους να διασφαλίσουν τον σεβασμό για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, τις δημοκρατικές αρχές και το κράτος δικαίου.
Επιπλέον, επί του παρόντος, η ΕΕ χρηματοδοτεί ένα πρόγραμμα βάσει του θεματικού κονδυλίου του Ευρωπαϊκού Μέσου για τη Δημοκρατία και τα Δικαιώματα του Ανθρώπου στόχος του οποίου είναι η αποκατάσταση και παροχή υπηρεσιών υποστήριξης σε θύματα βασανιστηρίων, βίαιων εξαφανίσεων και βιαιοπραγιών στη Λιβύη, καθώς και η υποστήριξη ενός εθνικού νομικού και πολιτικού πλαισίου που προσπαθεί να επιλύσει το πρόβλημα των βασανιστηρίων και άλλων μορφών κακομεταχείρισης.

(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-001395/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente / Alta Representante)
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL) e Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)
(7 de fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Tortura e assassinato de prisioneiros na Líbia
Algumas organizações têm afirmado repetidamente que a tortura e o assassinato de prisioneiros são prática comum na Líbia depois do ataque das forças da NATO e no pós-Kahdafi, e que as novas autoridades ignoraram todas as denúncias feitas. Baseiam as suas conclusões em investigações e testemunhos recolhidos junto de familiares das vítimas e de prisioneiros, alguns dos quais haviam sido torturados há poucos dias.
A tortura e o assassinato de prisioneiros líbios e imigrantes oriundos da África subsaariana — suspeitos de serem defensores do anterior regime — constituem prática habitual nos centros de detenção à guarda das milícias, nomeadamente os situados na capital, Trípoli, e em Misrata. A barbárie é consentida pelos responsáveis do Conselho Nacional de Transição (CNT). Estas organizações afirmam ainda que, em Misrata, a tortura é praticada no quartel-general das milícias. A tortura da estátua e outras posições dolorosas, os espancamentos com objetos contundentes ou as descargas elétricas são algumas das torturas mais comuns. Os ferimentos observados nos cadáveres e nos prisioneiros auscultados assim o indicam.
Multiplicam-se as denúncias de casos de abusos e torturas às chamadas autoridades centrais e locais, mas, até agora, quem detém o poder nada fez para pôr fim à situação e punir os responsáveis. Os denominados comités judiciais continuam a realizar interrogatórios com total impunidade.
Em face do exposto, perguntamos à Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente da Comissão:







Não considera necessário condenar esta situação?











Que avaliação faz dos factos descritos, tendo em conta a posição da UE durante o ataque militar da NATO à Líbia e o papel que vários países da UE tiveram nessa agressão militar?




Resposta conjunta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão
(27 de março de 2012)
A UE levantou a questão dos maus tratos infligidos aos detidos no seu diálogo com as autoridades líbias. Mais recentemente, a Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente emitiu um comunicado onde apelou ao respeito por todos os detidos na Líbia, em conformidade com as normas internacionais. A AR/VP pediu também que as autoridades acelerassem o processo de colocação de todos os locais de detenção sob o seu controlo e que investigassem as alegadas violações dos direitos dos detidos. O Governo Líbio reagiu de forma positiva a este pedido e declarou ter iniciado um processo de aplicação de medidas que tem como objetivo a transferência do controlo das instalações de detenção para as autoridades. 
A UE tem prestado assistência de emergência a pessoas que carecem de proteção na sequência do conflito e está disposta a fornecer às autoridades todo o apoio de que necessitem para assegurar o respeito pelos direitos humanos, os valores democráticos e o Estado de direito. 
Além disso, a UE financia atualmente um projeto no âmbito na linha temática do Instrumento Europeu para a Democracia e os Direitos Humanos, cujo objetivo é proporcionar reabilitação e serviços de apoio a vítimas de tortura, de desaparecimentos forçados e vítimas de traumatismos violentos na Líbia e preconizar um quadro jurídico e político a nível nacional que contemple o problema da tortura e outras formas de maus tratos.

(English version)
Question for written answer E-001087/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Charalampos Angourakis (GUE/NGL)
(7 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Torture of detainees in Libya
Accusations are growing of torture and ill-treatment of detainees in Libya to the point of death, either by the Libyan army or armed groups. It has been reported that 115 patients in Misrata have suffered serious injuries from torture. A similar situation has occurred in Tripoli and elsewhere.
The phenomenon has been denounced by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, who has stressed that, in around 60 detention centres, there are over 8 500 people , the majority of whom are being tortured. Despite repeated appeals, the situation is becoming worse by the day. As denounced by the UN Special Envoy to Tripoli, the various armed groups of ‘freedom fighters’, who have the support of NATO, the EU and the governments of EU Member States, are acting wholly uncontrollably, clashing with each other, taking prisoners, torturing and killing at will.
I would like to ask the Vice-President of the Commission and High Representative of the EU, Ms Catherine Ashton, if she condemns this practice and rejects the new ‘leaders’ of Libya? Will she take action to put a stop to the torture of thousands of detainees?
Question for written answer E-001395/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL) and Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)
(7 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Torture and killing of prisoners in Libya
A number of organisations have stated repeatedly that the torture and killing of prisoners is common practice in Libya since the attack by NATO forces and overthrow of Gaddafi, and that the new authorities are ignoring all complaints. They base their conclusions on investigations and evidence gathered from the families of the victims and prisoners, some of whom had been tortured only a few days ago.
The torture and killing of Libyan prisoners and immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa — suspected of being supporters of the previous regime — are common practice in detention centres guarded by militias, particularly those in the capital, Tripoli, and in Misrata. Such brutal treatment is permitted by members of the National Transitional Council (NTC). These organisations also say that torture is carried out at the militias’ headquarters in Misrata. Torture by being forced to stand motionless or adopt other painful positions, and beatings with blunt objects and electric shocks are some of commonest tortures. The wounds on dead bodies and on the prisoners interviewed bear this out.
There are increasing numbers of complaints to the so-called central and local authorities of cases of abuse and torture, but up till now those who hold power are doing nothing to put a stop to this situation and punish those responsible. The ‘judicial committees’ continue to conduct interrogations with complete impunity.
In the light of this, the Vice-President of the Commission/High Representative is asked to answer the following:







Does she not consider it necessary to condemn this situation?











What is her view of the facts described, given the EU’s position during the NATO attack on Libya and the role of various EU countries in this military aggression?




Joint answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(27 March 2012)
The EU has raised the issue of ill-treatment of detainee’s in its dialogue with the Libyan authorities. Most recently the High Representative/Vice-President issued a statement where she called for the respect of all detainees in Libya in accordance with international standards. The HR/VP also called on the authorities to accelerate the process of bringing all places of detention under their control and to investigate allegations of violations of detainee’s rights. The Libyan government has reacted positively to these calls and has declared to be in the process of implementing measures aiming at transferring the control of detention facilities to the authorities. 
The EU has provided emergency assistance to people in need of protection as a result of the conflict and stands ready to provide all assistance to the authorities in their efforts to ensure respect for human rights, democratic values and the rule of law.
Moreover, the EU is currently funding a project under the thematic line of the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights whose objective is to provide victims of torture, enforced disappearances and victims of violent trauma in Libya with rehabilitation and support services and to advocate for a national legal and policy framework that addresses torture and other forms of ill-treatment.

(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-001094/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(13 ta' Frar 2012)

Suġġett: Żejt tal-Palm 
Il-Kummissjoni tikkonferma l-eżistenza ta' rapport kunfidenzjali dwar il-bijokarburanti li allegatament inħareġ b'mod mhux uffiċjali u li saret referenza għalih fuq websajts (93) tal-aħbarijiet tal-UE? 
Il-Kummissjoni, f'każ li l-eżistenza tar-rapport tiġi konfermata, meta ser tippubblikah?
Kif stipulat fir-rapport tagħha ta' Diċembru 2010 dwar l-impatti tal-gassijiet serra minħabba bidla indiretta fl-użu tal-art assoċjata mal-produzzjoni tal-bijofjuwils (94), il-Kummissjoni bħalissa qed tiffinalizza l-valutazzjoni tal-impatt fuq għadd ta' għażliet tal-politika sabiex jonqsu dawn l-impatti. Nifhmu li dak li qiegħed jissemma fl-aħbarijiet riċenti dwar l-UE huwa abbozz ta’ din il-valutazzjoni tal-impatt , li dwaru l-Kummissjoni mhux se tikkumenta. Il-Kummissjoni biħsiebha tippubblika l-valutazzjoni tal-impatt tagħha hekk kif titlesta, flimkien mal-proposta/i leġiżlattiva/i biex temenda d-Direttivi dwar l-Enerġija Rinnovabbli u l-Kwalità tal-Fjuwil.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-001884/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(16. februára 2012)

Vec: Emisie z biopalív
V Európskej únii nedávno unikli údaje, ktoré vznikli po započítaní vplyvu nepriamej zmeny využívania pôdy, tzv. ILUC. Zatiaľ nezverejnené údaje potvrdzujú, že pridávanie biozložky do palív vedie k produkcii väčšieho množstva emisií skleníkových plynov ako v prípade čistých fosílnych palív. Emisné hodnoty, ktoré sa dosiaľ prisudzovali biopalivám, sa v dokumente porovnávali s údajmi pre ropné piesky v Kanade. Zdroje z priemyselného sektora i občianskej spoločnosti považujú dáta za dôveryhodné a v súlade s inými štúdiami. Nepriama zmena vo využívaní pôdy znamená, že produkcia biopalív nepriaznivo zasahuje do produkcie potravín. Mimovládny aj akademický sektor na tento problém upozorňuje už dlhodobo. Nezisková organizácia Wetlands International predpovedala, že kvôli ILUC sa do konca tohto desaťročia zničia všetky rašeliniská v tropických lesoch, čo bude mať alarmujúce dôsledky na emisie skleníkových plynov.
— Čo z týchto údajov vyplýva pre politiku Komisie v tejto oblasti?
— Plánuje na predmetné výsledky nejako reagovať?
— Ak áno, akým spôsobom?
Spoločná odpoveď predložená pani Hedegaardovou v mene Komisie
(14. marca 2012)
Ako sa stanovilo v správe z decembra 2010 o dosahu emisií skleníkových plynov v dôsledku nepriamej zmeny využívania pôdy v súvislosti s biopalivami (95) Komisia v súčasnosti dokončuje hodnotenie vplyvov viacerých politických možností minimalizovania uvedeného dosahu. Domnievame sa, že v nedávnych správach EÚ sa odkazuje na návrh tohto hodnotenia vplyvov, čo Komisia nebude komentovať. Komisia plánuje uverejniť svoje hodnotenie vplyvu hneď, ako ho dokončí, spolu s legislatívnymi návrhmi na zmenu a doplnenie smerníc o energii z obnoviteľných zdrojov a o kvalite palív.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001094/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: Palm oil
Can the Commission confirm the existence of the allegedly leaked report concerning biofuels referred to on EU news websites (96)?
Should the report’s existence be confirmed, when will the Commission publish it?
Question for written answer E-001884/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(16 February 2012)

Subject: Biofuel emissions
Data obtained following accounting for the effects of indirect land use change, or ILUC, have recently been leaked in the European Union. The data, as yet unpublished, confirm that the addition of bio-components to fuels leads to the production of higher volumes of greenhouse gases than is the case for clean fossil fuels. The document compared the emission values that have been attributed to biofuels until now with data for oil sands in Canada. Sources in industry and civil society regard the data as credible and in agreement with other studies. Indirect land use change means that the production of biofuels has an adverse effect on food production. The non‐governmental and academic sectors have long been drawing attention to this issue. The non‐profit organisation Wetlands International has predicted that all peat lands in tropical forests will have been destroyed as a result of ILUC by the end of this decade, which will have alarming consequences for greenhouse gas emissions.
— How do these data affect Commission policy in this area?
— Does it plan to respond to these results?
— If so, how?
Joint answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission
(14 March 2012)
As set out in its December 2010 report on indirect land use change greenhouse gas impacts associated with the production of biofuels (97), the Commission is currently finalising an impact assessment on a number of policy options for minimising these impacts. We believe that it is a draft of this impact assessment that is being referred to in recent EU news, on which the Commission will not comment. The Commission plans to publish its impact assessment as soon as it is finalised, together with legislative proposal(s) to amend the Renewable Energy and Fuel Quality Directives.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001105/12
aan de Commissie
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 februari 2012)

Betreft: Beperking van het recht op vrije meningsuiting en gegevensverzameling
De bescherming van intellectueel eigendom is een essentieel element om innovatie en creativiteit te bevorderen, maar ook om werkgelegenheid te ontwikkelen en het concurrentievermogen te verbeteren. De bescherming van intellectueel eigendom moet het voor de uitvinder of maker mogelijk maken zijn werken, ideeën en nieuwe kennis zo breed mogelijk te verspreiden. Tegelijkertijd mag het de vrije meningsuiting, het vrije verkeer van informatie of de bescherming van persoonsgegevens, onder andere op het internet, niet belemmeren.
Ondanks deze bepalingen en beginselen ben ik op de hoogte gebracht van verschillende gevallen waarin het recht op vrije meningsuiting en gegevensverzameling en het auteursrecht werd beperkt door GEMA, een particuliere auteursrechtenorganisatie voor opvoeringen uit Duitsland. Deze instantie heeft de toegang tot het werk van een uitvoerend kunstenaar beperkt door zijn video op videodeelsites te blokkeren binnen het grondgebied van Duitsland, omdat ze delen van de video bezit. De organisatie heeft dit gedaan zonder enig onderzoek om de maker van de video, die in een andere lidstaat woont en daar zijn video heeft geüpload, te identificeren. Dit wijst eveneens op de mogelijkheid van onbillijk nadeel en discriminatie.
1. Kan de Commissie bevestigen dat deze of gelijkaardige gevallen zich voordoen in de lidstaten?
2. Is de Commissie van mening dat een dergelijke procedure een onwettige beperking van het recht op vrije meningsuiting of gegevensverzameling zoals gewaarborgd ingevolge artikel 11 van het EVRM inhoudt?
3. Kan de Commissie meedelen of een particuliere organisatie het recht heeft de toegang tot een auteursrechtelijk beschermd werk te beperken of te verbieden? Mogen zij dit doen zonder enig onderzoek of zonder enige mogelijkheid van wederwoord te bieden?
4. Kan de Commissie bevestigen dat muziek of video's uploaden naar het internet auteursrechtelijk beschermd is? Welk artikel van de verdragen is hierop van toepassing?
5. Is de Commissie van plan actie te ondernemen tegen dit soort geconstateerd misbruik van auteursrechten? Indien nee, waarom niet?
Antwoord van de heer Barnier namens de Commissie
(25 april 2012)
Het geval waarnaar het geachte Parlementslid verwijst, lijkt betrekking te hebben op een meldings‐ en actieprocedure. Het is niet uitgesloten dat er zich in andere lidstaten vergelijkbare gevallen hebben voorgedaan.
Op basis van de verstrekte gegevens kan de Commissie zich echter niet uitspreken over de vraag of het beschreven geval indruist tegen het Europees Handvest van de grondrechten.
Krachtens de bij Richtlijn 2001/29/EG geharmoniseerde nationale voorschriften betreffende het auteursrecht wordt aan auteurs en houders van naburige rechten, die auteursrechtenorganisaties kunnen vragen om als hun vertegenwoordiger op te treden, het uitsluitende recht verleend om de mededeling van hun werken aan het publiek toe te staan of te verbieden. Houders van rechten die geen toestemming hebben verleend voor het downloaden en verspreiden van het werk of van een deel van het werk via videodeelsites, kunnen zich tegen een dergelijk gebruik van het werk verzetten.
Wanneer exploitanten van videodeelsites verzoeken tot verwijdering van inhoud ontvangen, moeten zij daarop reageren conform het toepasselijke nationale recht. Ingeval het illegale inhoud betreft, moeten zij  terstond optreden om het materiaal te verwijderen of ontoegankelijk te maken. Alle betrokken partijen kunnen daartegen beroep instellen bij de nationale rechterlijke instanties. 
Momenteel zijn de meldings‐ en actieprocedures niet geharmoniseerd bij het Unierecht, maar de Commissie is de situatie thans aan het onderzoeken (98). Ook gaat zij voor het moment na of de intellectuele-eigendomsrechten in acht worden genomen (99). Zij zal erop toezien dat deze initiatieven in overeenstemming zijn met de in het Europees Handvest van de grondrechten van de EU vastgestelde rechten (100). Zij zal tevens onderzoeken of er mogelijk sprake is van misbruiken bij de toepassing van de procedures. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001105/12
to the Commission
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: Restriction of right to freedom of expression and information gathering
The protection of intellectual property is an essential element for promoting innovation and creativity, but also for developing employment and improving competitiveness. The protection of intellectual property should allow the inventor or creator the widest possible dissemination of works, ideas and new know-how. At the same time, it should not hamper freedom of expression, the free movement of information or the protection of personal data, including on the Internet.
Despite these provisions and principles, I have been informed about several cases where the right to freedom of expression and information gathering and the copyright was restricted by GEMA, a private performance rights organisation from Germany. This institution has restricted access to a performer’s work by blocking his video on video-sharing websites within the territory of Germany, stating that it owns parts of the video. The organisation did so without any investigation to identify the creator of the video, who lives and uploaded his video in another Member State, which raises the possibility of unfair damage and discrimination too.






1.


Can the Commission confirm that this or similar cases are happening in the Member States?










2.


Does the Commission think that such a proceeding constitutes unlawful restriction of the right to freedom of expression and information gathering as guaranteed by Article 11 of the ECHR?










3.


Can the Commission say whether a private organisation has the right to restrict or ban access to a work which is protected by copyright? Is it correct to do so without any investigation or providing any opportunity to express opposition to it?










4.


Can the Commission confirm that uploading music or videos to the Internet is protected by copyright? Which article of the Treaties is applicable to it?










5.


Does the Commission intend to plan action against this kind of ascertained misuse of copyright? If not, why not?




(Version française)
Il semble que la situation évoquée par l'Honorable parlementaire concerne une procédure de notification et action. Il est possible que des situations comparables aient pu voir le jour dans d'autres États membres. 
Sur la base des informations fournies, la Commission n'est toutefois pas en mesure de se prononcer sur la compatibilité avec la Charte européenne des droits fondamentaux de la situation décrite.
Les réglementations nationales sur le droit d'auteur harmonisées par la Directive 2001/29/CE, accordent aux auteurs et détenteurs de droits voisins, qui peuvent demander aux sociétés de gestion collectives de les représenter, le droit exclusif d'autoriser ou d'interdire toute communication au public de leurs œuvres. Les détenteurs de droits n'ayant pas autorisé le téléchargement et la dissémination de l'œuvre ou d'une partie de l'œuvre sur de sites de partage de fichiers vidéo peuvent s'opposer à des telles utilisations.
Lorsqu'ils reçoivent des demandes de retrait de contenus, les opérateurs de sites de partage de fichiers vidéo doivent y répondre conformément à la loi nationale applicable, et en cas de contenu illicite, agir promptement pour retirer les informations ou rendre l'accès à celles-ci impossible. Toutes les parties concernées peuvent former un recours devant les juridictions nationales. 
 Si pour l'instant le droit de l'Union n'harmonise pas les procédures de notification et action, la Commission réexamine actuellement la situation (101) ainsi que le respect des droits de propriété intellectuelle (102). Elle veillera à ce que ces initiatives respectent tous les droits consacrés par la Charte européenne des droits fondamentaux (103) et examinera la question d'éventuels abus dans l'utilisation des procédures. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001110/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Niki Tzavela (EFD)
(8 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Επίτροπος για την Ελλάδα
Σύμφωνα με δημοσιεύματα στο Reuters και στους Financial times, η Γερμανία πιέζει ώστε να παραχωρήσει η Ελλάδα σε ευρωπαϊκά όργανα και επιτροπές τον έλεγχο των δημοσιονομικών της, ως μέρος των προϋποθέσεων για το δεύτερο πακέτο βοήθειας, των 130 δισ. ευρώ. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, η Γερμανία πιέζει για τον διορισμό «Επιτρόπου Προϋπολογισμού» της ευρωζώνης με δικαίωμα αρνησικυρίας στις αποφάσεις της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης επί του προϋπολογισμού. Σύμφωνα με τα δημοσιεύματα, ο επίτροπος θα επιτηρεί όλες τις μεγάλες δαπάνες στην Ελλάδα και ταυτόχρονα θα μπορεί να ασκεί βέτο στις δημοσιονομικές αποφάσεις της κυβέρνησης σε περίπτωση που αυτές δεν συνάδουν με τους στόχους των δανειστών της.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


Ποια η άποψή της για την πρόταση αυτή της Γερμανικής κυβέρνησης;










—


Θεωρεί ότι ένα τέτοιο μέτρο οικονομικής επιτήρησης σέβεται την κυριαρχία και την ανεξαρτησία ενός κράτους μέλους και συνάδει με τις αρχές της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης;










—


Μπορεί ένα κράτος μέλος να επιβάλει πολιτική η οποία ουσιαστικά καταργεί την εκτελεστική εξουσία της Επιτροπής και τον αποφασιστικό ρόλο του Συμβουλίου;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(29 Μαρτίου 2012)
Στις 26 Οκτωβρίου 2011, τα κράτη μέλη της ευρωζώνης τόνισαν σε δήλωσή τους ότι «η κυριότητα του προγράμματος είναι ελληνική και η εφαρμογή του ευθύνη των ελληνικών αρχών», και πρόσθεσε: «Στο πλαίσιο του νέου προγράμματος, η Επιτροπή, σε συνεργασία με τα άλλα μέλη της τρόικας, θα δημιουργήσει, για το διάστημα εφαρμογής του προγράμματος, επιτόπια ικανότητα παρακολούθησης, με τη συμμετοχή εθνικών εμπειρογνωμόνων, ώστε να εργαστούν σε στενή και συνεχή συνεργασία με την ελληνική κυβέρνηση και την τρόικα στον τομέα της παροχής συμβουλευτικών υπηρεσιών και αρωγής, προκειμένου να εξασφαλιστεί η έγκαιρη και πλήρης εφαρμογή των μεταρρυθμίσεων. Θα συνδράμει την τρόικα στην εκτίμηση της συμμόρφωσης των μέτρων που θα ληφθούν από την ελληνική κυβέρνηση στο πλαίσιο των δεσμεύσεων του προγράμματος. Ο νέος αυτός ρόλος θα καθοριστεί στο μνημόνιο της συμφωνίας.»
Η δήλωση της ευρωζώνης εξακολουθεί να ισχύει και να είναι επίκαιρη. Η Επιτροπή έχει δεσμευθεί να ενισχύσει περαιτέρω την οικεία ικανότητα παρακολούθησης και αυτή τη στιγμή αναπτύσσει την επιτόπια ικανότητά της.
Αλλά τα εκτελεστικά καθήκοντα πρέπει να παραμείνουν υπό την πλήρη ευθύνη της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης, η οποία είναι υπόλογη απέναντι στους πολίτες και τα θεσμικά της όργανα. Την ευθύνη αυτή την επωμίζονται αυτά· έτσι πρέπει εξάλλου να παραμείνει η κατάσταση εν προκειμένω. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001110/12
to the Commission
Niki Tzavela (EFD)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: Commissioner for Greece
According to reports by Reuters and in the Financial Times, Germany is pushing for control over Greek finances to be given to European bodies and Commissioners as a precondition for the second aid package of EUR 130 billion. Specifically, Germany is pushing for the establishment of a ‘Budget Commissioner’ for the eurozone who will have the right to reject decisions made by the Greek Government on its budget. According to these reports, the Commissioner will oversee all the major expenditure in Greece and at the same time will be able to veto the government’s fiscal decisions where they are not aligned with the aims of the loans.
I would like to ask the Commission:






—


What is its opinion of this suggestion by Germany?










—


Does it think that this economic supervision measure respects the sovereignty and independence of a Member State and is in alignment with the principles of the European Union?










—


Can a Member State impose a policy that essentially invalidates the executive power of the Commission and the decisive role of the Council?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(29 March 2012)
On 26 October 2011, the euro area Member States stressed in their statement that ‘the ownership of the programme is Greek and its implementation is the responsibility of the Greek authorities’, and they added: " In the context of the new programme, the Commission, in cooperation with the other Troika partners, will establish for the duration of the programme a monitoring capacity on the ground, including with the involvement of national experts, to work in close and continuous cooperation with the Greek Government and the Troika to advise and offer assistance in order to ensure the timely and full implementation of the reforms. It will assist the Troika in assessing the conformity of measures which will be taken by the Greek Government within the commitments of the programme. This new role will be laid down in the memorandum of understanding."
That statement of the euro area remains valid and relevant. The Commission is committed to further reinforce its monitoring capacity and is currently developing its capacity on the ground.
But executive tasks must remain the full responsibility of the Greek Government, which is accountable before its citizens and its institutions. That responsibility lies on their shoulders and it must remain so. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001117/12
aan de Commissie
Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL)
(8 februari 2012)

Betreft: ESBL-bacterie in Nederlands kippenvlees
1. Heeft de Commissie de berichten op de websites van De Telegraaf en van de Consumentenbond gelezen waaruit blijkt dat 99 % van het Nederlandse kippenvlees afkomstig uit de intensieve veehouderij besmet is met de ESBL-bacterie en 60 % besmet is met de campylobacter bacterie?
2. Volgens het Rijksinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu (RIVM) is de ESBL-bacterie resistent tegen de meeste antibiotica en kostte hij volgens de berekeningen van het RIVM in 2007 in Nederland ongeveer honderd mensen het leven en eiste hij in 2010 één dodelijk slachtoffer. In hoeverre kan nu de veiligheid van de gezondheid van de Nederlandse consument gegarandeerd worden?
3. Welke stappen gaat de Commissie nemen om de bedreiging van de gezondheid van de consument door antibioticaresistentie van bacteriën in voedsel tegen te gaan?
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001221/12
aan de Commissie
Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D)
(9 februari 2012)

Betreft: Aanwezigheid gevaarlijk ESBL enzym in 99 % van het kippenvlees
Na een grootschalig onderzoek van 140 kippenstallen heeft de Nederlandse consumentenbond bekend gemaakt dat 139 (dus 99.3 %) van de kippenstallen besmet zijn met het ESBL (Extended Spectrum-Beta-Lactamase) enzym. Dit enzym wordt door darmbacteriën aangemaakt en leidt tot het immuun maken van die darmbacteriën tegen haast alle vormen van antibiotica.
In 99 % van de kipfilets die te koop zijn in de supermarkt zitten deze bacteriën. Wanneer personen er door besmet raken is een behandeling zeer moeilijk. Vaak is een ziekenhuisopname nodig aangezien enkel antibiotica die via een infuus worden toegediend nog soelaas kunnen bieden.
De oorzaak van het ontstaan van deze bacterie ligt bij de praktijken in de kippenkwekerijen. Er zitten te veel kippen bij elkaar op een kleine oppervlakte, waardoor bacteriën zich erg snel kunnen verspreiden. Om problemen te voorkomen wordt aan de kippen preventief antibiotica toegediend. Dit heeft er echter na verloop van tijd toe geleid dat ziektekiemen bestand zijn geworden tegen die antibiotica. Het probleem neemt ook steeds grotere proporties aan: tien jaar geleden was er haast geen sprake van ESBL, nu is de besmettingsgraad haast 100 %.
1. Is de Commissie op de hoogte van deze problematiek?
2. Welke Europese wetgeving is van toepassing op dit thema? Wordt deze wetgeving dan onvoldoende toegepast en gecontroleerd, of is deze ontoereikend om dit probleem op te lossen?
3. Welke acties gaat de Commissie ondernemen om deze kwestie aan te pakken?
4. Uit de studie blijkt dat ook 97 % van de stallen met biokippen besmet zijn. Kan de Commissie opleggen en voortaan garanderen dat minstens biokippen bacterievrij moeten zijn?
Antwoord van de heer Dalli namens de Commissie
(19 maart 2012)
De Commissie is op de hoogte van de door het geachte Parlementslid genoemde artikelen. De Commissie beschouwt antimicrobiële resistentie (AMR) als een zeer groot gevaar voor de volksgezondheid en heeft in de voorbije jaren reeds een aantal activiteiten tegen AMR ontplooid die zij heeft versterkt met de start van een specifiek vijfjarig actieplan in 2011 (104).
In dat vijfjarige actieplan is rekening gehouden met de aanbevelingen in een recent advies van de Europese Autoriteit voor voedselveiligheid (EFSA) over ESBL (105).
Bovendien zijn er verschillende Verordeningen van kracht om de blootstelling van de consument aan potentieel resistente, door voedsel overgedragen zoönoseverwekkers  terug te dringen. Het betreft met name Verordening (EG) nr. 2160/2003 inzake de bestrijding van salmonella en andere specifieke door voedsel overgedragen zoönoseverwekkers (106), de hygiëneverordeningen (107) en Verordening (EG) nr. 2073/2005 inzake microbiologische criteria (108). Deze wettelijke bepalingen zijn van toepassing op alle (conventionele en biologische) productiesystemen.
Verder verwijst de Commissie het geachte Parlementslid naar haar antwoorden op de schriftelijke vragen E-010443/2011 (109) en E-006000/20116(6).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001117/12
to the Commission
Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: ESBL bacteria in Dutch chicken meat
1. Has the Commission read the reports on the websites of and the Netherlands Consumer Association which say that 99 % of Dutch chicken meat produced using intensive livestock rearing methods is infected with ESBL bacteria and 60 % with the Campylobacter bacteria?
2. According to the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), the ESBL bacterium is resistant to most antibiotics, and claimed, according to the RIVM’s calculations, the lives of around 100 people in 2007 and one life in 2010. To what extent can the protection of Dutch consumers’ health be guaranteed?
3. What measures is the Commission going to take to counter the threat to consumers’ health posed by antibiotic-resistant bacteria in food?
Question for written answer E-001221/12
to the Commission
Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Presence of dangerous ESBL enzyme in 99 % of chicken meat
Following a large-scale investigation at 140 chicken farms, the Dutch Consumer Association has announced that 139 of them (i.e. 99.3 %) are infected with the ESBL (extended spectrum beta-lactamase) enzyme. This enzyme is produced by intestinal bacteria and makes those bacteria immune to almost all forms of antibiotics.
These bacteria are present in 99 % of the chicken meat on sale in supermarkets. The treatment of an ESBL infection is very difficult. Hospitalisation is often necessary since only antibiotics administered through a drip are effective.
These bacteria develop because of the rearing methods practiced at chicken farms. Too many chickens are packed there into small spaces and this allows bacteria to spread very fast. The chickens are treated with preventive antibiotics in order to avoid problems. However, this has led over time to pathogenic organisms becoming resistant to those antibiotics. This problem is growing in scale. Whereas 10 years ago there was hardly any talk of ESBL, the infection rate has now reached almost 100 %.
1. Is the Commission aware of this problem?
2. Which European legislation is applicable in this case? Is this legislation insufficiently applied and monitored, or is it inadequate for this problem?
3. What action is the Commission going to take to solve this problem?
4. The investigation has shown that 97 % of organic chicken farms are also infected. Can the Commission impose measures and guarantee that in future at least organic chickens will be free of these bacteria?
Joint answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(19 March 2012)
The Commission is aware of the articles to which the Honourable Member refers. The Commission considers antimicrobial resistance (AMR) to be a public health threat of particular importance and has already developed a series of activities over the past few years against AMR and strengthened these activities with the launch of a five-year specific action plan in 2011 (110). 
The recommendations of recent advice from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) regarding ESBL (111) have been taken on board in the five-year action plan. 
In addition, different regulations are in force to reduce the exposure of potentially resistant food-borne zoonotic agents to consumers; in particular to Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 on the control of salmonella and other specified food-borne zoonotic agents (112), the Hygiene Regulations (113) and Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on microbiological criteria (114). These legal provisions are applicable to all production systems i.e. conventional and organic. 
The Commission would also refer the Honourable Member to its answers to Written Questions E‐010443/2011 (115) and E‐006000/20116.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001133/12
aan de Commissie
Bart Staes (Verts/ALE)
(8 februari 2012)

Betreft: Europese middelen ten gunste van de Belgische spoorwegen
Mag ik van de Commissie vernemen welke financiële middelen sinds 2000  ter beschikking werden gesteld aan de Belgische spoorwegen, in al haar componenten?
Kan de Commissie tevens een overzicht verstrekken van de bestaande treinstations die in België gedurende de laatste twaalf jaar gecofinancierd werden, met vermelding van het bedrag per treinstation en vermelding vanuit welke budgetlijn dit gebeurde?
Onlangs besliste de leiding van de Belgische Spoorwegen ook een aantal treinstations te sluiten. Naar verluidt ontvingen een aantal van die stations recentelijk Europese steun.
Kan, in voorkomend geval, de Commissie aanvaarden dat onlangs gecofinancierde treinstations gesloten worden?
Wat denkt de Commissie eventueel te ondernemen, teneinde de investeringen die mede met Europese gelden werden gefinancierd, alsnog te valoriseren?
Antwoord van de heer Kallas namens de Commissie 
(14 maart 2012)
Projecten op het gebied van vervoersinfrastructuur die in overeenstemming zijn met Besluit 661/2010/EU (116) van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 7 juli 2010 betreffende uniale richtsnoeren voor de ontwikkeling van een trans-Europees vervoersnet komen in aanmerking voor financiering uit hoofde van het RTE-T-programma. In deze context heeft het RTE-T-programma in België bijgedragen aan de financiering van spoorwegprojecten. Voor de periode 2000-2011 bedroeg deze financiering 260,1 miljoen EUR. 95,8 miljoen EUR ging naar PBKAL, 30 miljoen EUR naar Eurocaprail, 6 miljoen EUR naar Diabolo, 2,8 miljoen EUR naar de IJzeren Rijn en 125,5 miljoen EUR naar ERTMS. Treinstations worden in de genoemde EU-richtsnoeren niet expliciet genoemd. Een onderdeel van de stationsinfrastructuur dat strookt met de vastgestelde prioriteiten en voldoet aan de in het vervoersbeleid van de EU vastgestelde voorwaarden en beginselen kan worden gefinancierd in het kader van de modernisering van de spoorwegen of van intermodale knooppunten. 
Het financieringsproces van het cohesiebeleid is gebaseerd op een systeem van gedecentraliseerd beheer. Dit betekent dat het in het kader van de reglementering inzake de werking van het EFRO en volgens de procedures van het Cohesiefonds de taak is van de overheden van de lidstaten om projecten te selecteren en deze te financieren voor zover deze projecten voldoen aan de juridische bepalingen van het Cohesiefonds en de Structuurfondsen. De Commissie wordt alleen op de hoogte gebracht van de bijzonderheden van projecten wanneer de totale kosten meer dan 50 miljoen EUR bedragen.
De Commissie beschikt derhalve niet over een complete lijst van treinstations die medegefinancierd zijn door het cohesiebeleid en het RTE-T-programma.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001133/12
to the Commission
Bart Staes (Verts/ALE)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: European funds for the Belgian Railways
Can the Commission inform me what funds have been provided to the Belgian Railways since 2000, and how these are broken down?
Can the Commission also provide an overview of train stations which have been co-financed in Belgium over the past 12 years, specifying the amount per train station and the budget line from which the funds were allocated?
The management of the Belgian Railways recently decided to close a number of train stations. It has been reported that a number of those stations recently received European support.
If so, can the Commission accept that recently co-financed train stations are being closed?
What is the Commission planning to do in order to derive further benefit from investments which were co-financed with European funds?
(Version française)
Les projets d'infrastructures de transport qui sont conformes à la décision 661/2010/UE (117) du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 7 juillet 2010 sur les orientations de l'Union pour le développement du réseau transeuropéen de transport bénéficient de financements au titre du programme RTE-T. Dans ce contexte des projets ferroviaires ont été cofinancé par le programme RTE-T en Belgique. Pour la période 2000-2011 les financements s'élèvent à 260,1 millions d'euros dont pour le projet PBKAL 95,8 millions d'euros, Eurocaprail 30 millions d'euros, Diabolo 6 millions d'euros, Iron Rhine 2,8 millions d'euros et ERTMS 125,5 millions d'euros. Les gares ferroviaires ne sont pas explicitement mentionnées dans lesdites orientations de l'Union. La partie des infrastructures des gares ferroviaires qui est conforme aux priorités définies et satisfait aux conditions et principes fixés par la politique des transports de l'UE peut être financée dans le cadre de la modernisation de voies ferrées ou de nœuds intermodaux. 
Le processus de financement de la politique de cohésion est fondé sur un système de gestion décentralisé. En conséquence, dans le cadre des règles de fonctionnement du FEDER ainsi que dans les procédures du Fonds de cohésion, il incombe aux administrations des États membres de sélectionner les projets et de les financer pour autant que les projets retenus satisfassent aux dispositions juridiques du Fonds de cohésion et des Fonds structurels. La Commission n'est informée des détails des projets que lorsque leur coût total est supérieur à 50 millions d'euros.
En conséquence, la Commission ne dispose pas d'une liste exhaustive des gares ferroviaires cofinancées par la politique de cohésion et du programme RTE-T.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-001147/12
adresată Comisiei
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)
(8 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Statistici regionale
În prezent, Comisia depune eforturi pentru realizarea unui management fiabil al calității pentru statisticile europene, comunicarea COM(2011)0211 fiind o dovadă în acest sens. Deși strategia propusă de Comisie implică o serie de măsuri, există nevoia ca la nivelul fiecărui stat membru recomandările Comisiei și codul de bune practici să fie respectate. Pentru politica de dezvoltare regională și mai ales pentru asigurarea complementarității intervențiilor la nivel local este necesar ca inclusiv statisticile de la acest nivel să respecte regulile.
Ce propune Comisia pentru a asigura calitatea statisticilor locale și regionale? Are Comisia în vedere acordarea unui sprijin financiar pentru acest lucru?
Răspuns dat de dl Šemeta în numele Comisiei
(22 martie 2012)
Comunicarea la care se face referire (118) defineşte standardele minime pentru consolidarea implementării codului de practică care se aplică la toate domeniile statistice, inclusiv statisticile regionale. Evaluarea calităţii statisticilor regionale generale este realizată de către Comisie, în mod regulat.
În domeniul PIB-ului regional, Comisia monitorizează calitatea producţiei de date a statelor membre din 1999. În 2006 s-a instituit raportarea calitativă periodică (119). În 2010 Comisia a lansat un program de asigurare a unei calităţi sporite în ceea ce priveşte compilarea datelor regionale privind valoarea adăugată brută (VAB) pentru a susţine lansarea PIB-ului regional din 2012. Acesta include, printre altele, verificări ale revizuirilor de date pentru toate statele membre şi vizite pentru unele dintre acestea. În cazul în care apar deficienţe în contextul acestui proces, Comisia şi statul membru implicat ajung la un consens cu privire la măsurile de corectare. De regulă, nu se acordă asistenţă financiară pentru asemenea îmbunătăţiri, pentru că datele sunt furnizate în baza unei obligaţii legale existente. Comisia poate susţine lucrări de pregătire pentru conformarea cu noi obligaţii legale, de exemplu compilarea ratelor de creştere a volumului VAB la nivel regional.
În domeniul demografiei regionale, datele sunt colectate în prezent pe bază de voluntariat. O propunere de regulament-cadru privind statisticile demografice a fost adoptată de către Comisie la 20 decembrie 2011 (120) şi va intra în discuţia Parlamentului şi a Consiliului pe parcursul anului 2012. Propunerea vizează şi statisticile demografice regionale. Obiectivul este de a produce la nivel naţional şi regional statistici demografice anuale de o calitate ridicată şi relevante la nivelul politicilor. Regulamentul nu va prevedea nicio asistenţă financiară pentru punerea la dispoziţia Comisiei a datelor solicitate.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001147/12
to the Commission
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: Regional statistics
At present, the Commission is striving to achieve robust quality management for European statistics, with COM(2011)0211 being proof of this. The strategy proposed by the Commission involves a set of measures, but the Commission’s recommendations and the code of best practice also need to be respected at the level of each Member State. In the case of regional development policy, and especially to ensure the complementarity of interventions at a local level, it is essential that the rules also be respected for statistics at that level.
What does the Commission propose be done to ensure the quality of local and regional statistics? Does the Commission intend to grant financial assistance for this?
Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(22 March 2012)
The communication referred to (121) defines minimum standards to reinforce the implementation of the Code of Practice which shall apply to all statistical domains including regional statistics. The quality assessment of the general regional statistics is regularly carried out in the Commission.
In the area of regional GDP, the Commission has been monitoring the quality of Member States' data production since 1999. In 2006 regular quality reporting was established (122). In 2010 the Commission launched a programme of enhanced quality assurance as regards the compilation of regional gross value added (GVA) data to underpin the 2012 release of regional GDP. This includes, inter alia, checks on data revisions for all and country visits to some Member States. In cases where shortcomings become apparent in the context of this process the Commission and the Member State concerned agree on corrective actions. Financial assistance is usually not granted for such improvements, because the data is provided on the basis of an existing legal obligation. The Commission may support preparatory work to comply with new legal obligations, for instance the compilation of volume growth rates of GVA at regional level.
In the area of regional demography, data is collected at the moment on a voluntary basis. A proposal for a Framework Regulation on demographic statistics was adopted by the Commission on 20 December 2011 (123) and will be under discussion in the Parliament and Council during 2012. The proposal also covers regional demographic statistics. The objective is to produce high quality and policy relevant annual demographic statistics at national and regional level. The regulation will not foresee any financial assistance to provide the requested data to the Commission.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001208/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(9 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Προγράμματα προώθησης οίνων σε τρίτες χώρες
Στα πλαίσια των κανονισμών (ΕΚ) αριθ.479/2008 του Συμβουλίου και (EK) αριθ 555/2008 της Επιτροπής προβλέπονται μέτρα ενημέρωσης η προώθησης κοινοτικών οίνων σε τρίτες χώρες. Η υλοποίηση προγραμμάτων ενημέρωσης και προώθησης κοινοτικών οίνων από Ελληνικές εταιρείες θα δώσει ώθηση στις εξαγωγές Ελληνικού κρασιού σε τρίτες χώρες. 
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Διαθέτει στοιχεία για τη συμμετοχή Ελληνικών εταιρειών η συνεταιρισμών σε προγράμματα ενημέρωσης η προώθησης κοινοτικών οίνων; Τι στοιχεία μπορεί να παράσχει;











Υπάρχουν παρεμφερή προγράμματα ενημέρωσης η προώθησης κοινοτικών οίνων η άλλων προϊόντων σε αγορές τρίτων χωρών στα οποία οι Ελληνικές εταιρείες ή συνεταιρισμοί θα μπορούσαν να συμμετάσχουν;




Απάντηση του κ. Cioloș εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(16 Μαρτίου 2012)
1. Το Εθνικό Πρόγραμμα Στήριξης Οίνου για την Ελλάδα 2009-2013 περιλαμβάνει το μέτρο <QT.START>«</QT.START>προώθηση οίνων σε αγορές τρίτων χωρών<QT.END>»</QT.END>. Ο συνολικός προϋπολογισμός για την περίοδο προγραμματισμού για την Ελλάδα ανέρχεται σε 101,475 εκατ. ευρώ, εκ των οποίων διατέθηκε για την προώθηση σε αγορές τρίτων χωρών το ποσό των 18,167 εκατ. ευρώ, δηλαδή 18 %. Για την περίοδο 2009-2011, οι δαπάνες για αυτό το μέτρο ανέρχονται σε 8,5 εκατ. ευρώ.
Σαράντα δύο δικαιούχοι συμμετείχαν σε αυτό το μέτρο κατά το πρώτο έτος της εφαρμογής του στην Ελλάδα, δηλ. το 2010. Από αυτούς τους δικαιούχους, οι δεκαέξι ήταν ομάδες επιχειρήσεων παραγωγής οίνου (συνεταιρισμοί και ιδιωτικές εταιρίες) και είκοσι τέσσερεις δικαιούχοι ήταν μεμονωμένες εταιρίες παραγωγής οίνου. 
2. Εκστρατείες ενημέρωσης και προώθησης προβλέπονται επίσης από τον κανονισμό για μέτρα ενημέρωσης και προώθησης σχετικά με τα γεωργικά προϊόντα στην εσωτερική αγορά και τις τρίτες χώρες. Ωστόσο, οι δικαιούχοι είναι επαγγελματικές ή διεπαγγελματικές οργανώσεις που αντιπροσωπεύουν τον σχετικό τομέα, αποκλείοντας τις ιδιωτικές επιχειρήσεις. Επιπρόσθετα, στο πλαίσιο αυτό, τα μέτρα ενημέρωσης και προώθησης πρέπει να είναι γενικά, χωρίς καμία αναφορά σε εμπορικές επωνυμίες ιδιωτικών επιχειρήσεων.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001208/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Campaigns to promote wine in third countries
Council Regulation (EC) No 479/2008 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 555/2008 make provision for information and promotion campaigns for Community wines in third countries. The implementation of information and promotion campaigns for Community wines by Greek companies will give momentum to Greek wine exports to third countries. 
In view of this:







Does the Commission have information on the participation of Greek companies or cooperatives in information and promotion campaigns for Community wines?











Are there similar campaigns to provide information on and promote Community wines or other products on third-country markets in which Greek companies or cooperatives could participate?




Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(16 March 2012)
1. The Wine National Support Programme for Greece 2009-2013 includes the measure ‘promotion of wines on third-country markets’. The total budget for programming period for Greece amounts to EUR 101.475 million, out of which it allocated for the promotion on third-country markets scheme EUR 18.167 million, i.e. 18 %. For the period 2009-2011, the expenses for this measure amount to EUR 8.5 million. 
Forty-two beneficiaries participated in this measure in the first year of its implementation by Greece in 2010. Out of these beneficiaries, 16 were groups of winemaking enterprises (cooperatives and private companies) and 24 beneficiaries were individual winemaking companies.
2. Information and promotion campaigns are also provided for by regulation on information and promotion measures for agricultural products on the internal market and in third countries. However, the beneficiaries are trade or intertrade organisations representing the sector concerned, which exclude private companies. Furthermore, under this framework information and promotion measures have to be generic without any reference to private brands.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001230/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(8 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Ασφαλιστική και συνταξιοδοτική αναγνώριση του χρόνου προϋπηρεσίας των σχολικών φυλάκων του Π.Δ. 164/2004
Με την υπ’ αριθ. 34100/24.11.1999 απόφαση του Ελληνικού Υπουργείου Εργασίας και Κοινωνικών Ασφαλίσεων και θέμα «

Πρόγραμμα για την απόκτηση εργασιακής εμπειρίας 2 700 ανέργων αποφοίτων Λυκείου, ηλικίας 25-64 ετών στη φύλαξη κτιρίων

»
 καταρτίστηκε σχετικό πρόγραμμα «… με σκοπό την απόκτηση εργασιακής εμπειρίας από ανέργους …με πιθανότητα μόνιμης απασχόλησης …»(Εφημερίδα της Κυβερνήσεως αρ. Φύλλου 2131/8.12.1999). Οι συμμετέχοντες στο Πρόγραμμα -ως καταρτιζόμενοι- υπάγονταν στην ασφάλιση του ΙΚΑ-ΕΤΑΜ μόνο για τον κλάδο παροχών ασθένειας σε είδος (και αργότερα κατά του κινδύνου ατυχήματος). Μετά την επιτυχή ολοκλήρωση του προγράμματος ακολούθησαν και άλλες διαδοχικές προγραμματικές συμβάσεις με αποτέλεσμα οι εν λόγω εργαζόμενοι να παραμείνουν αδιαλείπτως στις θέσεις τους μέχρι και το 2006, οπότε και κατατάχθηκαν σε θέσεις ιδιωτικού δικαίου αορίστου χρόνου στους οικείους ΟΤΑ με βάση το Π.Δ. 164/2004, δηλαδή του ειδικού νομοθετήματος για την προσαρμογή της ελληνικής νομοθεσίας -όσον αφορά το προσωπικό με συμβάσεις ορισμένου χρόνου του Δημοσίου και του ευρύτερου Δημοσίου Τομέα- στις διατάξεις της οδηγίας 1999/70/ΕΚ του Συμβουλίου. Ταυτόχρονα η Ολομέλεια του ΑΣΕΠ είχε αποφανθεί ομόφωνα ότι οι συγκεκριμένοι απασχολούμενοι παρείχαν εξαρτημένη εργασία καλύπτοντας πάγιες και διαρκείς ανάγκες ενώ και η ίδια η Πολιτεία (ν.3320/2005) αναγνώρισε το συγκεκριμένο διάστημα (2001 έως 2006) ως χρόνο πραγματικής υπηρεσίας, κατ’ επίφαση «σύμβαση μαθητείας», προκειμένου να υπολογιστεί τόσο στη μισθολογική εξέλιξη όσο και στη χορήγηση διαφόρων επιδομάτων. Στα ίδια έγγραφα, όμως, αναφέρεται ότι η αναγνώριση αυτή δεν αφορά την κατοχύρωση ασφαλιστικών ή συνταξιοδοτικών δικαιωμάτων. Ο Συνήγορος του Πολίτη στη γνωμοδότησή του προτείνει τη συντομότερη δυνατή ρύθμιση του θέματος υποστηρίζοντας ρητά την ασφαλιστική και συνταξιοδοτική αναγνώριση της προϋπηρεσίας.
Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Πώς κρίνει το γεγονός ότι ενώ αναγνωρίζεται μια σχέση εξαρτημένης εργασίας δεν αναγνωρίζονται τα απορρέοντα από αυτήν ασφαλιστικά και συνταξιοδοτικά δικαιώματα;











Θεωρεί ότι αυτό συνιστά παραβίαση της οδηγίας 2000/78/ΕΚ για την ισότητα στην απασχόληση;











Εκτιμά ότι αντίστοιχες ανακολουθίες σε εργασιακό και ασφαλιστικό επίπεδο δύνανται να αποτελέσουν προσχώματα για την ενίσχυση της κινητικότητας των εργαζομένων εντός της ΕΕ;




Απάντηση του κ. Andor εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(20 Μαρτίου 2012)
Το πρόγραμμα στο οποίο αναφέρεται ο κ. βουλευτής φαίνεται να είναι πρόγραμμα εργασιακής ενσωμάτωσης ή ένταξης. Η ρήτρα 2 (2) (β) της συμφωνίας πλαισίου που επισυνάπτεται στην οδηγία 1999/70/ΕΚ (124) παρέχει ρητά στα κράτη μέλη τη δυνατότητα να εξαιρούν τέτοια συστήματα από τις απαιτήσεις της εν λόγω οδηγίας.
Η οδηγία 2000/78/ΕΚ (125) θεσπίζει ένα νομικό πλαίσιο για την καταπολέμηση των διακρίσεων λόγω θρησκείας ή πεποιθήσεων, αναπηρίας, ηλικίας ή γενετήσιου προσανατολισμού στην απασχόληση και την εργασία. Ωστόσο, με βάση τις διαθέσιμες πληροφορίες, δεν υπάρχει καμία ένδειξη διακρίσεων για οποιονδήποτε από τους λόγους αυτούς, στη συγκεκριμένη περίπτωση. 
Σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 153 παράγραφος 4 της ΣΛΕΕ, τα κράτη μέλη καθορίζουν τις θεμελιώδεις αρχές του δικού τους συστήματος κοινωνικής ασφάλισης και είναι αρμόδια για την οργάνωση και τις μεθόδους χρηματοδότησης του εν λόγω συστήματος, υπό την προϋπόθεση ότι η νομοθεσία της ΕΕ τηρείται. Οι κανόνες της ΕΕ για την κοινωνική ασφάλιση περιορίζονται στο συντονισμό των νομοθεσιών των κρατών μελών (άρθρο 48 ΣΛΕΕ). Εφόσον δεν υπάρχει εναρμόνιση, οι διαφορές ουσίας και διαδικασίας μεταξύ των συστημάτων κοινωνικής ασφάλισης κάθε κράτους μέλους και, επομένως, τα δικαιώματα των ασφαλισμένων δεν εμπίπτουν στην εν λόγω διάταξη. Τα επιμέρους κράτη μέλη παραμένουν αρμόδια να καθορίζουν στη νομοθεσία τους, τηρώντας το δίκαιο της Ένωσης και ιδίως την αρχή της μη διάκρισης μεταξύ ημεδαπών και αλλοδαπών, τους όρους ασφάλισης και τις παροχές που χορηγούνται από ένα σύστημα κοινωνικής ασφάλισης.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001230/12
to the Commission
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: Recognition of years of service of the school guards under PD 164/2004 for insurance and pensions
Decision No 34100/24.11.1999 of the Greek Ministry of Labour and Social Insurance titled ‘Work experience programme for 2 700 unemployed high school graduates aged 25 to 64 years in guarding buildings’

established a program ‘… designed to provide work experience to the unemployed … with a probability of permanent employment …’ (Official Gazette, Sheet No 2131/8.12.1999). The trainees participating in the program were insured with the IKA-ETAM only for sickness benefits in kind (and later against the risk of accidents). The successful completion of the program was followed by further sequential program contracts, through which said employees remained at their posts continuously until 2006, when they were placed in private law open-ended posts in their respective local authorities, under the PD 164/2004, i.e. the special legislation for the adaptation of Greek legislation — regarding staff on fixed-term contracts in the public and broader public sector — to the provisions of Council Directive 1999/70/EC. Meanwhile, the Plenary of the ASEP has unanimously ruled that these employees provided dependent labour covering fixed and permanent needs, while the State too (L.3320/2005) recognised this period (2001 to 2006) as a time of actual service, in title only an ‘apprenticeship contract’ for the calculation of pay rises and the granting of various benefits. The same documents, however, state that this recognition does not concern the securing of insurance or pension rights. The Ombudsman in its opinion suggests the speediest possible settlement of the matter, expressly supporting the recognition of past service for insurance and pensions.
In this context, the Commission is asked:







How does it evaluate the fact that although a dependent labour relationship is recognised, the insurance and pension rights arising under this are not recognised?











Does it consider that this constitutes a violation of Directive 2000/78/EC on equal employment?











Does it believe that such discrepancies in work and insurance could contribute to enhancing worker mobility within the EU?




Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(20 March 2012)
The programme to which the Honourable Member refers appears to be a work insertion or integration programme. Clause 2(2)(b) of the framework Agreement annexed to Directive 1999/70/EC (126) explicitly offers Member States the option of excluding such schemes from the requirements of that directive.
Directive 2000/78/EC (127) lays down a legal framework for combating discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation in employment and occupation. However, on the basis of the information available, there is no indication of discrimination on any of those grounds in the case in point. 
In accordance with Article 153(4) TFEU, Member States define the fundamental principles of their social security systems and are responsible for the organisation and methods of financing such systems, provided that EC law is complied with.The EU rules on social security are confined to coordination of the laws of the Member States (Article 48 TFEU). Insofar as there is no harmonisation, material and procedural differences between the social security systems of each Member State, and thus the rights of the persons insured, are not affected by this provision. Each Member State remains competent to determine in its legislation, in compliance with EC law and in particular with the principle of non-discrimination between nationals and non-nationals, the conditions for membership of a social security scheme and the granting of benefits under the scheme.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-001243/12
adresată Comisiei
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(9 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Contaminarea cu cloramfenicol a hranei porcilor
Potrivit cotidianului Augsburger Allgemeine, în Germania au fost descoperite cazuri de contaminare cu cloramfenicol a hranei porcilor din 26 de ferme. Comisia este rugată să precizeze dacă au fost realizate investigații cu privire la o eventuală ajungere pe piața de consum a cărnii provenite de la aceste ferme.
De asemenea, Comisia este rugată să precizeze dacă există posibilitatea ca produsele întreprinderii Ehrmann, sursa contaminării, să fi ajuns în alte state membre ale UE.
Răspuns dat de dl Dalli în numele Comisiei
(14 martie 2012)
Investigaţiile autorităţilor de control competente din Germania au arătat că furajele pentru porci contaminate au fost livrate doar către ferme din Bavaria şi Baden-Wuerttemberg şi, prin urmare, nu au fost expediate în alte state membre.
Autorităţile competente din Germania au confirmat că nu a intrat în lanţul alimentar carnea de la fermele de porci cu rezultate pozitive de Cloramfenicol. De fapt, cele 26 de ferme din Bavaria şi cele şase ferme din Baden-Wuerttemburg au primit hrană pentru animale potenţial contaminată. Acestea au fost oprite de la sacrificarea animalelor, ceea ce înseamnă că nici un animal nu a putut părăsi fermele. Ulterior, au fost prelevate mostre de urină din aceste ferme. Dacă Cloramfenicolul a fost detectat în urina de la o anumită fermă, toate animalele de la acea fermă au fost declarate improprii pentru consumul uman şi au trebuit lichidate.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001243/12
to the Commission
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Chloramfenicol contamination of pig feed
According to the daily newspaper Augsburger Allgemeine, cases of pig feed contamination with chloramfenicol were discovered in 26 farms in Germany. Can the Commission say whether investigations were carried out to establish whether meat sourced from these farms reached the consumer market?
Can the Commission clarify whether the possibility exists that products from the Ehrmann firm, the source of the contamination, have reached other EU Member States?
Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(14 March 2012)
The investigations of the competent control authorities in Germany showed that the contaminated pig feed was delivered solely to farms in Bavaria and Baden-Wuerttemberg and thus were not dispatched to other Member States.
The competent authorities in Germany confirmed that meat from pig farms with positive findings of chloramphenicol did not enter the food chain. In fact, the 26 farms in Bavaria and the six farms in Baden-Wuerttemberg received potentially contaminated feed. They were blocked for slaughtering, that means no animal could leave the farms. Then, urine samples were taken from all these farms. If chloramphenicol was detected in the urine of a certain farm, all the animals of that farm were declared unfit for human consumption and had to be disposed of.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-001274/12
adresată Comisiei
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(10 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Noi forme de sprijin pentru fermieri în anul 2012
Ministerul Agriculturii şi Dezvoltării Rurale din România a notificat Comisia cu privire la intenția de a lansa două noi forme de sprijin pentru anul 2012 în baza art. 68 din Regulamentul CE nr. 73/2009 şi anume: sprijin pentru crescătorii de bivoliţe din zonele defavorizate în valoare totală de 1,5 milioane de euro şi pentru crescătorii de bovine de carne şi metişi ai raselor de carne din zonele defavorizate în valoare de 6,5 milioane de euro.
Comisia este rugată să informeze care este stadiul analizei acestor notificări.
Răspuns dat de dl Cioloș în numele Comisiei
(21 martie 2012)
Comisia poate confirma că, la data de 26 iulie 2011, România a comunicat măsurile de ajutor specific care urmau să fie puse în aplicare începând din 2012, în conformitate cu articolul 68 din Regulamentul (CE) nr. 73/2009 (128), inclusiv ajutorul acordat în sectoarele laptelui de bivoliță și cărnii de vită în zone defavorizate.
Procesul de evaluare s-a încheiat și măsurile de ajutor specific sunt puse în aplicare începând cu 1 ianuarie 2012, după cum fusese prevăzut în comunicarea menționată mai sus.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001274/12
to the Commission
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: New forms of assistance for farmers in 2012
The Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development in Romania notified the Commission regarding its intention to launch two new forms of assistance for 2012 on the basis of Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009, to be precise: assistance for breeders of buffalos in disadvantaged areas to the total value of EUR 1.5 million and for breeders of purebred and crossbred beef cattle in disadvantaged areas to the value of EUR 6.5 million.
Can the Commission say what stage has been reached in analysing this notification?
Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(21 March 2012)
The Commission can confirm that on 26 July 2011 Romania communicated specific support measures to be implemented from 2012 under Article 68 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 (129), including support in buffalo milk and bovine meat sectors in less favoured areas.
The assessment process is now over and the specific support measures are being implemented since 1 January 2012 as foreseen in the abovementioned communication.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-001275/12
alla Commissione
Carlo Fidanza (PPE)
(10 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Crollo Spanair
Spanair, orgoglio del governo regionale della Catalogna e quarta compagnia aerea della Spagna, ha sospeso le attività il 27 gennaio 2012, a causa della mancanza di prospettive di nuovi finanziamenti e della scarsa domanda di viaggi aerei in Spagna. Questo evento ha avuto serie conseguenze: più di 200 voli sono stati cancellati all'improvviso e 20 000 passeggeri sono rimasti a terra in tutta Europa e in altre destinazioni.
Alla luce di quanto sopra:







Può la Commissione spiegare come gestire un evento così deplorevole al fine di tutelare i diritti dei passeggeri coinvolti? Intende stabilire disposizioni per garantire provvedimenti amministrativi atti a far sì che i passeggeri rimasti a terra in aeroporti diversi da quelli della città di appartenenza vengano rimpatriati nel caso la linea aerea dovesse dichiarare la bancarotta?











Può la Commissione fornire aggiornamenti circa lo stato attuale della revisione della direttiva 90/314/CE del Consiglio (concernente i viaggi, le vacanze ed i circuiti «tutto compreso»)? Visti i frequenti rinvii del Consiglio, quando presenterà una nuova proposta atta a garantire un quadro maggiormente chiaro e conciso, tenendo in considerazione, tra l'altro, il verificarsi di circostanze eccezionali?











Nell'ambito della revisione del regolamento (CE) n. 261/2004 sui diritti dei passeggeri, intende la Commissione adottare misure appropriate per garantire che i passeggeri siano coperti in tutte le circostanze possibili?




Risposta data da Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione
(7 marzo 2012)







1.


Per quanto riguarda il caso Spanair, la Commissione osserva che le autorità spagnole hanno garantito l’applicazione dei diritti dei passeggeri aerei (regolamento (CE) n. 261/2004










1.


Per quanto riguarda il caso Spanair, la Commissione osserva che le autorità spagnole hanno garantito l’applicazione dei diritti dei passeggeri aerei (regolamento (CE) n. 261/2004




 (130)), in modo che i passeggeri potessero chiedere un rimborso o proseguire il viaggio con un volo alternativo. In particolare, Spanair, le autorità spagnole, nonché altri vettori aerei, hanno agito in modo da ridurre al minimo l’impatto negativo sui passeggeri, istituendo, tra l’altro, accordi amministrativi che hanno garantito un volo alternativo per i passeggeri che sono stati lasciati a terra lontano da casa.Come indicato nella risposta della Commissione all’interrogazione scritta n. 12497/2011 (131), la Commissione sta esaminando la questione della protezione dei passeggeri in caso di insolvenza della compagnia aerea e le possibili opzioni per migliorare la situazione. Come in altri casi, la Commissione applicherà il principio di proporzionalità e relativamente a questo tema intende adottare una decisione nel 2012.






2.


La Commissione sta attualmente esaminando le diverse opzioni per una revisione della direttiva sui viaggi 




«tutto compreso» (90/314/CEE). Per tenere debitamente conto dei suddetti lavori in corso nel campo dell’insolvenza delle compagnie aeree in relazione ai viaggi «tutto compreso», è probabile che una proposta verrà presentata entro la fine del 2012.






3.


La Commissione è del parere che in caso di bancarotta sia applicabile il regolamento (CE) n. 261/2004. Tuttavia, è necessaria un’azione coordinata della compagnia aerea e delle autorità nazionali, al fine di garantire che l’assistenza e un volo alternativo per i passeggeri vengano adeguatamente predisposti prima che la compagnia aerea cessi definitivamente le sue attività. In questo senso, il caso Spanair, insieme al recente caso Malev, è stato un esempio di buone prassi sulle quali la Commissione svolgerà un attento studio.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-001275/12
to the Commission
Carlo Fidanza (PPE)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Collapse of Spanair
Spanair, a flagship of the regional government of Cataluña, and Spain’s fourth-largest airline, collapsed on 27 January 2012, owing to the lack of prospects for new financing and to the weak demand for air travel in Spain. This event has caused serious consequences, with more than 200 flights suddenly cancelled and 20 000 passengers stranded across Europe and in other destinations.
For the abovementioned reasons:







Can the Commission explain how to deal with such a regrettable event with a view to safeguarding the rights of the passengers involved? Is the Commission willing to establish provisions in order to guarantee administrative arrangements which would ensure repatriation for passengers who are stranded at a non-home airport in the event of airline bankruptcy?











Can the Commission give an update on the current status of the revision of Council Directive 90/314/EC (Package Travel Directive)? Given the regular postponements by the EC, when will the Commission present a new proposal in order to guarantee a clearer and more concise framework, also taking account of exceptional circumstances?











In the context of the revision of Regulation 261/2004/EC on airline passengers’ rights, is the Commission willing to take all appropriate measures to ensure that passengers are covered in all possible circumstances?




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(7 March 2012)







1.


In the case of Spanair, the Commission notes that the Spanish authorities ensured that air passenger rights (Regulation 261/2004










1.


In the case of Spanair, the Commission notes that the Spanish authorities ensured that air passenger rights (Regulation 261/2004




 (132)) applied, so that passengers could claim for a refund or re-routing. In particular, Spanair, the Spanish authorities, as well as other carriers, have acted in a way that has minimised the negative impact on passengers, including putting in place administrative arrangements which ensured re-routing of passengers who were stranded away from home.As expressed in the Commission's reply to written question n° 12497/2011 (133), the Commission is working on the issue of passenger protection in case of airline insolvency and the possible options to improve the situation. As it always does, the Commission will apply the proportionality principle. The Commission intends to take a decision on this topic in 2012.






2.


The Commission is currently analysing different options for a reform of the Package Travel Directive (90/314/EEC). In order to take good account of the abovementioned ongoing works in the area of airline insolvency when it concerns package travel, it can be expected that a proposal will be presented before the end of 2012.










3.


The Commission is of the opinion that regulation N° 261/2004 applies in the case of bankruptcy. However, coordinated action by the airline and the national authorities is necessary to ensure that the assistance and rerouting of passengers is properly prepared before the airline ceases its operations. In this sense, the Spanair case, along with the also recent Malev case, was an example of good practice that the Commission will carefully study. 




(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001287/12
a la Comisión
Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D), Iratxe García Pérez (S&D), Alejandro Cercas (S&D), Carmen Romero López (S&D), Luis Yáñez-Barnuevo García (S&D) y Inés Ayala Sender (S&D)
(13 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Interoperabilidad de los sistemas de telepeaje en Europa
Según diversas fuentes el dispositivo de telepeaje con el que se cruza sin necesidad de parar en las cabinas de las autopistas españolas podría ser utilizado hoy mismo en las autovías de pago portuguesas. Toda vez que técnicamente es posible la interoperabilidad de sus dispositivos de telepeaje, hacerla efectiva requiere posibilitar la facturación entre las concesionarias en las infraestructuras y las entidades financieras encargadas del cobro en ambos países.
Aunque la patronal de las autopistas españolas y representantes portugueses han identificado las medidas necesarias para compatibilizar el funcionamiento de sus sistemas, no hay previsión alguna para oficializar un acuerdo y hacerlo efectivo.
La interoperabilidad de los sistemas de telepeaje no es un problema exclusivo de las relaciones entre España y Portugal. Afecta a infraestructuras situadas en otros Estados miembros de la Unión Europea financiadas en muchos casos con fondos comunitarios, e incluso a las conexiones con vecinos extracomunitarios como Suiza.
Esta situación afecta al ejercicio de las libertades fundamentales, la integración de los sistemas de pago y el funcionamiento del mercado interior en el ámbito de la UE así como a la movilidad europea. Por ello se pide a la Comisión que responda:






—


Si, tras la información recabada como consecuencia de anteriores preguntas, el funcionamiento de los peajes establecidos por Portugal en sus autovías que comunican con España se ajusta al Derecho comunitario.










—


Teniendo en cuenta la legislación en materia de interoperabilidad y en particular la Directiva 2004/52/EC relativa a los sistemas de peaje










—


¿Considera la Comisión que son necesarias medidas adicionales para solventar esta situación?










—


¿Qué iniciativas tiene previsto adoptar para garantizar que los sistemas sean realmente interoperables?










—


Y, en su caso, ¿tiene previsto algún programa para extenderla a otros países vecinos?




Respuesta del Sr. Kallas en nombre de la Comisión
(13 de marzo de 2012)






1.


La legislación europea relativa a la interoperabilidad de los sistemas de telepeaje en las carreteras permite el uso de tecnologías basadas en las comunicaciones por microondas y/o posicionamiento por satélite combinadas con las comunicaciones móviles. Según la información que obra en poder de la Comisión, la tecnología de telepeaje por microondas utilizada en las antiguas autopistas SCUT de Portugal se ajusta a la legislación.











2.


El Servicio Europeo de Telepeaje (SET) introducido por la Directiva 2004/52/CE










2.


El Servicio Europeo de Telepeaje (SET) introducido por la Directiva 2004/52/CE




 (134), relativa a la interoperabilidad de los sistemas de telepeaje de las carreteras de la Comunidad, y definido en la Decisión de Ejecución 2009/750/CE de la Comisión, relativa a la definición del Servicio Europeo de Telepeaje y sus elementos técnicos, complementa los servicios nacionales de telepeaje de los Estados miembros. El SET está a disposición de los usuarios a través de los proveedores de servicios que ofrecen generalmente los equipos capaces de funcionar en toda Europa mediante una de las dos tecnologías mencionadas. Los proveedores del SET actúan como intermediarios en la transferencia de los importes de los peajes adeudados por los usuarios del SET a los perceptores de los peajes de autopistas, velando al mismo tiempo por la garantía de pago a estos últimos. Los acuerdos posibles entre los perceptores de los peajes de autopistas a fin de crear sistemas regionales de interoperabilidad quedan fuera del ámbito de aplicación de la Directiva 2004/52/CE.En relación con el SET, la Comisión está instando a los Estados miembros y a las partes interesadas a intensificar sus esfuerzos a fin de que el SET funcione para los vehículos pesados para octubre de 2012 y para las demás categorías de vehículos para octubre de 2014, según lo previsto en los artículos 3 y 4 de la Directiva 2004/52/CE.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001287/12
to the Commission
Antolín Sánchez Presedo (S&D), Iratxe García Pérez (S&D), Alejandro Cercas (S&D), Carmen Romero López (S&D), Luis Yáñez-Barnuevo García (S&D) and Inés Ayala Sender (S&D)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: Interoperability of electronic road toll systems in Europe
According to various sources, the electronic road toll device that is used to travel on Spanish motorways without the need to stop at tollbooths could also be used on Portuguese toll roads. Since interoperability of their electronic road toll devices is technically possible, making it a reality requires enabling invoicing between concession-holders in the infrastructure and the financial bodies that are responsible for toll collection in both countries.
Although the Spanish roadway authority and Portuguese representatives have identified the necessary steps to make their systems work compatibly, there are no plans to enter into an official agreement and make this a reality.
The interoperability of electronic road toll systems is a problem that is not unique to the relationship between Spain and Portugal. It affects infrastructures that are located in other Member States of the European Union and that are financed, in many cases, with Community funds, and it even affects the connections to neighbouring non-EU countries such as Switzerland.
This situation affects the exercise of fundamental freedoms, the integration of payment systems and the functioning of the internal market in the EU, as well as mobility in Europe. Therefore, the Commission is asked to respond to the following:






—


Based on the information gathered in connection with previous questions, does the operation of the road tolls introduced by Portugal on its motorways connecting to Spain comply with EC law?










—


Bearing in mind the legislation on interoperability and, in particular, Directive 2004/52/EC on road toll systems:










—


Does the Commission believe that additional measures are necessary to resolve this situation?










—


What initiatives is the Commission planning to adopt in order to ensure that the systems are truly interoperable?










—


Is the Commission planning a programme to extend such initiatives to other neighbouring countries?




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(13 March 2012)






1.


The European legislation on the interoperability of electronic road toll systems allows the use of technologies based on micro-wave communications and/or satellite localisation associated with mobile communications. According to the information available to the Commission, the electronic tolling technology based on microwave used on former SCUT motorways in Portugal is compliant with the legislation.











2.


The European Electronic Toll Service (EETS) introduced by Directive 2004/52/EC










2.


The European Electronic Toll Service (EETS) introduced by Directive 2004/52/EC




 (135) on the interoperability of EETS in the Community and defined in implementing Decision 2009/750/EC on the definition of the EETS and its technical elements is complementary to national electronic toll services of the Member States. EETS is accessible to users through service providers which will generally provide the equipment capable of operating across Europe using one of the two abovementioned technologies. EETS Providers act as intermediary in transferring the amounts of toll due from the EETS users to the motorwaytoll chargers, while ensuring the guarantee of payment to the latter. Possible arrangements between motorways toll chargers to setup regional interoperability schemes fall outside the scope of Directive 2004/52/EC.Regarding EETS, the Commission is currently strongly calling upon the Member States and stakeholders to intensify their efforts in view of EETS being available to heavier vehicles by October 2012, and to all other vehicle categories by October 2014, as foreseen in Article 3 § 4 of Directive 2004/52/EC. 
(Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-001293/12
do Komisji
Piotr Borys (PPE)
(10 lutego 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Finansowanie kultury w perspektywie finansowej 2014-2020
W projekcie rozporządzenia w sprawie ERDF na lata 2007-2013 kultura włączona była jako osobny obszar interwencji do Europejskiego Funduszu Rozwoju Regionalnego, gdzie do zadań Funduszu należą „inwestowanie w kulturę”, „rozwój infrastruktury kulturalnej” oraz „pomoc na rzecz zwiększenia podaży usług kulturalnych”. KE zwracała wielokrotnie uwagę na znaczenie projektów kulturalnych dla rozwoju Europy we wszystkich wymiarach. W przedstawionej 6 października 2011 r. przez Komisję Europejską propozycji pakietu legislacyjnego dot. polityki spójności na lata 2014-2020 w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Rozwoju Regionalnego wsparcie dla sektora kultury zostało ograniczone do ochrony, rozwoju, promowania dziedzictwa kulturowego i znalazło się w celu dotyczącym ochrony środowiska i promocji efektywności zasobów. W ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego zabrakło natomiast jakichkolwiek odniesień do kultury.






1.


Czy Komisja w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Rozwoju Regionalnego planuje:










—


przeniesienie działania dotyczącego kultury z priorytetu „Protecting the environment and promoting resource efficiency” do priorytetu „Promoting social inclusion and combating poverty”?










—


poszerzenie zapisu dotyczącego dziedzictwa kulturowego tak, by brzmiał „Investing in Culture, protection of cultural heritage and cultural education for reducing inequalities in access to culture and enhancing social capital”?










—


włączenie zadań związanych z digitalizacją dóbr kultury do celu tematycznego „Enhancing accessibility to and use and quality of information and Communications Technologies (ICT)”, lit (c) „Strenghening ICT applications for e‐government, e‐learning, e‐culture, e‐inclusion and e‐health”?










—


poszerzenie wskaźnika dotyczącego dziedzictwa kulturowego (umieszczonego w dziale „Infrastruktura społeczna”) tak, by brzmiał „Culture and cultural heritage”?










2.


Czy w ramach rozporządzenia dotyczącego europejskiej współpracy terytorialnej możliwe jest poszerzenie wskaźnika dotyczącego dziedzictwa kulturowego tak, by brzmiał 




„Culture and Cultural heritage”?






3.


Czy Komisja w ramach Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego planuje włączenie jako jednego z priorytetów wsparcia zadań związanych z rozwojem kompetencji społecznych i kulturowych do celu tematycznego 




„Promoting social inclusion and combating poverty: Promoting developement of social and cultural competences for combating exclusion and build open and tolerant European society”?
Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarza Johannesa Hahna w imieniu Komisji 
(21 marca 2012 r.)
Wniosek Komisji w sprawie Europejskiego Funduszu Rozwoju Regionalnego (EFRR) na lata 2014-2020 jest obecnie przedmiotem dyskusji w Radzie i Parlamencie Europejskim. Komisja jest zdania, że inwestycje w kulturę powinny być bezpośrednio powiązane z priorytetami strategii „Europa 2020”, a mianowicie wzrostem gospodarczym, zatrudnieniem, innowacjami i włączeniem społecznym. W ramach proponowanego rozporządzenia w sprawie EFRR istnieje wiele możliwości wspierania kultury.
Ochrona i rozwój dziedzictwa kulturowego zostały włączone do celu tematycznego dotyczącego ochrony środowiska naturalnego i wspierania efektywności wykorzystania zasobów, ponieważ zarządzanie i utrzymanie obiektów dziedzictwa kulturalnego i naturalnego jest często elementem działań na rzecz wspierania zrównoważonego rozwoju. Kultura może być także wspierana na inne sposoby, na przykład przez pobudzanie przedsiębiorczości, propagowanie badań biznesowych i inwestycji w innowacje, transfer technologii, innowacje społeczne i aplikacje z dziedziny usług publicznych, pobudzanie popytu, budowanie sieci kontaktów, klastry i otwarty model innowacyjności poprzez inteligentną specjalizację lub wspieranie rewitalizacji obszarów miejskich. 
W odniesieniu do wsparcia kompetencji kulturowych i społecznych z Europejskiego Funduszu Społecznego (EFS) w latach 2014-2020 wniosek Komisji nie ogranicza zakresu działań kwalifikowalnych w zależności od różnych rodzajów kompetencji lub sektorów gospodarki. Wzmocnienie tego rodzaju umiejętności ma znaczenie dla wielu priorytetów inwestycyjnych EFS i w związku z tym może być wspierane przez Fundusz. Komisja nie zamierza ustanawiać specjalnego priorytetu inwestycyjnego EFS na rzecz kompetencji kulturowych i kompetencji społecznych.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001293/12
to the Commission
Piotr Borys (PPE)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Financing of culture in the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020
In the draft regulation on the ERDF for 2007‐2013, culture was included as a separate area of intervention for the European Regional Development Fund, where the tasks of the Fund are ‘investing in culture’, ‘development of cultural infrastructure’ and ‘help to improve the supply of cultural services’. The Commission has repeatedly highlighted the importance of cultural projects for the development of Europe in all dimensions. In the proposed legislative package for Cohesion Policy for 2014-2020 under the European Regional Development Fund, presented on 6 October 2011 by the Commission, support for the cultural sector has been limited to the protection, development and promotion of cultural heritage and is intended for the protection of the environment and promotion of resource efficiency. Within the context of the European Social Fund, however, all references to culture were absent.






1.


Does the Commission plan within the framework of the European Regional Development Fund:










—


To transfer cultural action from the ‘Protecting the environment and promoting resource efficiency’ priority to the ‘Promoting social inclusion and combating poverty’ priority?










—


To broaden the provision on cultural heritage, so that the wording reads ‘Investing in Culture, protection of cultural heritage and cultural education for reducing inequalities in access to culture and enhancing social capital’?










—


To include tasks relating to the digitisation of cultural objects in the thematic goal of ‘Enhancing accessibility to and use and quality of Information and Communications Technologies (ICT)’, point (c) ‘Strengthening ICT applications for e-government, e- learning, e-culture, e-inclusion and e-health’?










—


To broaden the cultural heritage indicator (located in the ‘Social Infrastructure’ section) so that it reads ‘Culture and Cultural Heritage’?










2.


Is it possible within the framework of the regulation on European territorial cooperation to broaden the scope of the cultural heritage indicator so that it reads 




‘Culture and Cultural Heritage’?






3.


Does the Commission plan, under the European Social Fund, to incorporate, as one of its priorities, the support of tasks associated with the development of social and cultural competences within the thematic goal of 




‘Promoting social inclusion and combating poverty: Promoting development of social and cultural competences for combating exclusion and build open and tolerant European society’?
Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission 
(21 March 2012)
The Commission’s proposal for the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) for 2014-2020 is currently under discussion in the Council and the European Parliament. The Commission is of the view that investments in culture should be directly linked to the priorities of Europe 2020, namely growth, employment, innovation and social inclusion. There are many opportunities to support culture under the proposed ERDF regulation. 
The protection and development of cultural heritage has been included as part of the thematic objective for protecting the environment and promoting resource efficiency because the management and maintenance of cultural and natural heritage sites are often part of efforts to promote sustainable development. Culture can also be supported in other ways such as the strengthening of entrepreneurship, promoting business research and innovation investment, technology transfer, social innovation and public service applications, demand stimulation, networking, clusters and open innovation through smart specialisation or support to urban regeneration. 
In relation to European Social Fund (ESF) support for cultural and social competences in 2014-2020, the Commission's proposal does not limit the scope of eligible activities according to various types of competences or sectors. Enhancing such skills could be relevant under several ESF investment priorities and thus could be supported by the fund. The Commission does not intend to establish a dedicated ESF investment priority for cultural and social competences. 
(České znění)
Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení E-001297/12
Komisi
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) a Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10. února 2012)

Předmět: Neonikotinoidní insekticidy a zdraví medonosných včel
Nedávno byla přijata směrnice 2010/21/EU, kterou se mění příloha I směrnice Rady 91/414/EHS, pokud jde o zvláštní ustanovení týkající se klothianidinu, thiamethoxamu, fipronilu a imidaklopridu, a jejímž účelem je vyřešit problém výrazného úbytku medonosných včel v důsledku vystavení neonikotinoidním pesticidům.







Mohla by Komise uvést, zda členské státy přijaly potřebná opatření, tak aby vyhověly požadavkům stanoveným ve směrnici 2010/21/EU?











Mohla by Komise poskytnout konkrétní údaje, z nichž by bylo zřejmé, zda jsou přijatá legislativní opatření (např. směrnice 2010/21/EU či nařízení (ES) č. 1107/2009) dostatečná a zda přispívají k zamezení úbytku medonosných včel?











Jaká další konkrétní opatření hodlá Komise přijmout, aby zajistila, že budou včely chráněny před neonikotinoidy?











Dne 30. května 2003 zveřejnil úřad ochrany životního prostředí Spojených států publikaci „Pesticide Fact Sheet on Conditional Registration of Clothianidin“ („Popis pesticidů – podmínečná registrace klothianidinu“). Může v souvislosti s touto publikací Komise uvést, zda si je vědoma: 










—


že v dokumentaci k této látce podle výše zmíněného dokumentu chybí zásadní údaje („studie o vývojové imunotoxicitě, další analýza látek použitých v mutagenních testech, testování reziduí pomocí zralých sojových bobů při osevním postupu střídání plodin, studie o aerobním metabolismu a metabolismu vody, testování vyluhovatelnosti na semenech, akutní toxicita sedimentů pro sladkovodní bezobratlé živočichy a testy na opylovačích v terénu“);










—


že podle téhož dokumentu je „klothianidin pro včely při intenzivním kontaktu vysoce toxický (letální dávka – LD50 > 0.0439 μg na jednu včelu). Této látce v toxických dávkách mohou být včely a jiní opylovači, proti nimž se tento pesticid nepoužívá, dlouhodobě vystaveni ve formě reziduí klothianidinu, které se na ně přenáší nektarem a pylem. U včel může dlouhodobé vystavení této látce v toxických dávkách vést k úmrtí nebo jinému poškození larev a může negativně ovlivnit rozmnožovací schopnost královny“? 




Odpověď pana Dalliho jménem Komise
(2. března 2012)







1.


Komise v současné době shromažďuje od členských států informace o prováděcích opatřeních k dosažení souladu se směrnicí 2010/21/EU










1.


Komise v současné době shromažďuje od členských států informace o prováděcích opatřeních k dosažení souladu se směrnicí 2010/21/EU




 (136). Tento bod je stálou součástí pracovního programu Stálého výboru pro potravinový řetězec a zdraví zvířat – sekce právních předpisů v oblasti pesticidů. 





2.


Do dnešního dne se nepopařilo najít souvislost mezi neonikotinoidními insekticidy, pokud jsou správně používány, a problémem úmrtností včel, a číselné údaje proto nejsou k dispozici. Komise je nicméně přesvědčena, že opatření stanovená v právních předpisech týkajících se pesticidů přispívají k zajištění vysoké úrovně ochrany včel, včetně včel medonosných.











3.


Pokud jde o konkrétní opatření, které Komise zamýšlí přijmout, dovoluje si Komise váženého pana poslance odkázat na svou odpověď na písemnou otázku E-000160/2012










3.


Pokud jde o konkrétní opatření, které Komise zamýšlí přijmout, dovoluje si Komise váženého pana poslance odkázat na svou odpověď na písemnou otázku E-000160/2012




 (137).





4.


Právní předpisy EU týkající se přípravků na ochranu rostlin vycházejí z rizik. Ačkoliv jsou insekticidy svou povahou pro včely toxické, jejich použití může být i nadále možné, pokud je expozice minimalizována na úrovně, které nevyvolávají škodlivé účinky. Za tímto účelem budou uplatněna zvláštní opatření ke zmírnění rizika. Údaje obsažené v dokumentaci EU, které byly vyhodnoceny a přezkoumány v rámci právních předpisů EU týkajících se pesticidů, nejsou vzhledem k různým požadavkům na údaje stanoveným v právních předpisech EU srovnatelné s údaji vyhodnocenými úřadem ochrany životního prostředí USA, ačkoliv se vztahují na stejnou účinnou látku 




„klothianidin“.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-001297/12
an die Kommission
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) und Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Neonicotinoid-Insektizide und Gesundheit von Honigbienen
Die Richtlinie 2010/21/EU zur Änderung von Anhang I der Richtlinie 91/414/EWG des Rates hinsichtlich Sonderbestimmungen zu Clothianidin, Thiamethoxam, Fipronil und Imidacloprid wurde kürzlich angenommen, um das Problem des Rückgangs von Honigbienen infolge der Einwirkung von Neonicotinoid-Pestiziden anzugehen.
1. Kann die Kommission angeben, ob die Mitgliedstaaten die erforderlichen Maßnahmen getroffen haben, um der Richtlinie 2010/21/EU nachzukommen?
2. Kann die Kommission spezifische Daten liefern, aus denen hervorgeht, ob die angenommenen Rechtsvorschriften (wie z. B. Richtlinie 2010/21/EU und Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1107/2009) ausreichend sind und dazu beitragen, dass der Rückgang von Honigbienen vermieden wird?
3. Welche anderen konkreten Maßnahmen sind von der Kommission geplant, um Honigbienen vor Neonicotinoiden zu schützen?
4. Kann die Kommission infolge der Veröffentlichung des pestizidbezogenen Informationsblatts über die bedingte Eintragung von Clothianidin („Pesticide Fact Sheet on Conditional Registration of Clothianidin“) vom 30. Mai 2003 durch die Environmental Protection Agency der USA angeben:






—


ob sie sich der gravierenden Datenlücken bewusst ist, die in dem oben genannten Informationsblatt aufgelistet sind (Studie zur Entwicklungsimmunotoxizität, zusätzliche Analyse von in Studien zur Mutagenität verwendeten Untersuchungsmaterialien, Feldversuche mit reifen Sojabohnen zu Rückständen in Folgefrüchten, aerober aquatischer Stoffwechsel, Studie zu Saatauswaschung, akute Toxizität von Sedimenten für Süßwasserwirbellose und Feldversuch zu Bestäubern);










—


ob sie sich der folgenden Tatsachen, wie sie aus dem oben genannten Informationsblatt hervorgehen, bewusst ist: Clothianidin ist für Honigbienen bei akutem Kontakt hochgradig toxisch (LD50 > 0,0439 μg/Biene). Es kann durch die Translokation von Clothianidinrückständen in Nektar und Pollen zu einer toxischen Langzeitbelastung bei Honigbienen und anderen nicht zur Zielgruppe gehörenden Bestäubern führen. Bei Honigbienen kann diese toxische Langzeitbelastung letale und/oder subletale Auswirkungen für Larven nach sich ziehen und die Reproduktionsmöglichkeiten der Bienenkönigin beeinflussen.




Antwort von Herrn Dalli im Namen der Kommission
(2. März 2012)







1.


Die Kommission holt derzeit bei den Mitgliedstaaten Informationen über die Maßnahmen zur Durchführung der Richtlinie 2010/21/EU










1.


Die Kommission holt derzeit bei den Mitgliedstaaten Informationen über die Maßnahmen zur Durchführung der Richtlinie 2010/21/EU




 (138) ein. Dieser Punkt steht kontinuierlich auf der Tagesordnung des Ständigen Ausschusses für die Lebensmittelkette und Tiergesundheit — Sektion für Pestizidvorschriften. 





2.


Bislang konnte kein Zusammenhang zwischen ordnungsgemäß angewandten Neonicotinoid-Insektiziden und dem Problem der Bienensterblichkeit hergestellt werden; daher liegen keine Daten vor. Dennoch ist die Kommission davon überzeugt, dass die in den Vorschriften über Pestizide festgelegten Maßnahmen dazu beitragen, ein hohes Schutzniveau für Bienen, einschließlich Honigbienen, zu gewährleisten.











3.


Zu den von der Kommission geplanten konkreten Maßnahmen verweist die Kommission die Damen und Herren Abgeordneten auf ihre Antwort auf die schriftliche Anfrage E-000160/2012










3.


Zu den von der Kommission geplanten konkreten Maßnahmen verweist die Kommission die Damen und Herren Abgeordneten auf ihre Antwort auf die schriftliche Anfrage E-000160/2012




 (139).





4.


Die EU-Vorschriften über Pflanzenschutzmittel sind risikobasiert. Auch wenn Insektizide an sich für Bienen toxisch sind, können sie verwendet werden, sofern die Exposition auf ein Maß minimiert wird, das keine schädlichen Auswirkungen hat. Zu diesem Zweck müssen besondere Maßnahmen zur Risikobegrenzung angewandt werden. Aufgrund abweichender Anforderungen an die in den EU-Vorschriften festgelegten Daten sind die Daten des EU-Dossiers, das im Rahmen der EU-Vorschriften über Pestizide bewertet und einem Peer Review unterzogen wurde, nicht mit den von der Environmental Protection Agency der USA bewerteten Daten vergleichbar, auch wenn sie denselben Wirkstoff 




„Clothianidin“ betreffen.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001297/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) και Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Τα νεονικοτινοειδή εντομοκτόνα και η υγεία της μελιτοφόρου μέλισσας
Η οδηγία 2010/21/ΕΕ που τροποποιεί το παράρτημα I της οδηγίας 91/414/ΕΟΚ του Συμβουλίου όσον αφορά τις συγκεκριμένες διατάξεις για την κλοθειανιδίνη (clothianidin), την θειαμεθοξάμη (thiamethoxam), την φιπρονίλη (fipronil) και την ιμιδακλοπρίδη (imidacloprid) εγκρίθηκε πρόσφατα για την αντιμετώπιση του προβλήματος της εξαφάνισης των μελιτοφόρων μελισσών λόγω της έκθεσής τους σε νεονικοτινοειδή εντομοκτόνα.






1.


Μπορεί η Επιτροπή να αναφέρει εάν τα κράτη μέλη έχουν λάβει τα απαραίτητα μέτρα για τη συμμόρφωσή τους με την οδηγία 2010/21/ΕΕ;










2.


Μπορεί η Επιτροπή να παράσχει συγκεκριμένα στοιχεία που να δείχνουν αν τα νομοθετικά μέτρα που εγκρίθηκαν (π.χ. η οδηγία 2010/21/ΕΕ και ο κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ.




 1107/2009) επαρκούν και συμβάλλουν στην πρόληψη της εξαφάνισης των μελιτοφόρων μελισσών;






3.


Ποια άλλα συγκεκριμένα μέτρα σκοπεύει η Επιτροπή να εγκρίνει για την προστασία των μελιτοφόρων μελισσών από τα νεονικοτινοειδή;




4. Μετά τη δημοσίευση του <QT.START>«</QT.START>ενημερωτικού δελτίου για τα εντομοκτόνα σχετικά με την υπό προϋποθέσεις καταχώρηση της κλοθειανιδίνης<QT.END>»</QT.END> (<QT.START>‘</QT.START>Pesticide Fact Sheet on Conditional Registration of Clothianidin<QT.END>’</QT.END>) στις 30 Μαΐου 2003 από την Υπηρεσία Προστασίας του Περιβάλλοντος των ΗΠΑ, μπορεί η Επιτροπή να αναφέρει:






—


αν είναι ενήμερη για τα σοβαρά κενά δεδομένων που κατονομάζονται και παρατίθενται στο προαναφερθέν ενημερωτικό δελτίο (<QT.START>«</QT.START>μελέτη για την ανοσοτοξικότητα της αναπτύξεως, πρόσθετη ανάλυση των δοκιμαστικών υλικών που χρησιμοποιούνται σε μελέτες για ετερογενέσεις, επιτόπιες δοκιμασίες σε υπολείμματα εναλλακτικών καλλιεργειών με ώριμη σόγια, αερόβιος υδατικός μεταβολισμός, μελέτη για την απόπλυση των σπόρων, οξεία τοξικότητα στο σύνολο των ιζημάτων η οποία επιδρά σε υδρόβια ασπόνδυλα και επιτόπια δοκιμή σε επικονιαστές<QT.END>»</QT.END>);










—


αν είναι ενήμερη για τα ακόλουθα, όπως διατυπώνονται στο ίδιο ενημερωτικό δελτίο: Η κλοθειανιδίνη είναι υψηλής τοξικότητας για τις μέλισσες όταν εκτίθενται σε αυτήν σε μεγάλο βαθμό (LD50 > 0.0439 μg/μέλισσα). Μέσω της μεταφοράς υπολειμμάτων κλοθειανιδίνης στο νέκταρ και στη γύρη, ενδέχεται να υπάρξει χρόνια έκθεση των μελιτοφόρων μελισσών καθώς και άλλων μη στοχευμένων επικονιαστών στη συγκεκριμένη ουσία, με τοξικά αποτελέσματα. Όσον αφορά τις μελιτοφόρους μέλισσες, η χρόνια τοξική έκθεση ενδέχεται να έχει θανατηφόρες και/ή υποθανατηφόρες επιπτώσεις για την προνύμφη καθώς και επιπτώσεις στην αναπαραγωγή της βασίλισσας;




Απάντηση του κ. Dalli εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(2 Μαρτίου 2012)







1.


Η Επιτροπή συγκεντρώνει επί του παρόντος στοιχεία από τα κράτη μέλη για τα εκτελεστικά μέτρα όσον αφορά τη συμμόρφωση με την οδηγία 2010/21/ΕΕ










1.


Η Επιτροπή συγκεντρώνει επί του παρόντος στοιχεία από τα κράτη μέλη για τα εκτελεστικά μέτρα όσον αφορά τη συμμόρφωση με την οδηγία 2010/21/ΕΕ




 (140). Το σημείο αυτό βρίσκεται διαρκώς στο πρόγραμμα εργασίας της μόνιμης επιτροπής για την τροφική αλυσίδα και την υγεία των ζώων — τομέας για τη νομοθεσία σχετικά με τα φυτοφάρμακα. 





2.


Μέχρι σήμερα δεν έχει τεκμηριωθεί σύνδεση μεταξύ των νεονικοτινοειδών εντομοκτόνων, εφόσον χρησιμοποιούνται σωστά, και του προβλήματος θνησιμότητας των μελιτοφόρων μελισσών και, επομένως, δεν υπάρχουν διαθέσιμα στοιχεία. Παρ’ όλα αυτά, η Επιτροπή είναι βέβαιη ότι τα μέτρα που έχουν ληφθεί στο πλαίσιο της νομοθεσίας σχετικά με τα φυτοφάρμακα συμβάλλουν στην εξασφάλιση υψηλού ποσοστού προστασίας των μελισσών, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των μελιτοφόρων μελισσών.











3.


Όσον αφορά τα συγκεκριμένα μέτρα που προτίθεται να λάβει, η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει τις κυρίες και τους κυρίους βουλευτές στην απάντησή της στη γραπτή ερώτηση 










3.


Όσον αφορά τα συγκεκριμένα μέτρα που προτίθεται να λάβει, η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει τις κυρίες και τους κυρίους βουλευτές στην απάντησή της στη γραπτή ερώτηση 



E-000160/2012 (141).





4.


Η νομοθεσία της ΕΕ για τα προϊόντα φυτοπροστασίας βασίζεται στην επικινδυνότητα. Ακόμη και αν τα εντομοκτόνα είναι, από τη φύση τους, τοξικά για τις μέλισσες, η χρήση τους είναι παρ’ όλα αυτά δυνατή εφόσον η έκθεσή τους σ’ αυτά ελαχιστοποιείται σε επίπεδα τα οποία δεν προκαλούν βλαβερές συνέπειες. Για τον σκοπό αυτό θα εφαρμοστούν μέτρα περιορισμού του κινδύνου. Λόγω των διαφορετικών απαιτήσεων για τα δεδομένα που προβλέπονται από τη νομοθεσία της ΕΕ, τα δεδομένα του φακέλου της ΕΕ, που αξιολογήθηκαν και εξετάστηκαν από ομότιμους στο πλαίσιο της νομοθεσίας της ΕΕ για τα φυτοφάρμακα, και τα δεδομένα που αξιολογήθηκαν από τον Οργανισμό Προστασίας του Περιβάλλοντος των ΗΠΑ, παρά το γεγονός ότι αναφέρονται στην ίδια δραστική ουσία την 




<QT.START>«</QT.START>κλοθειανιδίνη<QT.END>»</QT.END>, δεν είναι συγκρίσιμα.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-001297/12
alla Commissione
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) e Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Insetticidi neonicotinoidi e salute delle api da miele
La direttiva 2010/21/UE, che modifica l'allegato I della direttiva 91/414/CEE del Consiglio per quanto riguarda le disposizioni specifiche relative a clothianidin, tiametoxam, fipronil e imidacloprid, è stata recentemente adottata per affrontare il problema della riduzione delle api da miele causato dall'esposizione a pesticidi neonicotinoidi.






1.


Può la Commissione indicare se gli Stati membri hanno adottato le misure necessarie per conformarsi alla direttiva 2010/21/UE?










2.


Può la Commissione fornire dati specifici che indichino se le misure legislative adottate (per esempio, la direttiva 2010/21/UE e il regolamento (CE) n. 1107/2009) sono sufficienti e se contribuiscono a prevenire la riduzione delle api da miele?










3.


Quali altre misure concrete intende la Commissione adottare al fine di proteggere le api da miele dai neonicotinoidi?










4.


In seguito alla pubblicazione, il 30 maggio 2003, da parte dell'Agenzia statunitense per la protezione dell'ambiente del 




«Pesticide Fact Sheet on Conditional Registration of Clothianidin» (Scheda informativa dei pesticidi sulla registrazione condizionata di clothianidin, può la Commissione precisare:






—


se è consapevole delle gravi lacune nei dati elencati nella summenzionata scheda informativa (




«studio sull'immunotossicità dello sviluppo, analisi complementari dei materiali di prova impiegati negli studi mutageni, prove in campo sui residui nelle colture a rotazione con semi di soia maturi, metabolismo acquatico aerobico, studio sulla lisciviazione da semi, tossicità acuta dell'intero sedimento per gli invertebrati di acqua dolce e prova in campo per gli impollinatori»);






—


se è consapevole di quanto segue, come recita la summenzionata nota informativa: 




«La sostanza clothianidin è altamente tossica per le api da miele in caso di contatto prolungato (LD50 > 0,0439 μg/ape). Ha il potenziale per un'esposizione a tossicità cronica per le api da miele, così come altri impollinatori non bersaglio, nonostante la traslocazione dei residui di clothianidin nel nettare e nel polline. Nelle api da miele, gli effetti di tale esposizione a tossicità cronica possono comprendere effetti letali e/o subletali nelle larve ed effetti riproduttivi nella regina»?
Risposta data da John Dalli a nome della Commissione
(2 marzo 2012)







1.


La Commissione sta attualmente raccogliendo informazioni dagli Stati membri sulle misure d'attuazione da essi adottate per ottemperare alla direttiva 2010/21/UE










1.


La Commissione sta attualmente raccogliendo informazioni dagli Stati membri sulle misure d'attuazione da essi adottate per ottemperare alla direttiva 2010/21/UE




 (142). Questo punto è costantemente all'ordine del giorno del Comitato permanente per la catena alimentare e la salute degli animali — sezione Legislazione sui pesticidi.





2.


Finora non è stato possibile stabilire una correlazione tra gli insetticidi neonicotinoidi, se usati correttamente, e il problema della mortalità delle api. Pertanto, non sono disponibili cifre nel merito. La Commissione, tuttavia, è convinta che le misure contenute nella legislazione sui pesticidi contribuiscono ad assicurare un livello elevato di protezione delle api, comprese le api da miele.











3.


Per quanto concerne le misure concrete che la Commissione prevede di adottare, la Commissione rinvia gli onorevoli deputati alla propria risposta all'interrogazione scritta E-000160/2012










3.


Per quanto concerne le misure concrete che la Commissione prevede di adottare, la Commissione rinvia gli onorevoli deputati alla propria risposta all'interrogazione scritta E-000160/2012




 (143).





4.


La legislazione dell'UE sui prodotti fitosanitari è basata sull'analisi dei rischi. Anche se gli insetticidi sono, per loro natura, tossici per le api, il loro uso può essere tuttavia possibile se l'esposizione è ridotta al minimo portandola a livelli che non producono effetti nocivi. A tal fine si applicano misure specifiche di limitazione dei rischi. Poiché la legislazione dell'UE prevede requisiti distinti in tema di dati, i dati del fascicolo UE valutato e sottoposto a esame 




inter pares
 nel quadro della legislazione UE sui pesticidi, e i dati contemplati dalla Environmental Protection Agency statunitense, pur riferendosi alla stessa sostanza attiva, il «clothianidin», non sono comparabili.
(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-001297/12
a Bizottság számára
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Tabajdi Csaba Sándor (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) és Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(2012. február 10.)

Tárgy: Neonikotinoid alapú rovarirtók és a mézelő méhek egészsége
A közelmúltban fogadták el a 91/414/EGK tanácsi irányelv I. mellékletének a klotianidinra, a tiametoxámra, a fipronilra és az imidaklopridra vonatkozó különös rendelkezések tekintetében történő módosításáról szóló 2010/21/EU irányelvet azon probléma kezelése érdekében, amelyet a mézelő méheknek a neonikotinoid alapú növényvédő szereknek való kitettség miatti fogyása jelent.







Ismertetné-e a Bizottság, hogy a tagállamok megtették-e a szükséges intézkedéseket a 2010/21/EU irányelvnek való megfelelés érdekében?











Tudna-e a Bizottság részletes számadatokkal szolgálni arról, hogy az elfogadott jogszabályi intézkedések (például a 2010/21/EU irányelv és az 1107/2009/EK rendelet) elégségesek-e, illetve hozzájárulnak-e a mézelő méhek fogyásának megelőzéséhez?











Milyen más konkrét intézkedéseket kíván elfogadni a Bizottság a mézelő méhek neonikotinoidokkal szembeni védelme érdekében?











Miután 2003. május 30-án az Egyesült Államok Környezetvédelmi Ügynöksége közzétette „A klotianidin feltételes nyilvántartásba vételéről szóló növényvédőszer-tájékoztató” című dokumentumot, ismertetné-e a Bizottság, hogy:










—


tisztában van-e a fent említett tájékoztatóban felsorolt súlyos adatbeli hiányosságokkal („fejlődési immuntoxikológiai tanulmány, kiegészítő elemzés a mutagén vizsgálatokban alkalmazott vizsgálati anyagokról, vetésforgóban termesztett növények utáni maradványtalajon végzett kísérletek érett szójababbal, magáztatásos vizsgálat, aerob vízi metabolizmus, teljes szedimentációs akut toxicitás édesvízi gerincteleneken és terepvizsgálat beporzókkal”);










—


tisztában van-e a tájékoztatóban foglalt következő állításokkal: „A klotianidin akut kontakt alapon nagy mértékben mérgező a mézelő méhekre nézve (LD50>0,0439 μg/méh). Ez magában hordozza a mézelő méhek és az egyéb nem célzott beporzók mérgező anyagoknak való tartós kitettségének lehetőségét a nektárban és virágporban lévő klotianidin maradványok átvitelén keresztül. A mézelő méhek esetében e mérgező anyagoknak való tartós kitettség halálos és/vagy szubletális hatással lehet a lárvákra, illetve befolyásolhatja a méhkirálynő szaporodási képességét.”




John Dalli válasza a Bizottság nevében
(2012. március 2.)







1.


A Bizottság jelenleg gyűjti össze a tagállamoktól az információkat a 2010/21/EU irányelvnek










1.


A Bizottság jelenleg gyűjti össze a tagállamoktól az információkat a 2010/21/EU irányelvnek




 (144) való megfelelés érdekében hozott végrehajtási intézkedésekről. A kérdés továbbra is szerepel az Élelmiszerlánc- és Állategészségügyi Állandó Bizottság növényvédő szerekre vonatkozó jogszabályokért felelős részlegének napirendjén.





2.


A mai napig nem találtak összefüggést a rendeltetésszerűen alkalmazott neonikotinoid alapú rovarirtók és a méhek pusztulása között, ezért nem állnak rendelkezésre erre vonatkozó számadatok. A Bizottság ugyanakkor biztos abban, hogy a növényvédő szerekről szóló új európai jogszabályok elősegítik a méhek, ezen belül is a mézelő méhek magas szintű védelmének biztosítását.











3.


A Bizottság által elfogadni tervezett konkrét intézkedésekről az E-000160/2012










3.


A Bizottság által elfogadni tervezett konkrét intézkedésekről az E-000160/2012




 (145) írásbeli választ igénylő kérdésre adott bizottsági válaszból tájékozódhat a tisztelt képviselő.





4.


A növényvédő szerekre vonatkozó európai uniós jogszabályok kockázatalapúak. Bár a rovarirtók a méhekre nézve mérgezőek, használatuk mégis megengedett lehet egy olyan alacsony kitettségi szint mellett, amely még nem jár káros hatásokkal. Ezért külön kockázatcsökkentő intézkedéseket kell alkalmazni. Mivel az európai uniós jogszabályok eltérő követelményeket állapítanak meg az adatokra vonatkozóan, az uniós dokumentációban szereplő, a növényvédő szerekre vonatkozó uniós jogszabályok keretében értékelt és szakmai értékelésnek alávetett adatok és az Egyesült Államok Környezetvédelmi Ügynöksége által értékelt adatok nem hasonlíthatók össze annak ellenére, hogy mindkét esetben a klotianidin hatóanyagra vonatkozó adatokról van szó.




(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001297/12
aan de Commissie
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) en Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10 februari 2012)

Betreft: Neonicotinoïden en de gezondheid van honingbijen
Richtlijn 2010/21/EU tot wijziging van bijlage I bij Richtlijn 91/414/EEG van de Raad wat betreft de specifieke bepalingen voor clothianidin, thiamethoxam, fipronil en imidacloprid is onlangs vastgesteld om het probleem van de  terugloop van het honingbijenbestand als gevolg van blootstelling aan neonicotinoïde pesticiden aan te pakken.







Kan de Commissie meedelen of de lidstaten de nodige maatregelen hebben getroffen om aan Richtlijn 2010/21/EU te voldoen?











Kan de Commissie aan de hand van concrete cijfers aangeven of de vastgestelde rechtsnormen (bv. Richtlijn 2010/21/EU en Verordening (EG) nr. 1107/2009) toereikend zijn en de  terugloop van het honingbijenbestand voorkomen?











Welke andere concrete maatregelen denkt de Commissie te nemen om honingbijen tegen neonicotinoïden te beschermen?











Kan de Commissie met betrekking tot de factsheet inzake de voorwaardelijke registratie van clothianidin als bestrijdingsmiddel, die op 30 mei 2003 door het Amerikaanse Environmental Protection Agency werd gepubliceerd, meedelen:










—


of ze op de hoogte is van het schromelijk ontbreken van gegevens in de bovengenoemde factsheet (onderzoek naar ontwikkelingsimmunotoxiciteit, aanvullende analyse van in mutageniteitsstudies gebruikte testmaterialen, praktijkonderzoek naar residuen in wisselgewassen met rijpe sojabonen, aeroob aquatisch metabolisme, onderzoek naar de uitspoeling van zaden, acute toxiciteit van het bulksediment voor ongewervelde zoetwaterorganismen en veldtest voor bestuivers);










—


of ze op de hoogte is van de volgende beweringen in dezelfde factsheet: „Clothianidin is bij acuut contact (LD50 > 0,0439 μg/bij) zeer giftig voor honingbijen. Het kan via de in- en uitspoeling van residuen van clothianidin in nectar en stuifmeel chronische vergiftiging bij honingbijen en andere niet tot de doelsoort behorende bestuivers veroorzaken. Bij honingbijen kan deze chronische toxiciteit tot letale en/of subletale effecten in de larven leiden en gevolgen hebben voor de voortplanting van de koningin”?




Antwoord van de heer Dalli namens de Commissie
(2 maart 2012)







1.


De Commissie verzamelt momenteel informatie van lidstaten over de implementatiemaatregelen om te voldoen aan Richtlijn 2010/21/EU










1.


De Commissie verzamelt momenteel informatie van lidstaten over de implementatiemaatregelen om te voldoen aan Richtlijn 2010/21/EU




 (146). Dit is een vast punt op de agenda van het Permanent Comité voor de voedselketen en de diergezondheid — afdeling Wetgeving inzake bestrijdingsmiddelen. 





2.


Tot nu toe kon geen verband worden vastgesteld tussen neonicotinoïde insecticiden, wanneer die correct worden gebruikt, en het probleem van bijensterfte. Er zijn bijgevolg geen cijfers beschikbaar. De Commissie vertrouwt er evenwel op dat de maatregelen die in de wetgeving inzake bestrijdingsmiddelen zijn vastgesteld een hoog beschermingsniveau voor bijen én honingbijen garandeert.











3.


Wat de concrete maatregelen betreft die de Commissie van plan is te nemen, verwijst zij het geachte Parlementslid naar haar antwoord op schriftelijke vraag E-000160/2012










3.


Wat de concrete maatregelen betreft die de Commissie van plan is te nemen, verwijst zij het geachte Parlementslid naar haar antwoord op schriftelijke vraag E-000160/2012




 (147).





4.


De EU-wetgeving inzake gewasbeschermingsmiddelen is een op risico gebaseerde wetgeving. Zelfs wanneer insecticiden van nature giftig zijn voor bijen, kunnen zij toch worden gebruikt wanneer de blootstelling wordt beperkt tot niveaus die geen schadelijke gevolgen hebben. Daartoe moeten specifieke risicobeperkende maatregelen worden toegepast. Doordat de gegevensvereisten in de EU-wetgeving verschillen van die in de wetgeving van de VS, zijn de gegevens van het EU-dossier, geëvalueerd en aan een peer review onderworpen in het kader van de EU-wetgeving inzake bestrijdingsmiddelen, en de gegevens die door het bureau voor milieubescherming van de VS (US Environmental Protection Agency) zijn geëvalueerd, niet vergelijkbaar, ook al betreffen zij dezelfde werkzame stof, namelijk clothianidin.




(Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-001297/12
do Komisji
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) oraz Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10 lutego 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Insektycydy z grupy neonikotynoidów a zdrowie pszczół miodnych
Dyrektywa 2010/21/UE zmieniająca załącznik I do dyrektywy Rady 91/414/EWG w zakresie przepisów szczególnych dotyczących klotianidyny, tiametoksamu, fipronilu i imidachloprydu została przyjęta niedawno w celu zajęcia się problemem spadku populacji pszczół miodnych wynikającym z narażenia ich na działanie pestycydów z grupy neonikotynoidów.







Czy Komisja może stwierdzić, czy państwa członkowskie podjęły działania niezbędne w celu zapewnienia zgodności z dyrektywą 2010/21/UE?











Czy Komisja może przedstawić konkretne liczby wskazujące na to, czy przyjęte środki ustawodawcze (np. dyrektywa 2010/21/UE i rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1107/2009) są wystarczające oraz czy przyczyniają się one do zapobiegnięcia spadkowi populacji pszczół miodnych?











Jakie inne konkretne środki Komisja zamierza przyjąć w celu ochrony pszczół miodnych przed neonikotynoidami?











4.Czy po zapoznaniu się z opublikowanym w dniu 30 maja 2003 r. przez Agencję Ochrony Środowiska USA dokumentem pt. „Zestawienie danych dotyczących pestycydów: warunki rejestracji klotianidyny” Komisja może stwierdzić, że:










—


zdaje sobie sprawę ze znacznych luk w danych przedstawionych w wyżej wymienionym zestawieniu (badanie immunotoksyczności rozwojowej, dodatkowa analiza materiałów testowych wykorzystywanych do badań mutagennych, badania terenowe pozostałości w płodozmianie przy użyciu dojrzałej soi, tlenowy metabolizm wodny, badanie procesu ługowania nasion, całkowita ostra toksyczność osadów wobec bezkręgowców w wodach słodkich oraz badania terenowe przeprowadzane na zapylaczach);










—


zdaje sobie sprawę z następujących faktów, które są zawarte w wyżej wymienionym zestawieniu: „Klotianidyna jest wysoce toksyczna dla pszczół miodnych, co ma postać kontaktowej toksyczności ostrej (średnia dawka śmiertelna LD50 > 0,0439 μg na pszczołę). Klotianidyna może wywołać przewlekłe narażenie toksyczne pszczół miodnych oraz innych zapylaczy wskutek przedostawania się pozostałości klotianidyny do nektaru i pyłków. W przypadku królowych pszczół miodnych skutki przewlekłego narażenia toksycznego mogą obejmować efekt letalny i/lub subletalny w stadium larwalnym i reprodukcyjnym”?




Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarza Johna Dallego w imieniu Komisji
(2 marca 2012 r.)







1.


Obecnie Komisja gromadzi informacje od państw członkowskich na temat środków wykonawczych mających na celu zapewnienie zgodności z dyrektywą 2010/21/UE










1.


Obecnie Komisja gromadzi informacje od państw członkowskich na temat środków wykonawczych mających na celu zapewnienie zgodności z dyrektywą 2010/21/UE




 (148). Jest to stały punkt obrad Stałego Komitetu ds. Łańcucha Żywnościowego i Zdrowia Zwierząt (działu przepisów dotyczących pestycydów). 





2.


Do chwili obecnej nie ustalono powiązań pomiędzy insektycydami z grupy neonikotynoidów, jeżeli są właściwie stosowane, a problemem śmiertelności pszczół i w związku z tym nie są dostępne żadne dane. Komisja jest jednak przekonana, że środki ustanowione w przepisach dotyczących pestycydów przyczyniają się do zapewnienia wysokiego poziomu ochrony pszczół, w tym pszczół miodnych.











3.


W odniesieniu do konkretnych środków, które Komisja planuje przyjąć, Komisja pragnie odesłać Szanownych Posłów do odpowiedzi udzielonej na pytanie pisemne E‐000160/2012










3.


W odniesieniu do konkretnych środków, które Komisja planuje przyjąć, Komisja pragnie odesłać Szanownych Posłów do odpowiedzi udzielonej na pytanie pisemne E‐000160/2012




 (149).





4.


Prawodawstwo UE dotyczące środków ochrony roślin opiera się na ocenie ryzyka. Nawet jeśli, ze względu na swój charakter, insektycydy są toksyczne dla pszczół, ich stosowanie może być nadal możliwe, jeżeli narażenie jest zmniejszone do poziomów, które nie powodują szkodliwych skutków. W tym celu należy stosować szczególne środki ograniczania ryzyka. Ze względu na różne wymogi dotyczące danych, przewidziane w prawodawstwie UE, dane w dokumentacji unijnej, ocenione i wzajemnie zweryfikowane w ramach prawodawstwa UE dotyczącego pestycydów nie są porównywalne z danymi ocenionymi przez Agencję Ochrony Środowiska Stanów Zjednoczonych, mimo że odnoszą się do samej substancji czynnej 




„klotianidyny”.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-001297/12
à Comissão
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) e Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10 de fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: Inseticidas à base de neonicotinóides e saúde das abelhas produtoras de mel
A Diretiva 2010/21/UE, que altera o anexo I da Diretiva 91/414/CEE do Conselho no que se refere às disposições específicas relativas à clotianidina, ao tiametoxame, ao fipronil e ao imidaclopride, foi recentemente adotada com vista a abordar o problema da diminuição das abelhas produtoras de mel resultante da exposição a inseticidas à base de neonicotinóides.






1.


Pode a Comissão indicar se os Estados-Membros tomaram as medidas necessárias para cumprir a Diretiva 2010/21/UE?










2.


Pode a Comissão apresentar valores concretos de modo a indicar se as medidas legislativas adotadas [por exemplo, a Diretiva 2010/21/UE e o Regulamento (CE) n.° 1107/2009] são suficientes e estão a contribuir para evitar a diminuição das abelhas produtoras de mel?










3.


Quais são as medidas concretas que a Comissão pretende adotar no sentido de proteger as abelhas contra os neonicotinóides?




4. No seguimento da publicação, a 30 de maio de 2003, pela Agência de Proteção Ambiental dos Estados Unidos, da «Pesticide Fact Sheet on Conditional Registration of Clothianidin» (ficha informativa sobre pesticidas relativa ao registo provisório da clotianidina), pode a Comissão indicar:






—


Se tem conhecimento das graves lacunas de dados listadas na ficha informativa supracitada («estudo de imunotoxicidade para o desenvolvimento , análise suplementar dos materiais de ensaio utilizados em estudos mutagénicos, ensaios de campo de resíduos nas culturas de rotação com soja madura, metabolismo aeróbio aquático, estudo sobre lixiviação das sementes, toxicidade aguda de sedimento integral para invertebrados de água doce e ensaios de campo de polinizadores»);










—


Se tem conhecimento do seguinte, tal como indicado na mesma ficha informativa: «A clotianidina é altamente tóxica para as abelhas produtoras de mel na sequência de contacto intenso (LD50 > 0,0439 μg/abelha). Evidencia um potencial de exposição crónica ao tóxico para as abelhas produtoras de mel, bem como para outros polinizadores não visados, através da translocação de resíduos de clotianidina no néctar e no pólen. Nas abelhas produtoras de mel, os efeitos desta exposição crónica ao tóxico poderá incluir efeitos letais e/ou subletais nas larvas e efeitos reprodutivos na abelha-mestra»?




Resposta dada por John Dalli em nome da Comissão
(2 de março de 2012)







1.


A Comissão está presentemente a recolher informação junto dos Estados-Membros sobre as medidas de execução adotadas para dar cumprimento à Diretiva 2010/21/UE










1.


A Comissão está presentemente a recolher informação junto dos Estados-Membros sobre as medidas de execução adotadas para dar cumprimento à Diretiva 2010/21/UE




 (150). Este ponto é objeto de análise permanente no Comité Permanente da Cadeia Alimentar e da Saúde Animal, secção Legislação sobre Pesticidas. 





2.


Até hoje não foi estabelecida nenhuma ligação entre os inseticidas neonicotinoides, se utilizados corretamente, e o problema da mortalidade das abelhas, não existindo portanto números disponíveis. Contudo, a Comissão está confiante de que as medidas previstas na legislação relativa aos pesticidas ajudarão a garantir um elevado nível de proteção das abelhas, incluindo das abelhas produtoras de mel.











3.


Quanto às medidas concretas que a Comissão tenciona adotar, deve o Senhor Deputado consultar a resposta à pergunta escrita E-000160/2012










3.


Quanto às medidas concretas que a Comissão tenciona adotar, deve o Senhor Deputado consultar a resposta à pergunta escrita E-000160/2012




 (151).





4.


A legislação da UE sobre os produtos de proteção das plantas baseia-se numa análise dos riscos. Mesmo que os inseticidas sejam, pela sua natureza, tóxicos para as abelhas, a sua utilização pode ainda ser possível se a exposição for minimizada para níveis que não tenham efeitos nocivos. Para isso, serão aplicadas medidas específicas de redução dos riscos. Tendo em conta as diferenças nos requisitos aplicáveis em matéria de informação na legislação da UE, os dados de que dispõe a UE, avaliados e analisados pelos pares no quadro da legislação sobre os pesticidas da UE, e os dados avaliados pela Agência de Proteção do Ambiente dos EUA, embora se refiram à mesma substância ativa 




«clotianidina», não são comparáveis.
(Slovenska različica)
Vprašanje za pisni odgovor E-001297/12
za Komisijo
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) in Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10. februar 2012)

Zadeva: Neonikotinoidni insekticidi in zdravje medonosnih čebel
Nedavno je bila sprejeta Direktiva 2010/21/EU o spremembi Priloge I k Direktivi Sveta 91/414/EGS glede posebnih določb za klotianidin, tiametoksam, fipronil in imidakloprid, ki naj bi urejala problematiko izginjanja medonosnih čebel zaradi izpostavljenosti neonikotinoidnim pesticidom.






1.


Ali lahko Komisija poda izjavo o tem, ali so države članice izvedle ukrepe, potrebne za uskladitev z Direktivo 2010/21/EU?










2.


Ali lahko Komisija predloži konkretne podatke, ki izkazujejo, da so sprejeti zakonodajni ukrepi (npr. Direktiva 2010/21/EU in Uredba (ES) št. 1107/2009) zadostni in da prispevajo k preprečevanju izginjanja medonosnih čebel?










3.


Katere druge konkretne ukrepe za zaščito medonosnih čebel pred neonikotinoidi namerava Komisija še sprejeti?










4.


Ali lahko Komisija v zvezi z objavo „Informacij o pesticidih in pogojni registraciji klotianidina“ Agencije za zaščito okolja ZDA z dne 30. maja 2003 poda izjavo o tem, ali:










—


se zaveda resnih podatkovnih vrzeli, navedenih v zgoraj omenjenem informativnem dokumentu („študija razvojne imunotoksičnosti; dodatne analize preskusnih snovi, uporabljenih v študijah mutagenosti; terenske raziskave ostankov v poljščinah pri kolobarjenju na primeru zrele soje; aerobni vodni metabolizem; študija spiranja semen; akutna toksičnost celotnega sedimenta za sladkovodne vretenčarje in terenski testi za opraševalce“);










—


se zaveda naslednjih navedb iz istega informativnega dokumenta: „Klotianidin je zelo strupen za medonosne čebele ob akutnem stiku (LD50 > 0,0439 μg/čebelo). Možno je, da ima kronične toksične vplive na medonosne čebele, kot tudi na druge netarčne opraševalce zaradi prenosa ostankov klotianidina v nektar in cvetni prah. Pri medonosnih čebelah ima kronična toksična izpostavljenost lahko letalne in/ali subletalne učinke na ličinke in vpliva na reprodukcijske sposobnosti matice“?




Odgovor komisarja Dallija v imenu Komisije
(2. marec 2012)






1.


Komisija trenutno od držav članic pridobiva informacije o izvajanju ukrepov, potrebnih za uskladitev z Direktivo 2010/21/EU (152). Ta točka je redno na dnevnem redu Stalnega odbora za prehranjevalno verigo in zdravje živali – oddelek za zakonodajo o pesticidih.










2.


Do danes ni bilo mogoče ugotoviti povezave med pravilno uporabo neonikotinoidnih insekticidov in umrljivostjo čebel, zato podatki niso na voljo. Vendar Komisija verjame, da ukrepi, določeni v zakonodaji o pesticidih, prispevajo k zagotavljanju visoke stopnje zaščite čebel, vključno medonosnih čebel.










3.


Glede konkretnih ukrepov, ki jih Komisija namerava sprejeti, želi Komisija poslance in poslanke opozoriti na odgovor na pisno vprašanje E–000160/2012 (153).










4.


Zakonodaja EU o fitofarmacevtskih sredstvih temelji na tveganjih. Tudi če so insekticidi po naravi strupeni za čebele, je njihova uporaba še vedno mogoča, če je izpostavljenost zmanjšana do stopenj, ki ne povzročajo škodljivih učinkov. S tem namenom se bodo izvajali ukrepi za zmanjšanje tveganja. Zaradi različnih zahtev po podatkih, določenih v zakonodaji EU, podatki v dokumentaciji EU, ki je bila ocenjena in strokovno pregledana v okviru zakonodaje EU o pesticidih, in podatki, ki jih je ocenila ameriška agencija za varstvo okolja, niso primerljivi, čeprav se nanašajo na isto aktivno snov, tj. „klotianidin“.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-001297/12
to the Commission
Pavel Poc (S&D), Karin Kadenbach (S&D), Kriton Arsenis (S&D), Janusz Wojciechowski (ECR), Kartika Tamara Liotard (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE), Bas Eickhout (Verts/ALE), Sabine Wils (GUE/NGL), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE) and Alojz Peterle (PPE)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Neonicotinoid insecticides and honey bee health
Directive 2010/21/EU amending Annex I to Council Directive 91/414/EEC as regards the specific provisions relating to clothianidin, thiamethoxam, fipronil and imidacloprid was adopted recently in order to address the problem of depletion of honey bees arising from exposure to neonicotinoid pesticides.






1.


Can the Commission state whether the Member States have taken the necessary measures to comply with Directive 2010/21/EU?










2.


Can the Commission supply specific figures indicating whether the legislative measures adopted (e.g. Directive 2010/21/EU and Regulation (EC) No1107/2009) are sufficient and are contributing to prevent depletion of honey bees?










3.


What other concrete measures is the Commission planning to adopt in order to protect honey bees from neonicotinoids?




4. Following the publication on 30 May 2003 by the US Environmental Protection Agency of the ‘Pesticide Fact Sheet on Conditional Registration of Clothianidin’, can the Commission state:






—


if it is aware of the severe data gaps listed in the abovementioned fact sheet (‘developmental immunotoxicity study, additional analysis of test materials used in mutagenic studies, rotational crop residue fields trials with mature soybeans, aerobic aquatic metabolism, seed leaching study, whole sediment acute toxicity to freshwater invertebrates and field test for pollinators’);










—


if it is aware of the following, as stated in the same fact sheet: ‘Clothianidin is highly toxic to honey bees on an acute contact basis (LD50 > 0.0439 μg/bee). It has the potential for toxic chronic exposure to honey bees, as well as other nontarget pollinators, through the translocation of clothianidin residues in nectar and pollen. In honey bees, the effects of this toxic chronic exposure may include lethal and/or sub-lethal effects in the larvae and reproductive effects in the queen’?




Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(2 March 2012)







1.


The Commission is currently gathering information from Member States on the implementation measures to comply with Directive 2010/21/EU










1.


The Commission is currently gathering information from Member States on the implementation measures to comply with Directive 2010/21/EU




 (154). This point is constantly on the agenda of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health — section Pesticide Legislation. 





2.


Until today, no link between neonicotinoid insecticides, if correctly used, and the problem of bee mortality could be established, and therefore figures are not available. Nevertheless, the Commission is confident that measures laid down in the pesticide legislation contribute to ensure a high level of protection for bees, including honeybees.











3.


As regards the concrete measures the Commission is planning to adopt, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E‐000160/2012










3.


As regards the concrete measures the Commission is planning to adopt, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E‐000160/2012




 (155).





4.


EU legislation for plant protection product is risk based. Even if insecticides are, by their nature, toxic to bees, their use may still be possible if exposure is minimised to levels which do not generate harmful effects. To that aim specific risk mitigation measures shall be applied. Due to the different data requirements provided for in the EU legislation, the data of the EU dossier, evaluated and peer reviewed in the framework of the EU pesticide legislation, and the data evaluated by US Environmental Protection Agency, although refer to the same active substance 




‘clothianidin’, are not comparable.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001332/12
to the Commission
David Campbell Bannerman (ECR)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: NGO activities — criteria
What criteria does the Commission use for EU funding of NGO activities?
Answer given by Mr Lewandowski on behalf of the Commission
(22 March 2012)
The rules governing granting of EU funding by the Commission under centralised direct management do not ordinarily require the identification of the type of recipient. Under other management modes, criteria are defined by each management authority. NGOs are then in general treated no differently than other recipients (natural or legal persons).
Article 109 of the Financial Regulation sets out the basic principles of grant awards applicable to any organisation and body, including NGOs: transparency and equal treatment, non-cumulation, non-retroactivity, non-profit purpose or effect, and co-financing. All applicants are first assessed based on selection criteria regarding their financial and operational capacity. Their applications are then evaluated based on the award criteria defined in the call launched under a specific programme.
In addition, when NGO status is relevant for the eligibility of funding from certain programs, due to the absence of a formal definition of NGO at EU level, the Commission verifies in each case its NGO status in respect of the national law applicable or pre-defined eligibility criteria.
At the level of implementation, controls performed on grants aim at ascertaining legality, regularity and sound financial management. In case of non-respect of the rules, the competent authorising officer may, depending on the seriousness, suspend, reduce or terminate the grant, recover unduly paid amounts, and impose administrative or financial penalties, as for any other beneficiary.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-001336/12
adresată Comisiei
Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE)
(13 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Evaluarea eficienței sistemelor judiciare din statele membre
Justiția trebuie să fie imparțială, independentă și eficientă. Vicepreședintele Comisiei, Viviane Reding, a afirmat că sistemele naționale nu ar trebui să ridice obstacole în calea accesului cetățenilor la justiție. Programul de la Stockholm și programele anterioare acestuia — Programul de la Tampere și Programul de la Haga — menționează accesul eficient al cetățenilor europeni la justiție ca una dintre prioritățile lor. Actuala criză a datoriilor suverane și provocările cu care se confruntă moneda euro au demonstrat încă o dată că principiul bunei guvernanțe se bazează pe punerea în aplicare eficientă, corectă și punctuală a legilor. Avem nevoie nu numai de legi bune, ci și de actori și sisteme judiciare imparțiale. Prin urmare, în sprijinul unui spațiu european de justiție, Uniunea ar trebui să își concentreze eforturile nu doar asupra elaborării de standarde și norme comune, dar și asupra evaluării eficienței cu care acestea sunt implementate de către sistemele judiciare naționale.
Ce măsuri intenționează Comisia să adopte în 2012 în vederea evaluării eficienței sistemelor judiciare din statele membre?
Răspuns dat de dna Reding în numele Comisiei
(2 aprilie 2012)
Comisia împărtășește opinia onorabilului membru potrivit căreia sistemele judiciare eficiente sunt esențiale în spațiul de justiție al UE pentru ca atât cetățenii, cât și întreprinderile să aibă acces la justiție. Comisia consideră, de asemenea, că sistemele judiciare eficiente sunt esențiale pentru existența unor economii funcționale, competitive și favorabile întreprinderilor, facilitându-se tranzacțiile civile și comerciale atât pentru cetățeni, cât și pentru întreprinderi. Cetățenii trebuie să aibă încredere că sistemul judiciar oferă soluții în cazul în care astfel de tranzacții se confruntă cu dificultăți sau nu mai au loc. O bună funcționare a sistemului judiciar creează, de asemenea, încredere în funcționarea statului și a instituțiilor sale.
Comisia dispune de multiple dovezi cu privire la importanța sistemelor de justiție și judiciare în actualul climat economic. Începând cu 2011, reforma sistemului judiciar a reprezentat o componentă importantă a reformelor structurale realizate în Grecia și Portugalia. În 2012, Comisia intenționează să evalueze, de asemenea, sistemele judiciare din țările care beneficiază de asistență pentru balanța de plăți. Acest proces de reformă este deosebit de important pentru statele membre în care există programe de reformă, sistemele judiciare eficiente contribuind la creșterea economică în toate statele membre. Fiecare stat membru poate beneficia de experiența celorlalte state membre în domeniul justiției, în special în ceea ce privește dreptul civil și dreptul comercial. Analizele anuale ale creșterii efectuate de Comisie acoperă, printre altele, și domeniul administrației publice.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001336/12
to the Commission
Monica Luisa Macovei (PPE)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: Evaluation of the efficiency of judicial systems in the Member States
Justice must be impartial, independent, and effective. Commission Vice-President Viviane Reding has stated that national systems should not be barriers to citizens’ access to justice. The Stockholm Program and its predecessors — Tampere and Hague — list effective access to justice for European citizens as one of their priorities. The current sovereign debt crisis and the challenges facing the euro show once again that the principle of good governance relies on the efficient, fair and timely implementation of laws. In addition to good laws we need impartial judicial systems and actors. Therefore, in support of a European Area of Justice, the Union should focus its efforts not only on the development of common standards and rules, but also on evaluating the efficiency with which they are implemented by national judicial systems.
What measures does the Commission plan to take in 2012 in order to evaluate the efficiency of judicial systems in the Member States?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(2 April 2012)
The Commission shares the Honourable Member’s position that efficient judicial systems are essential in the EU's area of justice to ensure that both citizens and businesses have access to justice. The Commission also believes that efficient judicial systems are vital to well-functioning, competitive and business-friendly economies, making civil and commercial transactions easier for both individuals and businesses. People need to have confidence that the judicial system will provide solutions when such transactions run into difficulties or fail. A well-functioning judicial system also creates trust in the functioning of the State and its institutions.
The Commission has ample evidence of the importance of justice and legal systems in the current economic climate. Since 2011, judicial reform has been an important part of the wider structural reforms being carried out in Greece and Portugal. In 2012, the Commission intends to assess also the judicial systems of countries receiving balance-of-payments assistance. While this reform process is particularly important for Member States with existing reform programmes, efficient judicial systems help boost growth in all Member States. They can learn from one another’s experience in the justice area, and especially in civil and commercial law. The Commission's horizontal Annual Growth Surveys also cover public administration.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-001340/12
til Kommissionen
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(6. februar 2012)

Om: Uregelmæssigheder med EU‐projekter i Grækenland
Spørgeren har tidligere forelagt Kommissionen denne problematik (spørgsmål E‐010148/2011), som under henvisning til Kommissionens svar hermed uddybes: Spørgeren er blevet gjort opmærksom på nedenstående henvendelse, der er sendt til Kommissionen af en dansk statsborger, som tillige er EU‐projekt-koordinator (se uddrag herunder). Spørgeren er foruroliget over de betragtninger, som fremkommer om de omfattende uregelmæssigheder med EU‐projekter, og beder på den baggrund Kommissionen kommentere disse samt redegøre for, hvad man agter at foretage sig for at lade OLAF undersøge, om disse rygter er sande og — i bekræftende fald — retsforfølge de relevante aktører?
Uddrag af borgerhenvendelse: 
»Til Hr. J. Lewandowski, EU‐Kommissionen.
… Igennem årene har jeg ofte hørt forlydender om snyd med EU‐tilskuddene. Vi taler om forkert opgivne tal på fåre‐ og gedehold, som har medført enorme, uretmæssige tilskud. Tilskud til oliventræer, som er fældet flere år tidligere! Dog har jeg ikke noget håndgribeligt; beviser at vise frem. For nylig var jeg igen på Kreta, og i den sammenhæng talte jeg igen med folk i landsbyer. Og måske på grund af krisen, var der pludselig mange der havde noget at »fortælle« …«
Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Algirdas Šemeta
(2. april 2012)
Kommissionen deler fuldt ud det ærede medlems og den pågældende borgers bekymringer om uregelmæssigheder til skade for EU‐budgettet, uanset i hvilken medlemsstat det måtte forekomme.
Med hensyn til det rejste spørgsmål vil det ærede medlem være klar over, at i henhold til bestemmelserne om delt forvaltning, der er gældende for den fælles landbrugspolitik, er det medlemsstaterne, der i første instans er ansvarlige for gennemførelsen af landbrugsforanstaltningerne samt for revision og kontrol af disse. De nationale myndigheder er altså i første række ansvarlige for kontrollen med den form for landbrugsmidler, der kan være blevet givet som støtte i forbindelse med de forhold, som dette specifikke spørgsmål omhandler, og er herunder ansvarlige for inddrivelsen af uretmæssigt udbetalte beløb. Medlemsstaterne har inden for disse rammer også en lovforeskrevet forpligtelse til at fremsende detaljerede oplysninger om opdagede uregelmæssigheder til Kommissionen inden for en vis frist.
OLAF kan gribe ind i særlige tilfælde, når der er tilstrækkelig alvorlig mistanke om svig eller korruption eller alvorlige uregelmæssigheder, der skader EU's budget. Sådanne tilfælde eller sager skal midlertidig som nævnt være klart identificerbare. Kommissionen bemærker, at de oplysninger, som det ærede medlem giver, ikke er tilstrækkelig præcise til, at OLAF kan undersøge et specifikt forhold som sådan, og beder ham igen om at fremsende mere fyldige oplysninger, hvis disse forefindes, direkte til OLAF. OLAF vil herefter i henhold til sin politik om kriterier for undersøgelser træffe beslutning om, hvordan der sikres en hensigtsmæssig opfølgning på de givne oplysninger.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001340/12
to the Commission
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(6 February 2012)

Subject: Irregularities in EU projects in Greece
The questioner has previously raised this problem with the Commission (Question E‐010148/2011) and, with reference to the Commission’s response, adds the following information.
The letter below was brought to the attention of the questioner. It was sent to the Commission by a Danish citizen who is also an EU Project Coordinator (see extract below). The questioner is disturbed about the observations made on the extensive irregularities in EU projects and asks the Commission to comment on them, as well as to explain what it intends to do to allow OLAF to investigate the truth of these rumours and, if confirmed, prosecute the persons involved.
Extract from the letter from a member of the public to Mr J. Lewandowski, EU Commission
… Over the years I have often heard reports of cheating with regard to EU subsidies. For example, there are false figures on sheep and goat farming, which have resulted in enormous, unlawful subsidies. Subsidies for olive trees that were felled several years before! However I am not able to present tangible proof of this. Recently I was in Crete again and spoke to people in villages. Perhaps because of the crisis, there were suddenly many people who had ‘something to tell’ …
Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(2 April 2012)
The Commission fully shares the Honourable Member's and the citizen's concerns regarding possible irregularities against the EU budget in any Member State. 
In response to the issues raised, the Honourable Member will be aware that, under the rules of shared management which govern the common agricultural policy, Member States are responsible in the first instance for the implementation of the agricultural measures, their audit and control. The national authorities are thus primarily responsible for the control of such agricultural funds which may have subsidised the matters mentioned in this particular question, including the recovery of any unduly paid amounts. In this framework the Member States also have a regulatory obligation to transmit detailed information on detected irregularities to the Commission within a certain time limit. 
OLAF may intervene in specific cases whenever there are sufficiently serious suspicions of fraud or corruption or serious irregularities detrimental to the EU budget. However, as stated, such instances or cases must be clearly identifiable. The Commission notes that the information provided by the Honourable Member is not sufficiently specific to allow OLAF to enquire into any particular matter as such and would again ask him to provide more specific information, if available, directly to OLAF. OLAF will then decide, in accordance with its investigation policy criteria, how to ensure appropriate follow up to the information provided.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-001401/12
alla Commissione
Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Carlo Fidanza (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), Roberta Angelilli (PPE) e Aldo Patriciello (PPE)
(14 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Utilizzo del Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale (FESR) in Campania
Premesso che:






—


la Regione Campania intende utilizzare fondi comunitari (circa 2 milioni di euro) del Programma operativo regionale (POR) FESR Campania 2007-2013, nell'ambito dell'obiettivo operativo 1.12 («Promuovere la conoscenza della Campania»), per la costruzione di una scogliera mobile nel Golfo di Napoli, necessaria per lo svolgimento delle regate dell'America's Cup, in programma dal 7 al 15 aprile;











—


a tal fine la Regione ha pubblicato un apposito bando, con termini ridotti, sul Bollettino regionale che scade il prossimo 9 febbraio;










—


per esplicita prescrizione della soprintendenza, la stessa scogliera dovrà essere parzialmente smantellata al massimo entro quattro settimane dalla conclusione delle regate;




ritiene la Commissione che una simile iniziativa, per quanto temporanea, realizzi comunque la finalità della promozione del territorio, che l'utilizzo di fondi europei per tale opera sia in linea con le previsioni del regolamento (CE) n. 1080/2006 relativo al Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale, che prevede la possibilità di finanziamento di attività turistiche, affidando alle autorità nazionali e regionali la selezione dei singoli progetti e che il bando rispetti le prescrizioni normative europee?
Risposta data da Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione
(30 marzo 2012)
L'oggetto dell'intervento non verte sull'evento «American Cup» in quanto tale, bensì su un'infrastruttura necessaria ad assicurare la sicurezza dei diportisti. Il quadro di riferimento strategico nazionale permette il sostegno di azioni volte a promuovere eventi atti a mobilitare flussi importanti di visitatori e turisti. Questo sostegno si basa sull'obbligo di condurre uno studio previo in merito alla domanda potenziale.
Il progetto è stato oggetto dello studio previo obbligatorio per ottenere il sostegno del POR Campania 2007-2013 cofinanziato dal FESR. 
I progetti cofinanziati a titolo dei fondi strutturali e di coesione sono gestiti, in virtù del principio di gestione condivisa e conformemente al regolamento (CE) n. 1083 del 5 luglio 2006, direttamente dalle autorità nazionali e regionali che ne assicurano la regolarità.
La Commissione, a stretto contatto con le autorità nazionali, vigilerà alla conformità delle procedure relative alle regole di attribuzione dei contratti pubblici e all'ammissibilità delle spese certificate alla luce della sostenibilità degli investimenti. A tutt'oggi la Commissione non ha conoscenza di eventuali irregolarità commesse dalla regione Campania per quanto concerne le procedure di attribuzione di appalti che sono state affidate dalla regione al Provveditorato Interregionale alle Opere Pubbliche, il che dovrebbe assicurare la regolarità delle procedure di attuazione dell'intervento menzionato dagli onorevoli deputati.
La Commissione chiederà inoltre alle autorità nazionali di verificare il rispetto dell'articolo 55 del regolamento summenzionato per quanto concerne gli introiti generati dall'operazione. Qualora le condizioni previste dai regolamenti comunitari e dai documenti di programmazione non fossero soddisfatte, la Commissione chiederà all'autorità di gestione di decertificare gli importi in questione e di ritirarli dalla prossima domanda di pagamento.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001401/12
to the Commission
Erminia Mazzoni (PPE), Alfredo Antoniozzi (PPE), Clemente Mastella (PPE), Cristiana Muscardini (PPE), Lara Comi (PPE), Carlo Fidanza (PPE), Raffaele Baldassarre (PPE), Crescenzio Rivellini (PPE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Elisabetta Gardini (PPE), Roberta Angelilli (PPE) and Aldo Patriciello (PPE)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Use of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) in Campania
Given that:






—


the Region of Campania intends to use Community funds (approximately EUR 2 million) under the ERDF Regional Operative Programme (ROP) Campania 2007‐2013, in the context of operational objective 1.12 (‘Promoting awareness of Campania’), to construct a mobile reef in the Gulf of Naples which is needed for the America’s Cup regattas scheduled for 7 to 15 April;










—


to this end, the Regional Government has published a tender, with reduced deadlines, in the Regional Bulletin, which will expire on 9 February;










—


by specific prescription of the Superintendence, this reef must be partially dismantled within four weeks of completion of the regattas at the latest;




does the Commission believe that such an initiative, albeit temporary, would achieve the purpose of promoting the region, that the use of European funds for such works is in line with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 on the European Regional Development Fund, which establishes the possibility of financing tourism activities and entrusts the selection the individual projects to national and regional authorities, and that the tender complies with EU regulatory prescriptions?
(Version française)
L'objet de l'intervention ne porte pas sur l'événement «American Cup» en tant que tel mais sur une infrastructure nécessaire à assurer la sécurité des plaisanciers. Le cadre de référence stratégique national permet le soutien d'actions visant la promotion d'événements permettant de mobiliser des flux importants de visiteurs et touristes. Ce soutien se fonde sur l'obligation de mener une étude préalable sur la demande potentielle.
Le projet a fait l'objet de l'étude préalable obligatoire pour obtenir le soutien du POR Campanie 2007-2013 cofinancé par le FEDER. 
Les projets cofinancés au titre des fonds structurels et de cohésion sont gérés, en vertu du principe de gestion partagée et conformément au règlement (CE) no 1083 du 5 juillet 2006, directement par les autorités nationales et régionales lesquelles en assurent la régularité.
La Commission, en étroit contact avec les autorités nationales, veillera à la conformité des procédures portant sur les règles de passation des marchés publics et à l'éligibilité des dépenses certifiées compte tenu de la durabilité des investissements. À ce jour, la Commission n'a pas eu connaissance d'irrégularités éventuelles commises par la région Campanie concernant les procédures de passation des marchés qui ont été confiées par la région au «Provveditorato Interregionale alle Opere Pubbliche», ce qui devrait assurer la régularité des procédures de mise en œuvre de l'intervention mentionnée par les Honorables Parlementaires.
De plus, la Commission demandera aux autorités nationales de vérifier le respect de l'article 55 du règlement précité, quant aux recettes générées par l'opération. Au cas où les conditions prévues par les règlements communautaires et les documents de programmation ne seraient pas remplies, la Commission demandera à l'autorité de gestion de dé-certifier les montants concernés et de les retirer de la prochaine demande de paiement.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-001410/12
an die Kommission
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(14. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Standorte von Endlagern für hoch radioaktiven Abfall
In seiner Antwort auf die schriftliche Anfrage E-012367/2011 von Hans-Peter Martin zur Suche nach einem Endlager für radioaktiven Atommüll schreibt Kommissionsmitglied Oettinger, dass „die für die Entsorgung radioaktiver Abfälle zuständigen Stellen eine Plattform […] gebildet [haben], um bis 2025 ein oder zwei Endlager für hoch radioaktiven Abfall verwirklichen zu können“.
1. Wie weit sind die Beratungen der auf europäischer Ebene eingerichteten Plattform hinsichtlich der Verwirklichung von ein oder zwei Endlagern für hoch radioaktiven Abfall vorangeschritten?
2. Gibt es bereits Vorschläge für Standorte der zu verwirklichenden Endlager für hoch radioaktiven Abfall? Wenn nicht, wann wird es erste Standortvorschläge geben? Wenn ja, welche konkreten Standorte wurden dafür vorgeschlagen?
3. Ist die auf europäischer Ebene eingerichtete Plattform einzig für die Unterstützung und Zusammenarbeit im Hinblick auf die Koordinierung von Forschung und Entwicklung für ein Endlager für hoch radioaktiven Abfall eingerichtet worden oder befasst sie sich auch mit der Suche nach Lagern für schwach und mittelradioaktiven Abfall?
Antwort von Herrn Oettinger im Namen der Kommission
(28. März 2012)







1.


Ziel der Technischen Plattform zur Verwirklichung der Endlagerung in geologischen Formationen (IGD-TP) ist in erster Linie die Unterstützung der Verwirklichung von Endlagern durch Forschungs-, Entwicklungs‐ und Demonstrationstätigkeiten zu zentralen vorrangigen Themen mit dem größten Potenzial für eine intensivere Zusammenarbeit in Europa. Nach den Zielvorstellungen der Plattform sollen bis 2025 die ersten Endlager in geologischen Formationen für abgebrannte Brennstoffe, hoch radioaktive Abfälle und sonstige langlebige Abfälle in Europa in Betrieb gehen und dabei ausreichend Sicherheit bieten. Zu diesem Zweck wurde ein schrittweises Vorgehen gewählt: Im November 2009 wurde zunächst ein Dokument über die Zielvorstellung 










1.


Ziel der Technischen Plattform zur Verwirklichung der Endlagerung in geologischen Formationen (IGD-TP) ist in erster Linie die Unterstützung der Verwirklichung von Endlagern durch Forschungs-, Entwicklungs‐ und Demonstrationstätigkeiten zu zentralen vorrangigen Themen mit dem größten Potenzial für eine intensivere Zusammenarbeit in Europa. Nach den Zielvorstellungen der Plattform sollen bis 2025 die ersten Endlager in geologischen Formationen für abgebrannte Brennstoffe, hoch radioaktive Abfälle und sonstige langlebige Abfälle in Europa in Betrieb gehen und dabei ausreichend Sicherheit bieten. Zu diesem Zweck wurde ein schrittweises Vorgehen gewählt: Im November 2009 wurde zunächst ein Dokument über die Zielvorstellung 




 (156) ausgearbeitet, im Juli 2011 folgte die Veröffentlichung einer strategischen Forschungsagenda  (157). Anhand der strategischen Forschungsagenda wurde ein Einführungsplan entwickelt und zur Konsultation vorgelegt  (158). Er soll noch vor dem Sommer 2012 veröffentlicht werden.





2.


In zwei Mitgliedstaaten wurden bereits Standortentscheidungen getroffen. 2011 wurde eine Baugenehmigung für ein tiefes Endlager in Östhammar, Schweden, beantragt. In Finnland wird dieses Jahr ein Bauantrag für ein tiefes Endlager in Olkiluoto gestellt. Die Standortfrage wird in nächster Zeit auch in Frankreich geklärt sein: Dort ist ein Gebiet nahe der Gemeinde Bure im Gespräch.










3.


Die Plattform befasst sich mit der Endlagerung abgebrannter Brennstoffe, hoch radioaktiver Abfälle und sonstiger langlebiger radioaktiver Abfälle in tiefen geologischen Formationen. Endlager für kurzlebige schwach‐ und mittelradioaktive Abfälle, für die es bereits in mehreren Mitgliedstaaten Endlager gibt, gehören nicht zu ihrem Tätigkeitsfeld.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-001410/12
to the Commission
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: The sites of final repositories for highly radioactive waste
In his answer to Written Question E‐012367/2011 by Hans-Peter Martin on the search for a permanent repository for radioactive nuclear waste, Commissioner Oettinger writes that the ‘waste management organisations have formed a platform […] so as to open one or two final repositories for highly radioactive waste by 2025’.
1. How far have the deliberations of the platform created at European level progressed about establishing one or two final repositories for highly radioactive waste?
2. Have proposals already been made for possible sites for the final repositories for highly radioactive waste that are to be established? If not, when will the first proposals for sites be made? If so, which specific sites have been proposed?
3. Was the platform at European level established solely for the purpose of support and cooperation in relation to the coordination of research and development for a final repository for highly radioactive waste, or is it also involved in the search for repositories for low— and medium-grade radioactive waste?
Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)







1.


The main objective of the Implementing Geological Disposal Technical Platform (IGD-TP) is to support repository implementation through work on key priority topics of research, development and demonstration (RD&D), having the greatest potential for enhanced cooperation in Europe; the vision of the Platform is that by 2025, the first geological disposal facilities for spent fuel, high-level waste and other long-lived radioactive waste will be operating safely in Europe. To that end, a step-wise process was chosen, starting with a Vision Document










1.


The main objective of the Implementing Geological Disposal Technical Platform (IGD-TP) is to support repository implementation through work on key priority topics of research, development and demonstration (RD&D), having the greatest potential for enhanced cooperation in Europe; the vision of the Platform is that by 2025, the first geological disposal facilities for spent fuel, high-level waste and other long-lived radioactive waste will be operating safely in Europe. To that end, a step-wise process was chosen, starting with a Vision Document




 (159) in November 2009, followed by a Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) (160) published in July 2011. Based on the SRA, a Deployment Plan has been developed and submitted to consultation (161). It is intended to be published before summer 2012.





2.


In two Member States, decisions regarding siting have been taken. A construction licence application has been filed in 2011 for a deep depository in Östhammar, Sweden. Finland will follow this year with an application for constructing a deep repository at Olkiluoto. Siting work is also nearing completion in France, where an area around the community Bure has been identified.










3.


The Platform is focusing on deep geological disposal of spent fuel, high level and long-lived radioactive waste. Repositories for short-lived low and intermediate level waste, for which repositories already exist in a number of Member States, are not included in its scope.




(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001417/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Kyriakos Mavronikolas (S&D)
(14 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Απολαβές πρώην Επιτρόπων
Στις 13 Δεκεμβρίου 2011, η Επιτροπή ενέκρινε σειρά προτάσεων για αλλαγές στο καθεστώς απασχόλησης του προσωπικού, οι οποίες στοχεύουν στην εξοικονόμηση 1 δισεκατομμυρίου ευρώ ως το 2020. Οποιεσδήποτε ενέργειες οι οποίες συμβάλουν στην βιωσιμότητα της οικονομίας στην Ευρώπη και έχουν ως γνώμονα την διαφάνεια και την κοινωνική δικαιοσύνη, είναι προς την ορθή κατεύθυνση. Σε προηγούμενή μου ερώτηση είχα αναφερθεί στο ζήτημα των πρώην Επιτρόπων οι οποίοι λαμβάνουν πολύ υψηλές απολαβές μέχρι και τρία χρόνια μετά την ολοκλήρωση της θητείας τους.
Παρακαλώ όπως μας ενημερώσει η Επιτροπή εάν στο πλαίσιο των περικοπών του προσωπικού της ΕΕ σκοπεύει να σταματήσει να δίνει αυτές τις απολαβές στους πρώην Επιτρόπους.
Απάντηση του κ. Šefčovič εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(21 Μαρτίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή δεν αναλαμβάνει δράση για την μεταρρύθμιση του συστήματος των προσωρινών αποζημιώσεων, διότι δεν έχει δικαίωμα πρωτοβουλίας στο συγκεκριμένο θέμα.Σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 243 της ΣΛΕΕ, οι διατάξεις σχετικά με προσωρινές αποζημιώσεις υπόκεινται σε κανονισμό του Συμβουλίου επί του οποίου έχει δικαίωμα πρωτοβουλίας το Συμβούλιο.

Σύμφωνα με τον κανονισμό αριθ. 422/67/ΕΟΚ, αριθ. 5/67/Ευρατόμ του Συμβουλίου, της 25ης Ιουλίου 1967 κατόπιν μεταγενέστερων τροποποιήσεων (162), η προσωρινή αποζημίωση αποτελεί ποσοστό του τελευταίου βασικού μισθού, τον οποίο λάμβανε το πρώην μέλος της Επιτροπής κατά την παύση των καθηκόντων του σε συνάρτηση με τη διάρκεια της θητείας του. Η προσωρινή αποζημίωση υπόκειται σε κοινοτική φορολογία, καθώς και στον κανόνα απαγόρευσης της σώρευσης παροχών. Τα πρώην μέλη της Επιτροπής, συνεπώς, υποχρεούνται να δηλώνουν κάθε εισόδημα που λαμβάνουν από οποιουδήποτε άλλου είδους ασχολία. Το δικαίωμα σε προσωρινή αποζημίωση δεν είναι σωρευτικό με το δικαίωμα συνταξιοδότησης και παύει να ισχύει αν το πρώην μέλος της Επιτροπής αναλάβει άλλα καθήκοντα σε κάποιο από τα θεσμικά όργανα της Ένωσης.
Αξίζει να σημειωθεί ότι τα πρώην μέλη του Δικαστηρίου της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, του Γενικού Δικαστηρίου, του Δικαστηρίου Δημόσιας Διοίκησης, καθώς και τα πρώην μέλη του Ελεγκτικού Συνεδρίου, οι πρώην Γενικοί Γραμματείς και οι Ύπατοι Εκπρόσωποι του ΚΕΠΠΑ, όπως επίσης και οι πρώην Πρόεδροι του Ευρωπαϊκού Συμβουλίου υπόκεινται στο ίδιο δημοσιονομικό καθεστώς και στις ίδιες αποζημιώσεις.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001417/12
to the Commission
Kyriakos Mavronikolas (S&D)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Allowances for former Commissioners
On 13 December 2011 the Commission approved a series of staff reform proposals designed to save EUR 1 billion by 2020. Any action which contributes to the sustainability of the European economy and has transparency and social justice as its watchword is moving in the right direction. In my previous question, I referred to the matter of the very high allowances received by former Commissioners for three years after the end of their term of office.
Could the Commission please inform us whether, as part of EU staff salary cuts, it intends to terminate payment of these allowances these wages to former Commissioners?
Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission
(21 March 2012)
The Commission is not acting to reform the transitional allowances system, because it has no powers of initiative in the matter. In accordance with Article 243 of TFEU, the provisions on interim allowances are in a Council Regulation over which the Council has the right of initiative.
In accordance with Regulation No 422/67/EEC, 5/67/Euratom of the Council 25 July 1967 with subsequent amendments (163), the transitional allowance is a percentage of the last basic salary, which the former Member of the Commission was receiving when he ceased to hold office and with reference to the length of mandate. The transitional allowance is subject to Community tax and to the rule against overlapping benefits. Former Members of the Commission are therefore obliged to declare all income received from any other form of activity. The entitlement to transitional allowance is not cumulative with pension entitlements, and ceases if the former Member of the Commission takes up another post at one of the Union Institutions.
It is worth noting that former Members of the Court of Justice, of the General Court, of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal, and former Members of the Court of Auditors, former Secretary General and High Representative for the PESC and future former President of the European Council are subject to the same financial regime and allowances.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001428/12
a la Comisión
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Kinga Göncz (S&D), Zita Gurmai (S&D), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D) y Baroness Sarah Ludford (ALDE)
(14 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Nueva ley húngara sobre religión y compatibilidad con la legislación de igualdad de trato de la UE
En Hungría, ha entrado en vigor recientemente la ley CCVI de 2011 relativa al derecho a la libertad de conciencia y religión y sobre la condición jurídica de las iglesias, confesiones religiosas y comunidades religiosas. Esta ley establece que «habida cuenta de que las instituciones eclesiásticas tienen un compromiso ideológico, estas pueden determinar las condiciones relativas a la contratación y al establecimiento, al mantenimiento y a la extinción de la relación jurídica de carácter laboral que resulten necesarias para preservar su identidad específica» (artículo 12, apartado 2).
Esta amplia disposición parece aumentar significativamente el margen de maniobra de algunos empleadores en términos de discriminación en comparación con el artículo 4, apartado 2 de la Directiva 2000/78/CE relativa al establecimiento de un marco general para la igualdad de trato en el empleo y la ocupación. En particular, la legislación mencionada anteriormente:






—


ignora el criterio «requisitos profesionales esenciales, legítimos y justificados», como se establece en la Directiva 2000/78/CE, y










—


extiende la exención a motivos distintos de la religión y las creencias, de forma que se incumple la Directiva 2000/78/CE.




A la luz de lo anterior, ¿puede explicar la Comisión de forma detallada si la Ley CCVI de 2011 relativa al derecho a la libertad de conciencia y religión y sobre la condición jurídica de las iglesias, confesiones religiosas y comunidades religiosas es compatible con la legislación de la UE y, en particular, con la Directiva 2000/78/CE? De no ser así, ¿emprenderá la Comisión acciones legales para que estos textos sean compatibles con el acervo comunitario?
Respuesta de la Sra. Reding en nombre de la Comisión
(2 de abril de 2012)
La Directiva 2000/78/CE (164) sobre igualdad en el empleo prohíbe la discriminación por motivos de religión o convicciones, discapacidad, edad u orientación sexual en el empleo y la ocupación.
El artículo 4 de la Directiva contempla excepciones contadas en casos específicos. El artículo 4, apartado 1, permite, bajo condiciones estrictas, diferencias de trato cuando una determinada característica vinculada a una condición cubierta por la Directiva sea «un requisito profesional esencial y determinante» para el empleo en cuestión.
El artículo 4, apartado 2, permite a los Estados miembros disponer que las iglesias y las organizaciones religiosas pueden exigir que la persona empleada sea de la misma religión cuando esté justificado por la naturaleza del empleo en cuestión. La exención prevista en dicho apartado, se refiere únicamente a las diferencias de trato por organizaciones religiosas por motivos de religión o convicciones.
Según la jurisprudencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea, las excepciones al principio de igualdad de trato, como las del artículo 4 de la Directiva 2000/78/CE deben interpretarse de manera estricta.
La legislación de los Estados miembros en materia de condiciones de selección, conclusión de la relación laboral y otras condiciones de trabajo deben respetar el principio de igualdad de trato, establecido mediante la Directiva 2000/78/CE.
La Comisión se pondrá en contacto con las autoridades húngaras para solicitar más información y examinar si la legislación húngara se ajusta a la Directiva 2000/78/CE.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-001428/12
an die Kommission
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Kinga Göncz (S&D), Zita Gurmai (S&D), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D) und Baroness Sarah Ludford (ALDE)
(14. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Neues ungarisches Gesetz zur Religion und Vereinbarkeit mit Gleichbehandlungsrecht der EU
In Ungarn ist vor kurzem Gesetz CCVI von 2011 zum Recht auf Gewissens— und Religionsfreiheit und zur Rechtsstellung von Kirchen, Religionsbekenntnissen und religiösen Gemeinschaften in Kraft getreten. Dieses Gesetz sieht vor, dass, „da kirchliche Einrichtungen weltanschaulich ausgerichtet sind, sie Bedingungen in Bezug auf Einstellungen und die Einrichtung, Wahrung und Aufhebung von rechtlichen Beschäftigungsverhältnissen bestimmen können, wie sie zur Wahrung ihrer spezifischen Identität erforderlich sind“ (Artikel 12 Absatz 2).
Diese weitreichende Bestimmung scheint für manche Arbeitgeber im Vergleich zu Artikel 4 Absatz 2 der Richtlinie 2000/78/EG zur Festlegung eines allgemeinen Rahmens für die Verwirklichung der Gleichbehandlung in Beschäftigung und Beruf den Ermessensspielraum bei der Diskriminierung erheblich auszuweiten. Insbesondere hat es den Anschein, dass das oben genannte Gesetz:






—


das Kriterium „wesentliche, rechtmäßige und gerechtfertigte berufliche Anforderung“, wie in Richtlinie 2000/78/EG dargelegt, außer Acht lässt, und










—


die Ausnahmeregelung auf andere Bereiche als Religion und Glaube ausweitet und damit gegen Richtlinie 2000/78/EG verstößt.




Kann die Kommission angesichts oben genannter Punkte im Detail darlegen, ob das Gesetz CCVI von 2011 zum Recht auf Gewissens— und Religionsfreiheit und zur Rechtsstellung von Kirchen, Religionsbekenntnissen und religiösen Gemeinschaften mit EU-Recht und insbesondere mit Richtlinie 2000/78/EG vereinbar ist? Sofern dies nicht der Fall ist, wird die Kommission rechtliche Schritte einleiten, um diese Texte mit dem Besitzstand in Einklang zu bringen?
Antwort von Frau Reding im Namen der Kommission
(2. April 2012)
Die Richtlinie 2000/78/EG  (165) zur Gleichbehandlung in Beschäftigung und Beruf untersagt Diskriminierungen wegen der Religion oder der Weltanschauung, einer Behinderung, des Alters oder der sexuellen Ausrichtung.
Artikel 4 der Richtlinie sieht für besondere Fälle begrenzte Ausnahmebestimmungen vor. Artikel 4 Absatz 1 der Richtlinie gestattet unter strengen Bedingungen eine Ungleichbehandlung wegen eines Merkmals, das im Zusammenhang mit einem in der Richtlinie genannten Diskriminierungsgrund steht, sofern dieses „eine wesentliche und entscheidende berufliche Anforderung darstellt“.
Gemäß Artikel 4 Absatz 2 der Richtlinie dürfen die Mitgliedstaaten vorsehen, dass Kirchen und religiöse Organisationen von einer für sie tätigen Person dieselbe Religionszugehörigkeit verlangen können, wenn die Art der betreffenden Tätigkeit dies rechtfertigt. Die Ausnahmeregelung nach Artikel 4 Absatz 2 betrifft ausschließlich Ungleichbehandlungen wegen der Religion oder der Weltanschauung durch religiöse Organisationen. 
Nach der Rechtsprechung des Gerichtshofs der Europäischen Union müssen Abweichungen vom Grundsatz der Gleichbehandlung wie die in Artikel 4 der Richtlinie 2000/78/EG benannten eng ausgelegt werden. 
Die Rechtsvorschriften der Mitgliedstaaten zu den Einstellungsbedingungen, der Beendigung eines Beschäftigungsverhältnisses und sonstigen Arbeitsbedingungen müssen im Einklang mit dem in der Richtlinie 2000/78/EG verankerten Grundsatz der Gleichbehandlung stehen. 
Die Kommission wird bei den ungarischen Behörden nähere Informationen einholen und prüfen, ob das ungarische Gesetz mit der Richtlinie 2000/78/EG vereinbar ist.
(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-001428/12
a Bizottság számára
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Göncz Kinga (S&D), Gurmai Zita (S&D), Tabajdi Csaba Sándor (S&D) és Baroness Sarah Ludford (ALDE)
(2012. február 14.)

Tárgy: Az új magyar egyházi törvény és annak összeegyeztethetősége az EU egyenlő bánásmódra vonatkozó jogszabályaival
Magyarországon a közelmúltban lépett hatályba a lelkiismereti és vallásszabadság jogáról, valamint az egyházak, vallásfelekezetek és vallási közösségek jogállásáról szóló 2011. évi CCVI. törvény, amely úgy rendelkezik, hogy „[a]z egyházi intézmény világnézeti szempontból elkötelezett, így a felvételnél és a foglalkoztatásra irányuló jogviszony létesítésénél, fenntartásánál és megszüntetésénél a sajátos identitás megőrzéséhez szükséges feltételek határozhatók meg” (12. § (2)).
A foglalkoztatás és a munkavégzés során alkalmazott egyenlő bánásmód általános kereteinek létrehozásáról szóló 2000/78/EK tanácsi irányelv 4. cikkének (2) bekezdésével összevetve úgy tűnik, hogy ez a széles hatáskörű rendelkezés jelentősen megnöveli bizonyos munkáltatók abbéli mozgásterét, hogy teret adhassanak a megkülönböztetésnek. Úgy tűnik, hogy a fent említett törvény különösen:






—


figyelmen kívül hagyja a 2000/78/EK irányelvben előírt „fontos, törvényes és igazolt alkalmazási feltételek” kritériumát, és










—


a kivételek körét kiterjeszti a valláson és meggyőződésen kívüli területekre is, ami ellentétes a 2000/78/EK irányelvvel.




A fentiek fényében tud-e a Bizottság részletes magyarázattal szolgálni a tekintetben, hogy a lelkiismereti és vallásszabadság jogáról, valamint az egyházak, vallásfelekezetek és vallási közösségek jogállásáról szóló 2011. évi CCVI. törvény összhangban van-e az európai uniós joggal, és ezen belül is a 2000/78/EK irányelvvel? Amennyiben nincs összhangban, szándékában áll-e a Bizottságnak jogi eljárást kezdeményezni annak elérése érdekében, hogy e szöveg megfeleljen az uniós vívmányoknak?
Viviane Reding válasza a Bizottság nevében
(2012. április 2.)
A foglalkoztatás és a munkavégzés során alkalmazott egyenlő bánásmód általános kereteinek létrehozásáról szóló 2000/78/EK irányelv (166) tiltja a valláson, meggyőződésen, fogyatékosságon, életkoron vagy szexuális irányultságon alapuló hátrányos megkülönböztetést a foglalkoztatás és a munkavégzés során.
Az irányelv 4. cikke különleges esetekben korlátozott eltéréseket biztosít. Az irányelv 4. cikkének (1) bekezdése – szigorú feltételek mellett – az irányelvben említett okokkal kapcsolatos jellemző alapján történő megkülönböztetést engedélyez, ha az érintett foglalkozási tevékenység jellege miatt az ilyen jellemző „valódi és meghatározó foglalkozási követelményt” kíván meg.
Az irányelv 4. cikkének (2) bekezdése lehetővé tesz olyan tagállami rendelkezést, amely értelmében az egyházak és vallási szervezetek megkövetelhetik, hogy a foglalkoztatott személy azonos vallású legyen, amennyiben ezt a szóban forgó foglalkozási tevékenység természete indokolja. A 4. cikk (2) bekezdése szerinti mentesség csak a vallási vagy a meggyőződési alapon történő megkülönböztetést engedélyezi a vallási szervezetek számára.
Az Európai Unió Bíróságának ítélkezési gyakorlata szerint az egyenlő bánásmód elve alóli kivételeket – mint például a 2000/78/EK irányelv 4. cikkében is szereplő kivételeket – megszorítóan kell értelmezni.
A munkaerő felvételére, a foglalkoztatási jogviszony megszüntetésére és a munkaviszonnyal kapcsolatos egyéb feltételekre vonatkozó tagállami jogszabályoknak tiszteletben kell tartaniuk a 2000/78/EK irányelv értelmében vett egyenlő bánásmód elvét.
A Bizottság felveszi a kapcsolatot a magyar hatóságokkal további tájékoztatásért és annak vizsgálata céljából, hogy a magyar jogszabály összhangban van-e a 2000/78/EK irányelvvel.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001428/12
aan de Commissie
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Kinga Göncz (S&D), Zita Gurmai (S&D), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D) en Baroness Sarah Ludford (ALDE)
(14 februari 2012)

Betreft: Nieuwe Hongaarse godsdienstwet en verenigbaarheid met de EU-wetgeving op het gebied van gelijke behandeling
In Hongarije is Wet CCVI van 2011 betreffende het recht op gewetens— en godsdienstvrijheid en betreffende de wettelijke status van kerken, religieuze denominaties en religieuze gemeenschappen onlangs in werking getreden. In deze wet wordt bepaald dat „kerkelijke instellingen gezien het feit dat zij ideologisch verbonden zijn, voorwaarden betreffende aanwerving en de vaststelling, het behoud en de beëindiging van het wettelijk dienstverband mogen bepalen om hun specifieke identiteit te kunnen behouden” (Artikel 2, lid 2).
Deze vergaande bepaling blijkt de beoordelingsmarge van sommige werkgevers voor discriminatie aanzienlijk te vergroten in vergelijking met artikel 4, lid 2, van Richtlijn 2000/78/EG tot instelling van een algemeen kader voor gelijke behandeling in arbeid en beroep. De bovengenoemde wet blijkt met name:






—


voorbij te gaan aan het criterium „wezenlijke, legitieme en gerechtvaardigde beroepsvereiste”, zoals uiteengezet in Richtlijn 2000/78/EG, en










—


de ontheffing, in strijd met Richtlijn 2000/78/EG, uit te breiden tot andere gronden dan religie en geloof.




Kan de Commissie gelet op het voorgaande toelichten of Wet CCVI van 2011 betreffende het recht op gewetens— en godsdienstvrijheid en betreffende de wettelijke status van kerken, religieuze denominaties en religieuze gemeenschappen verenigbaar is met het recht van de Unie en met name met Richtlijn 2000/78/EG? Is de Commissie, zo dat niet het geval is, bereid gerechtelijke stappen te ondernemen om deze teksten in overeenstemming met het acquis te brengen?
Antwoord van mevrouw Reding namens de Commissie
(2 april 2012)
De Europese richtlijn inzake gelijke behandeling in arbeid en beroep (2000/78/EG) (167) verbiedt discriminatie op het gebied van arbeid en beroep op grond van godsdienst of overtuiging, handicap, leeftijd of seksuele geaardheid.
Artikel 4 van voornoemde richtlijn laat beperkte afwijkingen in specifieke gevallen toe. Krachtens artikel 4, lid 1, kan, onder strikte voorwaarden, een verschil in behandeling gerechtvaardigd zijn wanneer een bepaald kenmerk verband houdend met een  terrein waarop de richtlijn betrekking heeft, een „wezenlijke en bepalende beroepsvereiste” vormt voor de baan in kwestie. 
Krachtens artikel 4, lid 2, mogen de lidstaten bepalen dat kerken en religieuze organisaties kunnen vereisen dat de werknemer van dezelfde godsdienst is wanneer dit gerechtvaardigd is door de aard van de beroepsactiviteiten in kwestie. De afwijking op grond van artikel 4, lid 2, betreft uitsluitend verschillen in behandeling door religieuze organisaties op grond van godsdienst of overtuiging. 
Volgens de rechtspraak van het Hof van Justitie van de Europese Unie moeten de uitzonderingen op het beginsel van gelijke behandeling, zoals de uitzonderingen waarop artikel 4 van Richtlijn 2000/78/EG betrekking heeft, restrictief worden uitgelegd. 
De wetgeving van de lidstaten betreffende de voorwaarden voor de aanwerving, de beëindiging van het dienstverband en andere arbeidsvoorwaarden moet in overeenstemming zijn met het beginsel van gelijke behandeling, zoals vastgelegd in Richtlijn 2000/78/EG. 
De Commissie zal de Hongaarse autoriteiten om aanvullende informatie verzoeken en onderzoeken of de Hongaarse wetgeving in overeenstemming is met Richtlijn 2000/78/EG. 
(Suomenkielinen versio)
Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-001428/12
komissiolle
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Kinga Göncz (S&D), Zita Gurmai (S&D), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D) ja Baroness Sarah Ludford (ALDE)
(14. helmikuuta 2012)

Aihe: Unkarin uusi uskontoa koskeva laki ja yhteensopivuus yhtäläistä kohtelua koskevan EU:n lainsäädännön kanssa
Unkarissa tuli hiljattain voimaan vuoden 2011 laki CCVI oikeudesta uskonnonvapauteen ja omantunnonvapauteen sekä kirkkojen, uskontokuntien ja uskonnollisten yhteisöjen oikeudellisesta asemasta. Laissa säädetään, että koska uskonnolliset instituutiot ovat ideologisesti sitoutuneita, ne voivat määrittää palvelukseen ottoa sekä laillisen työsuhteen muodostumista, jatkumista ja päättämistä koskevat edellytykset niiden erityisen identiteetin säilyttämisen edellyttämällä tavalla (12 artiklan 2 kohta).
Hyvin laaja-alainen säännös vaikuttaa lisäävän merkittävästi tiettyjen työnantajien harkintavaltaa syrjinnän osalta verrattuna yhdenvertaista kohtelua työssä ja ammatissa koskevista yleisistä puitteista annetun direktiivin 2000/78/EY 4 artiklan 2 kohtaan. Erityisesti vaikuttaa siltä, että edellä mainitussa laissa
— rikotaan direktiivissä 2000/78/EY asetettua ”todellisen, perustellun ja oikeutetun vaatimuksen” kriteeriä
— laajennetaan poikkeusta muihin kuin uskontoon ja vakaumukseen liittyviin perusteisiin direktiivin 2000/78/EY vastaisesti.
Voiko komissio edellä esitetyn perusteella selittää yksityiskohtaisesti, onko vuoden 2011 laki CCVI oikeudesta uskonnonvapauteen ja omantunnonvapauteen sekä kirkkojen, uskontokuntien ja uskonnollisten yhteisöjen oikeudellisesta asemasta yhteensopiva EU:n lainsäädännön ja erityisesti direktiivin 2000/78/EY kanssa? Jos ei ole, aikooko komissio ryhtyä oikeudellisiin toimiin näiden tekstien saattamiseksi yhdenmukaisiksi yhteisön säännöstön kanssa?
Viviane Redingin komission puolesta antama vastaus
(2. huhtikuuta 2012)
Yhdenvertaista kohtelua työssä koskevassa direktiivissä 2000/78/EY (168) kielletään uskontoon tai vakaumukseen, vammaisuuteen, ikään tai sukupuoliseen suuntautumiseen perustuva syrjintä työssä ja ammatissa.
Direktiivin 4 artiklassa säädetään rajoitetuista poikkeuksista tietyissä tapauksissa. Kyseisen artiklan 1 kohdassa sallitaan tiukoin edellytyksin erilainen kohtelu, joka perustuu johonkin direktiivissä tarkoitettuun seikkaan liittyvään ominaisuuteen, jos kyseinen ominaisuus on ”todellinen ja ratkaiseva työhön liittyvä vaatimus”.
Direktiivin 4 artiklan 2 kohdassa annetaan jäsenvaltioille mahdollisuus säätää, että kirkot ja uskonnolliset organisaatiot voivat vaatia, että niiden palveluksessa olevan henkilön uskonto on sama kuin työnantajan, jos se on perusteltua työn luonteen perusteella. Kyseinen 4 artiklan 2 kohdan mukainen poikkeus koskee ainoastaan uskonnollisten järjestöjen harjoittamaa erilaista kohtelua uskonnon tai vakaumuksen perusteella.
Euroopan unionin tuomioistuimen oikeuskäytännön mukaisesti yhdenvertaisen kohtelun periaatetta koskevia poikkeuksia, kuten direktiivin 2000/78/EY 4 artiklassa mainittuja, on tulkittava suppeasti.
Jäsenvaltioiden lainsäädännössä, joka koskee palvelukseen ottamisen ja työsuhteen päättämisen ehtoja ja muita työoloja, on noudatettava yhdenvertaisen kohtelun periaatetta, sellaisena kuin se on pantu täytäntöön direktiivillä 2000/78/EY.
Komissio ottaa yhteyttä Unkarin viranomaisiin saadakseen lisätietoja ja tutkiakseen, onko Unkarin lainsäädäntö direktiivin 2000/78/EY mukainen.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001428/12
to the Commission
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE), Kinga Göncz (S&D), Zita Gurmai (S&D), Csaba Sándor Tabajdi (S&D) and Baroness Sarah Ludford (ALDE)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: New Hungarian law on religion and compatibility with EU equal treatment legislation
In Hungary, Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion and on the Legal Status of Churches, Religious Denominations and Religious Communities came into force recently. This act provides that ‘since church institutions are ideologically committed, they may determine such conditions concerning recruitment and the establishment, maintenance and termination of the legal relationship of employment as are necessary to preserve their specific identity’ (Article 12(2)).
This wide-ranging provision appears to significantly increase some employers’ margin of appreciation for discrimination in comparison with Article 4(2) of Directive 2000/78/EC on establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation. In particular, it appears that the aforementioned law:






—


disregards the criterion ‘genuine, legitimate and justified occupational requirement’, as set forth in Directive 2000/78/EC, and










—


extends the exemption to grounds other than religion and belief, in breach of Directive 2000/78/EC.




In the light of the above, can the Commission explain in detail whether Act CCVI of 2011 on the Right to Freedom of Conscience and Religion, and on the Legal Status of Churches, Religious Denominations and Religious Communities is compatible with EC law, and in particular with Directive 2000/78/EC? If it is not, will the Commission undertake legal action to bring these texts in line with the acquis?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(2 April 2012)
The Employment Equality Directive 2000/78/EC (169) prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion or belief, disability, age, or sexual orientation in employment and occupation.
Article 4 of the directive provides for limited derogations in specific cases. Article 4(1) of the directive allows, under strict conditions, differences of treatment where a particular characteristic related to a ground covered by the directive is a ‘genuine and determining occupational requirement’ for the job in question. 
Article 4(2) of the directive allows Member States to provide that churches and religious organisations can require that the person employed is of the same religion where this is justified by the nature of the job in question. The exemption under Article 4(2) concerns only differences of treatment by religious organisations on grounds of religion or belief. 
According to the case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, exceptions to the principle of equal treatment, such as those in Article 4 of Directive 2000/78/EC, have to be interpreted narrowly. 
Member States' legislation on conditions of recruitment, the termination of the employment relationship and other working conditions must comply with the principle of equal treatment, as put into effect by Directive 2000/78/EC.
The Commission will contact the Hungarian authorities for further information and to examine whether Hungarian law is in conformity with Directive 2000/78/EC.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse P-001438/12
til Kommissionen
Christel Schaldemose (S&D)
(10. februar 2012)

Om: Kunstige metalhofter produceret af Depuy — revision af direktivet om medicinsk udstyr
I Danmark kører for tiden en stor sag om de kunstige metalhofter, der er produceret af firmaet Depuy. Hofterne er nu kaldt tilbage af firmaet, da de har vist sig at være skadelige for patienterne. 600 danske patienter har fået hofterne indopereret.
Under afdækningen af sagen er det kommet frem, at læger i blandt andet Storbritannien i flere år — inden hofterne blev kaldt tilbage — har advaret om hofternes skadelige bivirkninger. Det har desuden vist sig, at flere danske læger har fået rejser og andre goder betalt af firmaet Depuy.
Vil det nærtforestående forslag til revision af direktivet om medicinsk udstyr tage højde for:







at lave et bedre overvågningssystem, så advarsler om medicinsk udstyr fra én medlemsstat formidles til alle andre medlemsstater og i øvrigt undersøges af Kommissionen?











at forhindre/forbyde, at læger modtager rejser og andre goder fra et medicinudstyrsfirma således, at patienter kan være sikre på, at valg af udstyr/implantat kun handler om, hvad der er bedst for patienten, og ikke hvad der økonomisk gavner lægen?




Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne  af John Dalli
(13. marts 2012)
Fabrikanten DePuy underrettede ved meddelelse af 24. august 2010 de britiske myndigheder om, at firmaet ville kalde sine kunstige metal-mod-metal-hofter tilbage fra det britiske marked. Den 7. september 2010 rådede den britiske kompetente myndighed lægerne til at ophøre med at bruge de pågældende kunstige hofter, og myndigheden underrettede den 8. september 2010 de øvrige medlemsstater om fabrikantens tilbagekaldelse og om sit råd til lægerne i overensstemmelse med overvågningssystemet, der er oprettet ved direktiv 93/42/EØF (170). 
I forbindelse med Kommissionens forslag om at ændre direktivet om medicinsk udstyr, der forventes at foreligge i 2012, overvejer man at styrke overvågningssystemet med henblik på i alle tilfælde at sikre hurtig informationsudveksling mellem medlemsstaterne og at forbedre dels koordineringen af analysen af visse overvågningssager, dels påvisningen af tendenser og signaler på EU‐plan. Desuden bør fabrikanternes pligt til at iværksætte procedurer for udveksling af erfaringer med brugen af medicinsk udstyr yderligere skærpes.
Det forventes ikke, at der i Kommissionens forslag indføres særlige bestemmelser vedrørende incitamenter fra fabrikanter til læger, fordi dette spørgsmål er knyttet til udøvelsen af lægefaget, som ikke er specifikt begrænset til medicinsk udstyr, og ville falde uden for anvendelsesområdet for bestemmelserne om medicinsk udstyr.
For så vidt angår klinisk evaluering, kræves det i henhold til afsnit 2.3.7. i bilag X til direktiv 93/42/EF, at alle data, der er indsamlet under en klinisk afprøvning, skal indgå i den endelige rapport. Det fastsættes i bilagets afsnit 2.2., at kliniske afprøvninger skal foretages i overensstemmelse med Verdenslægesammenslutningens Helsinkierklæring, der indeholder visse retningslinjer vedrørende interessekonflikter.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-001438/12
to the Commission
Christel Schaldemose (S&D)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Metal artificial hips manufactured by Depuy — revision of the Medical Devices Directive
There is currently a major issue in Denmark concerning the metal artificial hips manufactured by the Depuy company. These hips have now been recalled by the company as they have proven to be harmful to patients. Six hundred Danish patients have received hip implants.
Investigations into the case have revealed that doctors in the United Kingdom, amongst other countries, had been warning of the harmful side effects of these hips for a number of years before they were recalled. It has also emerged that a number of Danish doctors received trips and other perks paid for by Depuy.
Will the forthcoming proposal on the revision of the Medical Devices Directive seek to:







improve the surveillance system so that alerts about medical devices issued by one Member State are communicated to all other Member States and investigated by the Commission?











prevent/prohibit doctors from receiving trips and other perks from medical devices companies so that patients can be confident that the sole criterion for choosing a device/implant is what is best for the patient and not what is economically beneficial to the doctor?




Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(13 March 2012)
With its communication of 24 August 2010, the manufacturer DePuy informed the UK authorities of the recall of its metal-on-metal hip joint replacements in question from the UK market. On 7 September 2010, the UK competent authority advised clinicians to stop using those hip joint replacements and informed the competent authorities of the other Member States on 8 September 2010 of the manufacturer's recall and their advice to clinicians, in accordance with the vigilance system established by Directive 93/42/EEC (171). 
In the context of the Commission's proposals to revise the medical devices directives, which are foreseen for 2012, a reinforcement of the vigilance system is under consideration in order to ensure in all cases rapid information exchange between Member States as well as an improved coordination of the analysis of certain vigilance cases and the identification of trends and signals at EU level. Moreover, the existing obligation of manufacturers to institute procedures to review experience gained from the use of devices should be further developed. 
It is not foreseen to include specific provisions in the Commission's proposals which would address the issue of inducement of healthcare professionals by manufacturers because this is related to the exercise of the medical profession which is not specifically limited to medical devices and would fall outside the scope of the medical devices regulations. 
As far as clinical investigations are concerned, Section 2.3.7 of Annex X of Directive 93/42/EEC requires that all data collected during an investigation are mentioned in the final report. Section 2.2 of this Annex stipulates that clinical investigations must be carried out in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of the World Medical Association which contains some guidance on conflicts of interests.
(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-001451/12
a Bizottság számára
Göncz Kinga (S&D)
(2012. február 14.)

Tárgy: Adatgyűjtés az EU roma lakosságáról
Az Európai Parlament 2011-ben elfogadta a romák integrációjának európai uniós stratégiájáról szóló állásfoglalást (2010/2276(INI)), amelyben felhívja a Bizottságot, hogy állítson össze európai válságtérképet, amely bizonyos mutatók alapján azonosítja azokat az uniós mikrorégiókat, ahol a lakosokat a leginkább sújtja szegénység és társadalmi kirekesztés, így lehetővé teszi összetett fejlesztési programok indítását a tagállamokban.
Az Európai Bizottság „A nemzeti romaintegrációs stratégiák uniós keretrendszere 2020-ig” című közleményében azt is hangsúlyozza, hogy mindenekelőtt megbízható és részletes adatokat kell gyűjteni a tagállamok roma lakosságáról, és javasolja, hogy ez (a Világbankkal és az Alapjogi Ügynökséggel folytatott együttműködés keretében az Egyesült Nemzetek Fejlesztési Programja által) a roma háztartásokban végzett felmérést magában foglaló kísérleti programra alapuljon. Azt is kezdeményezi, hogy ezt a romákra irányuló felmérést terjesszék ki valamennyi tagállamra, és rendszeresen végezzék el a helyszíni előrelépés mérése érdekében.
Ezek az adatok nélkülözhetetlenek a tagállamok számára fejlesztési programjaik elindításához és működtetéséhez, ezért az adatokat sürgősen közölni kell. A rendelkezésünkre álló információk szerint az említett adatokat már részben összegyűjtötték.
A fentiek fényében, választ tud-e adni a Bizottság a következőkre:






—


Mikor készül nyilvánosságra hozni az adatokat?










—


Mikor tervezi a tagállamok és a Parlament elé tárni az adatokat?










—


Hogyan szándékozik biztosítani a következő évek során az adatgyűjtést, vagyis milyen módszereket szándékozik alkalmazni?




Viviane Reding válasza a Bizottság nevében
(2012. március 28.)
2010 második felében az Alapjogi Ügynökség az Egyesült Nemzetek Fejlesztési Programjával (UNDP) és a Világbankkal együttműködve nagyszabású kísérleti háztartási felmérést indított 11 uniós tagállam hátrányos helyzetű roma lakossága körében. Ezzel a Regionális Politikai Főigazgatóság kiegészítő projekt elvégzésére adott megbízásának tett eleget. A háztartási felmérés eredményei pótolják a hiányzó adatokat, és lehetővé teszik, hogy az Európai Bizottság és az EU tagállamai a tények ismeretében alakítsák ki a romák integrációjára vonatkozó politikáikat.
Elkészült a szóban forgó felmérés első eredményeiről szóló jelentés, amelyet tavasszal, a nemzeti roma integrációs stratégiák értékeléséről szóló bizottsági jelentéssel egyidejűleg fogunk a tagállamok és az Európai Parlament, valamint a széles közvélemény elé tárni.
Annak érdekében, hogy az elkövetkező években is gondoskodjon az adatok összegyűjtéséről, az Alapjogi Ügynökség 2012-ben további tíz tagállamra terjeszti ki a kutatómunkát a romákra irányuló kíséreli felmérés keretében jelenleg vizsgált 11 tagállamról, a fennmaradó öt tagállamot pedig 2013-ban fogja abba bevonni. 2020-ig további felméréseket végeznek majd az uniós keretrendszer végrehajtása terén elért előrehaladás nyomon követése érdekében.
Ezzel egyidejűleg az Alapjogi Ügynökség a Bizottság felkérésére olyan ellenőrzési módszerek fejlesztése terén is együttműködik a tagállamokkal, amelyek segítségével összehasonlítható elemzés készíthető az Európai Unió területén élő roma közösségek helyzetéről.
Továbbá, az Európai Bizottság a Világbankkal együttműködve, az EPSON-nal (Európai Területrendezési Megfigyelő Hálózat) közös kísérleti projekt keretében feltérképezi a szegénységet és a társadalmi kirekesztést a legtöbb uniós tagállamban, hogy lehetőség szerint a leghátrányosabb helyzetű területekre irányíthassa a strukturális alapokat.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001451/12
to the Commission
Kinga Göncz (S&D)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Data collection on the Roma population of the EU
In 2011, Parliament adopted a resolution on the EU strategy on Roma inclusion (2010/2276(INI)), in which it called for the creation of an EU crisis map, to be based on a number of indicators in order to identify the microregions hardest hit by poverty and social exclusion, and thus make it possible to launch complex development-oriented programmes in Member States.
The Commission, in its communication on an EU framework for national Roma integration strategies up to 2020, also stresses the importance of collecting reliable and detailed data on the Roma population of the Member States in the forefront, and suggests building on the Roma household survey pilot project (carried out by the UNDP in cooperation with the World Bank and the FRA). It has also proposed expanding this survey on Roma to all Member States, and repeating it regularly to measure progress.
These figures are vital for Member States if they are set up and run their development programmes; they should therefore be communicated as a matter of urgency. According to our information, some of these data have already been collected.
In the light of the above, can the Commission state:






—


when it plans to make the data public;










—


when it plans to present them to the Member States and Parliament; and










—


how it intends to ensure data collection in the coming years, i.e. what methods it intends to apply?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)
In the second half of 2010, the Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) launched a major pilot household survey of marginalised Roma in 11 EU Member States in collaboration with United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank (WB), carrying out a complementary project commissioned by the Directorate General for Regional policy. The results of this household survey overcome the lack of data allowing the European Commission and EU Member States to develop evidence-based policies to address Roma integration.
The report on the first results of this survey is finalised and will be presented to the Member States and to the European Parliament as well as to the wider public in spring, concurrently with the Commission's report on the assessment of national Roma integration strategies.
In order to ensure data collection in the coming years, in 2012, the FRA will expand its research, currently covering 11 Member States under the Pilot Roma survey, to 10 additional Member States, while the five remaining Member States will be covered in 2013. Until 2020 there will be additional surveys carried out to measure progress in the implementation of the EU Framework. 
At the same time, at the request of the Commission the FRA is also working with the Member States to develop monitoring methods which can provide a comparative analysis of the situation of Roma across the European Union.
Furthermore, the European Commission is collaborating with the World Bank and within the scope of a complementary project with ESPON (European Spatial Planning Observation Network) to map poverty and exclusion in most of the EU Member States with a view of the possible targeting of structural funds at the most deprived areas. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-001502/12
alla Commissione
Francesco De Angelis (S&D)
(14 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Catastrofe naturale nelle regioni del centro Italia
Premesso che:
l'eccezionalità del gelo che ha colpito le regioni del centro Italia ha già provocato ingenti danni e pesantissimi disagi alle popolazioni;
l'ampiezza del fenomeno ha determinato la totale distruzione delle colture, oltre all'interruzione della rete viaria, elettrica e idrica di molti comuni;
l'emergenza che tuttora costringe decine di migliaia di cittadini di queste regioni a vivere in una condizione di totale isolamento è lungi dall'essere stata superata, con gli effetti di una vera e propria catastrofe naturale;
quali misure urgenti, oltre all'auspicabile mobilitazione del Fondo di solidarietà dell'Unione europea, intende la Commissione europea assumere al fine di sostenere le popolazioni civili e provvedere al ristabilimento di condizioni minime di vivibilità in quei territori?
Risposta data da Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione
(8 marzo 2012)
La Commissione ha seguito con molta attenzione la situazione determinata dalle bufere di neve che hanno colpito diverse regioni italiane all'inizio del febbraio 2012.
In generale, oltre al Fondo di solidarietà che ha il compito, a determinate condizioni stabilite dal regolamento (CE) n. 2012/2002, di dare un sostegno finanziario immediato agli Stati membri colpiti da catastrofi, è sempre possibile attivare le misure previste dai programmi operativi 2007-2013 finanziati a titolo dei fondi europei FESR e FSE al fine di rispondere ai bisogni di coesione territoriale.
Di conseguenza la Commissione valuterà positivamente le proposte di revisione dei programmi che venissero eventualmente formulate dalle autorità italiane al fine di intervenire più efficacemente per assicurare una ripresa rapida delle attività economiche e umane che hanno subito pregiudizio in seguito alla calamità.
Per quanto concerne il Fondo europeo agricolo per lo sviluppo rurale, per il periodo 2007-2013 i programmi di sviluppo rurale prevedono, nell'ambito della misura 126, la possibilità di sostenere operazioni di investimento legate al ripristino del potenziale produttivo agricolo pregiudicato da catastrofi naturali.
La Commissione informa inoltre l'onorevole deputato che, per l'attuazione delle misure d'urgenza, gli Stati membri possono domandare l'attivazione del meccanismo europeo di protezione civile. Una volta attivato, il meccanismo facilita il coordinamento dell'inoltro degli aiuti e può contribuire al ripristino delle condizioni di vita minime per le popolazioni colpite.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-001502/12
to the Commission
Francesco De Angelis (S&D)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Natural disaster in central Italy
The exceptional nature of the freezing weather which has struck central Italy has already caused considerable damage and very serious problems for local people. The scale of the phenomenon has led to the complete destruction of crops and the closure of the road, electricity and water networks in many areas. This emergency, which continues to leave tens of thousands of people completely isolated, is far from being resolved, and is taking on the dimensions of a genuine natural disaster.
What emergency measures, besides what would be a welcome decision to mobilise the European Union Solidarity Fund, does the Commission intend to take to help local people and to restore basic services in the parts of Italy affected?
(Version française)
La Commission a suivi avec beaucoup d'attention la situation créée par les tempêtes de neige qui ont frappé plusieurs régions d'Italie au début du mois de février 2012.
En général, outre le Fonds de solidarité qui est chargé à certaines conditions établies par le règlement (CE) no 2012/2002 d'accorder un soutien financier immédiat aux États membres frappés par des catastrophes, les mesures prévues par les programmes opérationnels 2007-2013 financés au titre des fonds européens FEDER et FSE peuvent toujours être activées pour répondre aux besoins de cohésion territoriale.
Par conséquent, la Commission évaluera positivement les propositions de révision des programmes qui seront éventuellement formulées par les autorités italiennes afin d'intervenir plus efficacement pour la reprise rapide des activités économiques et humaines qui ont subi des dégâts à la suite de la calamité.
En ce qui concerne le Fonds européen agricole pour le développement rural pour la période 2007-2013, les programmes de développement rural prévoient, dans le cadre de la mesure 126, la possibilité de soutenir des opérations d'investissement liées à la reconstitution du potentiel de production agricole endommagé par des catastrophes naturelles.
Enfin, la Commission informe l'Honorable Parlementaire que, pour la mise en œuvre des mesures d'urgence, les États membres peuvent demander l'activation du Mécanisme européen de protection civile. Lorsqu'il est activé, le mécanisme facilite la coordination de l'acheminement de l'aide et peut contribuer à la restauration des conditions de vie minimales de la population affectée.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001507/12
aan de Commissie
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 februari 2012)

Betreft: Grieken verhuren EU-paspoorten aan illegale immigranten
Aangenomen wordt dat 90 procent van het (geschatte) half miljoen „illegale” immigranten die de EU elk jaar binnenkomen, waarschijnlijk aankomen via Turkije en Griekenland. Criminele bendes in Griekenland hebben een grote voorraad aan legale Europese identiteitsdocumenten. Zij verhuren dergelijke identiteitspapieren aan om het even wie de EU wil binnenkomen. Documenten die de houders ervan in staat stellen sociale-zekerheidsuitkeringen aan te vragen, zijn eveneens beschikbaar, net als documenten waaruit blijkt dat de persoon in kwestie jonger is dan 18, hetgeen een soepeler behandeling door de autoriteiten garandeert.







1.


Is de Commissie op de hoogte van de volgende krantenberichten: 










1.


Is de Commissie op de hoogte van de volgende krantenberichten: 



„Illegals enter UK on „passports for hire”,” [„Illegalen komen het VK binnen met „gehuurde paspoorten” (172)” en „In Griekenland kun je een paspoort „huren” om de EU in te komen”] (173)?





2.


Gedoogd de Commissie illegale immigratie via deze 




„Griekse route”? Zo ja, waarom? Zo niet, welke maatregelen gaat de Commissie nemen tegen Griekenland?






3.


Is de Commissie bereid — ten minste totdat een einde is gemaakt aan de 




„Griekse route” — om Nederland en andere lidstaten toe te staan hun grenzen te sluiten voor migranten die de EU binnenkomen via de „Griekse route”? Zo niet, waarom niet?






4.


Kan de Commissie aangeven of en zo ja, waar Nederland en andere lidstaten de schade kunnen verhalen die wordt veroorzaakt door immigratie via de 




„Griekse route”? Zo niet, waarom niet?
Antwoord van mevrouw Malmström namens de Commissie
(28 maart 2012)
De Commissie heeft een allesomvattende strategie geformuleerd om illegale migratiestromen van Turkije naar Griekenland aan te pakken en heeft verschillende, onder andere operationele maatregelen getroffen die door Frontex zullen worden gecoördineerd. Om met deze strategie resultaten te behalen, is het belangrijk de huidige Frontex-activiteiten aan de Griekse-Turkse grens te intensiveren, de onderlinge samenwerking tussen instanties te versterken, met name tussen Frontex, Europol en EASO, en Griekenland te blijven helpen met de ontwikkeling van een efficiënt grensbeheersysteem, dat onder andere de  terugkeer van illegale migranten omvat. 
De Commissie blijft erbij de Turkse autoriteiten op aandringen om de door onderhandelingen bereikte overnameovereenkomst te ondertekenen, de daarin geformuleerde overnameverplichtingen volledig na te komen, illegale migratie beter te voorkomen en samenwerking met Europol en Frontex aan te gaan op dit gebied. Op 15 maart 2012 werden deze kwesties in Ankara met de Turkse autoriteiten besproken.
Een eventuele sluiting van de binnengrenzen tussen lidstaten in het Schengengebied is alleen mogelijk bij wijze van uitzonderlijke en tijdelijke maatregel door een lidstaat in geval van ernstige bedreigingen van de openbare orde en de binnenlandse veiligheid.
De beveiliging van EU-paspoorten is sterk verbeterd door de opneming van twee biometrische identificatiemiddelen, namelijk een gezichtsopname en vingerafdrukken. Deze twee elementen zijn opgeslagen op de chip van het document. Daarmee wordt een betrouwbaar verband gelegd tussen de rechtmatige houder en het document wanneer de inhoud en de authenticiteit van de chip worden gecontroleerd door nationale rechtshandhavingsautoriteiten, met name bij grenspassages. Fraude zou bijgevolg gemakkelijker op te sporen moeten zijn.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001507/12
to the Commission
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 February 2012)

Subject: Greeks hire EU passports out to illegal immigrants
Out of (an estimated) half a million ‘illegal’ immigrants entering the EU every year, 90 % are thought to probably arrive through Turkey and Greece. Criminal gangs in Greece have a large supply of legal European identity documents. They offer to hire such identity documents out to anybody wishing to enter the EU. Documents enabling their holders to apply for social security benefits are also available, as are documents certifying that the person in question is under 18, ensuring that the authorities will be more lenient with them.







1.


Is the Commission familiar with the reports 










1.


Is the Commission familiar with the reports 



‘Illegals enter UK on “passports for hire”’ (174) and ‘In Griekenland kun je een paspoort “huren” om de EU in te komen’ [‘You can “rent” a passport in Greece to enter the EU’] (175)?





2.


Does the Commission condone illegal immigration by this 




‘Greek route’? If so, why? If not, what measures will the Commission take against Greece?






3.


Is the Commission prepared — at least until an end has been put to the 




‘Greek route’ — to allow the Netherlands and other Member States to close their borders to migrants who enter the EU by the ‘Greek route’? If not, why not?






4.


Can the Commission indicate whether and where the Netherlands and other Member States can recover the damages caused by immigration via the 




‘Greek route’? If not, why not?
Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)
The Commission has put in place a comprehensive strategy to tackle irregular migration flows entering from Turkey into Greece and has adopted several measures, including some of operational nature to be coordinated by Frontex. For this strategy to achieve results, it is important to enhance the current Frontex operations at the Greek/Turkish border, to increase inter-agency cooperation, notably between Frontex, Europol and EASO, and to continue to assist Greece in building an efficient border management system, including the return of irregular migrants. 
The Commission keeps on encouraging Turkish authorities to sign the negotiated readmission agreement, to fully implement its incumbent readmission obligations, to better prevent irregular migration, and to cooperate with Europol and Frontex on this endeavour. Discussion on these issues with Turkish authorities took place in Ankara on 15 March 2012.
As regards the possibility of the closure of internal borders between Member States in the Schengen area, this would only be possible — as an exceptional and temporary measure by a Member State — to the extent that it is considered necessary on account of a serious threat to public policy or internal security.
The security of EU passports has been substantially improved by the inclusion of two biometric identifiers: a facial image and fingerprints. These two elements are stored in a chip in the document. A reliable link between the genuine holder and the document is therefore established when the content and the authenticity of the chip are checked by national law enforcement authorities, in particular when borders are crossed. Fraud should therefore be more easily detectable.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-001520/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(14 de fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: Financiamento do Programa Marco Polo II
Considerando que:






—


 O armador espanhol «Naviera Armas» ganhou recentemente a concessão de uma linha entre Melia, no sul de Espanha, Cartagena e o porto de Séje, no sul de França;










—


 O mesmo armador espanhol abandonou recentemente a linha que vinha operando com um ferry entre os portos de Las Palmas, nas Canárias, Funchal, na Madeira, e Portimão, no sul de Portugal, alegadamente por não terem sido satisfeitas as suas exigências de uma isenção total de taxas portuárias no porto do Funchal;










—


 O transporte marítimo entre duas regiões ultraperiféricas como a Madeira e as Canárias e a subsequente ligação com o continente português se revestem de capital importância para a mobilidade de pessoas e mercadorias, particularmente pelas características e polivalência do tipo de navio em causa;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







A nova linha a operar pelo armador espanhol «Naviera Armas» entre Melia, no sul de Espanha, Cartagena e o porto de Séje, no sul de França, beneficiou de algum tipo de apoio ou financiamento comunitário, nomeadamente através do Programa Marco Polo II?











Em caso afirmativo, quais os montantes em causa e em que condições foram atribuídos?











Existe algum programa comunitário que possa financiar o restabelecimento de uma linha de transporte marítimo a operar por ferry entre os portos de Las Palmas, nas Canárias, Funchal, na Madeira, e Portimão, no sul de Portugal?











Existe algum programa comunitário que possa financiar a diminuição dos custos logísticos inerentes a uma linha de transporte marítimo a operar por ferry entre os portos de Las Palmas, nas Canárias, Funchal, na Madeira, e Portimão, no sul de Portugal, nomeadamente, a subsidiação das taxas portuárias a suportar pelos operadores nos diversos portos envolvidos?




Resposta dada por Siim Kallas em nome da Comissão
(12 de março de 2012)






1. e 2.


A Comissão informa o Senhor Deputado de que, até à data, não foi concedido qualquer apoio da União, através do programa Marco Polo, ao armador Naviera Armas, para o referido projeto.











3.


No respeitante ao programa Marco Polo, a Comissão chama a atenção do Senhor Deputado para o facto de, em princípio, o programa apoiar serviços de transporte baseados no objetivo de transferência modal. Dado não poderem existir itinerários rodoviários entre Las Palmas, Funchal e Portimão, não se encontram preenchidas as condições de transferência modal determinadas pelo Regulamento (CE) n.° 1692/2006










3.


No respeitante ao programa Marco Polo, a Comissão chama a atenção do Senhor Deputado para o facto de, em princípio, o programa apoiar serviços de transporte baseados no objetivo de transferência modal. Dado não poderem existir itinerários rodoviários entre Las Palmas, Funchal e Portimão, não se encontram preenchidas as condições de transferência modal determinadas pelo Regulamento (CE) n.° 1692/2006




 (176). Por conseguinte, o referido projeto não pode ser financiado pelo programa Marco Polo. 





4.


Não é possível recorrer a quaisquer outros programas da UE para subvencionar diretamente a exploração de linhas regulares de transporte marítimo, incluindo o pagamento de taxas portuárias. Contudo, os programas que permitem conceder apoio ao desenvolvimento dos portos e das infraestruturas conexas, como o programa RTE‐T, ou os fundos regionais, podem ter um impacto positivo nos serviços marítimos.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-001520/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Funding from the Marco Polo II programme
The Spanish shipping company Naviera Armas was recently awarded the concession for a line between Melia, in southern Spain, Cartagena and the port of Sète, in southern France.
The same Spanish shipping company recently closed a ferry line that it had been operating between the ports of Las Palmas, in the Canary Islands, Funchal, in Madeira, and Portimão, in southern Portugal, allegedly because its demands for total exemption from harbour dues in the port of Funchal had not been satisfied.
Maritime transport between two extremely remote regions like Madeira and the Canary Islands and their connection to the Portuguese mainland are of the greatest importance to the mobility of people and goods, particularly because of the characteristics and multi-purpose nature of the type of vessel in question.
Given the above, the Commission is asked to answer the following:







Has the new line to be operated by the Spanish shipping company Naviera Armas between Melia, in southern Spain, Cartagena and the port of Sète, in southern France, benefited from any type of Union support or funding, specifically through the Marco Polo II programme?











If so, how much has it been awarded and under what conditions?











Is there a Union programme that could finance the reestablishment of a maritime transport line to be operated by ferry between the ports of Las Palmas, in the Canary Islands, Funchal, in Madeira, and Portimão, in southern Portugal?











Is there a Union programme that could provide funding to reduce the logistical costs arising from the operation of a maritime ferry line between the ports of Las Palmas, in the Canary Islands, Funchal, in Madeira, and Portimão, in southern Portugal, specifically by subsidising the harbour dues payable by the operators in the different ports involved?




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(12 March 2012)






1 and 2.


The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that so far no Union support has been granted through the Marco Polo programme to Naviera Armas, for the abovementioned project.










3.


As far as Marco Polo is concerned, the Commission would like to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that the programme in principle supports transport services based on modal shift objective. Since road routes are physically impossible between Las Palmas, Funchal and Portimão, the modal shift conditions as determined in the Regulation (EC) 1692/2006 (177), are not fulfilled. Consequently, there is no possibility for Marco Polo to finance the abovementioned project. 










4.


No other EU programmes can be used for directly subsidysing the operations of maritime lines, including the payment of harbour dues. However, programmes which can support ports development and infrastructure related to ports, such as the Trans-European Transport Network programme or regional funds can have a favourable impact on martime services.




(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-001529/12
a Bizottság számára
Mészáros Alajos (PPE)
(2012. február 16.)

Tárgy: A Jaslovské Bohunice-i atomerőmű leállításához nyújtandó pénzügyi támogatásról
Az európai uniós csatlakozási tárgyalások során Bulgária, Litvánia és Szlovákia kötelezte magát, hogy leállítja, majd leszereli az országaikban működő atomerőművek egy részét. Szlovákia esetében ez a Jaslovské Bohunice-i V1 atomerőmű 1. és 2. reaktorára vonatkozik.
Az előrehozott leállítás rendkívüli terheit figyelembe véve, az Európai Unió kötelezettséget vállalt arra, hogy pénzügyi támogatást nyújt a leszereléséhez, ezért 2013 végéig 2847,8 millió euró pénzügyi támogatást különített el erre a célra (1367 millió euró Litvánia, 613 millió euró Szlovákia és 867,8 millió euró Bulgária részére).
A 2014–2020-as pénzügyi keret elkészítésekor Szlovákia további pénzügyi forrást igényelt. A Bizottság „Költségvetés Európának 2020” című jelentése alapján 553 millió eurót különítettek el a három tagállam részére. Ebből a keretből a szlovák fél számára szánt összeg 115 millió euró, amely határozottan nem elég a leszerelés költségeinek fedezésére, ugyanis a végleges költségek nagysága eléri az 1146 millió eurót. Tekintettel a Szlovák Nemzeti Nukleáris Alap elégtelen pénzügyi helyzetére további támogatásra van szükség, ezért a pénzügyi támogatás összegét 300 millió euróra kellene növelni.
— Milyen módszert alkalmaz a Bizottság a javaslatában (178) a pénzügyi támogatás szétosztásánál a három tagállam között?
— A 2014‐2020-as időszakra vonatkozó költségvetésből miért csak 553 millió eurót különített el erre a célra?
— A pénzügyi támogatást Szlovákia és Litvánia esetében miért 2017-ig határozta meg, ha a leszerelési munkálatok 2020-ig tartanak?
Günther Oettinger válasza a Bizottság nevében
(2012. március 12.)






1.


A csatlakozási szerződés értelmében az Európai Unió (EU) megfelelő pénzügyi támogatás biztosítását vállalta. A felülvizsgált költségbecslés alapján az EU által biztosított támogatás meghaladja a leszerelési költségek 60%-át, így a pénzügyi támogatás 




„megfelelőnek” minősül. A pénzügyi támogatásnak a három tagállam közötti szétosztása az egyes országok által az erőművek leszerelése terén vállalt erőfeszítéseket tükrözi.






2.


A folyamatok során a biztonsági szempontok garantálása, valamint a leszerelés és a hulladékkezelés finanszírozása végső soron a tagállamok feladata.




Az 553 millió EUR összegű javasolt uniós támogatás összhangban van „Az Európa 2020 stratégia költségvetése” című bizottsági közleményben foglaltakkal. A leszereléshez nyújtott pénzügyi támogatás fokozatos csökkentése azt a politikai szándékot tükrözi, hogy az egyes tagállamok vegyék át a leszereléssel kapcsolatos szerep— és felelősségvállalást, ideértve a pénzügyi felelősségvállalást is.






3.


Azt szem előtt tartva, hogy a pénzügyi felelősségvállalást végül teljes egészében a tagállamoknak kell átvenniük, a támogatás a csatlakozást követő 14 évig folyósítható. Éppen ezért az egyenlő elbánás biztosítása érdekében a leszereléshez nyújtott uniós pénzügyi támogatás Szlovákia és Litvánia esetében 2017-ig nyújtható, Bulgária esetében pedig (mivel 2007-ben csatlakozott az EU-hoz), 2020-ig.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-001529/12
to the Commission
Alajos Mészáros (PPE)
(16 February 2012)

Subject: Provision of financial assistance for decommissioning the Jaslovské Bohunice nuclear power plant
In the context of the negotiations for accession to the European Union, Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia undertook to close and subsequently decommission some of the nuclear power plants operating in their countries. In the case of Slovakia, this concerns reactor units 1 and 2 at the Jaslovské Bohunice V1 nuclear power plant.
Given the exceptional burden imposed by early closure, the European Union made the commitment to provide financial assistance for decommissioning. This is why it has earmarked EUR 2 847.8 million in financial assistance for this purpose until the end of 2013 (EUR 1 367 million for Lithuania, EUR 613 million for Slovakia and EUR 867.8 million for Bulgaria).
During the preparations for the 2014‐2020 financial framework, Slovakia has requested additional financial resources. Based on the Commission’s report entitled ‘A budget for Europe 2020’, EUR 553 million has been allocated to the three Member States. The amount earmarked for Slovakia from this envelope is EUR 115 million, which is definitely not sufficient to cover the decommissioning costs, as the final costs will amount to EUR 1 146 million. In view of the inadequate financial situation of the Slovak National Nuclear Fund, further assistance is required. This is why the amount of financial assistance should be increased to EUR 300 million.
— What method is the Commission using in its proposal (179) for distributing the financial assistance among the three Member States?
— Why has only EUR 553 million been earmarked for this purpose from the budget for the period 2014‐2020?
— Why has the financial assistance for Slovakia and Lithuania been specified until 2017 if the decommissioning work lasts until 2020?
Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(12 March 2012)
1. In accordance with the Accession Treaty, the European Union (EU) is committed to providing adequate financial support. Based on revised cost estimation, EU coverage exceeds 60 % of the decommissioning costs and such financial support is considered to be ‘adequate’. The distribution of the financial resources between the countries concerned reflects the decommissioning efforts to be undertaken.
2. It remains the ultimate responsibility of Member States to ensure safety as well as financing of decommissioning and waste management.
The proposed EU support of EUR 553 million is in accordance with the Commission's Communication ‘A Budget for Europe 2020’. It is the expression of the political intention to gradually phase out decommissioning financing in order for each Member State to take over its financial responsibility and ownership for decommissioning.
3. Taking into consideration the transition to full Member State financial ownership, support is limited to a period of 14 years following accession. Thus, to ensure equal treatment, EU decommissioning assistance for Lithuania and Slovakia would end in 2017, while for Bulgaria (having joined the EU in 2007) in 2020.
(Latviešu valodas versija)
Jautājums, uz kuru jāatbild rakstiski, E-001581/12
Komisijai
Krišjānis Kariņš (PPE)
(2012. gada 9. februāris)

Temats: Par viena zīmola preču atšķirīgo kvalitāti dažādās dalībvalstīs
Tā kā cilvēku mobilitāte ir izplatīta un viena zīmola preces ir nopērkamas dažādās dalībvalstīs, patērētājiem ir viegli novērtēt savus pirkumus.
Diemžēl bieži vien to pašu preču kvalitāte atšķiras atkarībā no iegādes vietas. Piemēram, iegādājoties preci Rietumeiropā un salīdzinot to ar tādu pašu preci, kas iegādāta Austrumeiropā, nākas secināt, ka Rietumeiropā iegādātā ir kvalitatīvāka. Izvērstu pētījumu šajā jomā ir veikusi Slovākijas Patērētāju asociācija, un tas apstiprina Austrumeiropas iedzīvotāju bažas.
Ko Komisija dara, lai kontrolētu kvalitāti ne tikai pārtikas produktiem, bet arī citām precēm, un panāktu, ka visā Eiropas Savienībā būtu nopērkamas vienādi kvalitatīvas preces?
Atbildi Komisijas vārdā sniedza Džons Dalli
(2012. gada 22. marts)
ES tiesību aktiem par pārtikas nekaitīgumu un citu ražojumu drošumu ir mērķis nodrošināt augstu cilvēka veselības aizsardzības līmeni, vienlaikus nodrošinot efektīvu iekšējā tirgus darbību. To īstenošanā ļoti svarīga loma ir dalībvalstīm. Vairākiem konkrētiem produktiem, piemēram, augļu sulām, ievārījumiem, ES papildu tiesību aktos noteiktas kvalitātes prasības.
ES noteikumi ne vien paredz nodrošināt Eiropā pārdoto produktu nekaitīgumu, bet to mērķis ir arī sniegt pienācīgu informāciju patērētājiem. Nosakot stingras prasības, piemēram, par pārtikas marķēšanu, tiesību akti nodrošina, ka patērētāji ir pilnībā informēti par lietotās pārtikas veidu un īpašībām. Pārtikas sastāvs ir skaidri jānorāda sastāvdaļu sarakstā un ar īpašu apzīmējumu jāraksturo produkta veids.
Ja vien produkti atbilst tiesību aktiem, to sastāvs vai kvalitāte var atšķirties atkarībā no patērētāju vēlmēm vai pirktspējas, ražošanas līniju tehniskajām specifikācijām un izejvielu pieejamības un piekļuves tām. Kā savus produktus pozicionēt katras valsts tirgū, izlemj uzņēmumi.
Pasākumi, kuru mērķis ir uzlabot tirgus pārskatāmību patērētājiem, izklāstīti arī divos Komisijas paziņojumos par labāku pārtikas apgādes ķēdes darbību (2009. gads) (180) un par e-tirdzniecību (2012. gads) (181). 
Komisija aicina godāto Parlamenta deputātu ielūkoties atbildēs uz jautājumiem E‐04388/2011, E-05055/2011, E-05563/2011, E‐05756/2011, E-09773/2011, E-11053/2011 un E-11349/2011 (182).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001581/12
to the Commission
Krišjānis Kariņš (PPE)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Divergent quality of goods sold under the same label in various Member States
As people are now widely mobile and same-label goods may be purchased in various Member States, consumers can easily evaluate their purchases.
Unfortunately, the quality of the same goods all too often varies according to where they are obtained. For example, when comparing an item obtained in Western Europe with the same item obtained in Eastern Europe, the conclusion is that the one obtained in Western Europe is of a higher quality. A detailed survey in this area has been carried out by the Slovak Association of Consumers, which confirms Eastern Europeans’ concerns.
What is the Commission doing to check the quality of not only food products but also other goods in order to ensure that goods of the same quality can be purchased throughout the European Union?
Answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(22 March 2012)
EU food and non-food product safety legislations are designed to ensure a high level of protection for human health whilst ensuring the effective functioning of the internal market. Member States play a key role in their implementation. Additional EU legislation imposes quality requirements on a number of specific products, e.g. fruit juice or jam.
Besides ensuring safety of products sold in Europe, the EU rules also aim to provide consumers with appropriate information. Through stringent requirements on food labelling, for example, the legislation ensures that consumers are fully informed as to the nature and characteristics of the food they consume. The composition of foodstuffs has to be clearly indicated in the ingredients list and the nature of the product has to be specified by name.
As long as products comply with legislation, differences in composition or quality may occur due to consumer preferences or purchasing power, technical specifications of production lines as well as availability and access to raw materials. Businesses operators decide how to position their products on national markets.
Two Commission communications, on a better functioning food supply chain from 2009 (183) and on E-commerce from 2012 (184), also set out actions aimed at increasing market transparency for consumers. 
The Commission would also refer the Honourable Member to the replies to Questions E‐04388/2011, E‐05055/2011, E‐05563/2011, E‐05756/2011, E‐09773/2011, E‐11053/2011 and E‐11349/2011 (185). 
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-001582/12
à Comissão
Vital Moreira (S&D)
(9 de Fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: Aplicação do Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa no Jornal Oficial da União Europeia
Tendo verificado que o Jornal Oficial da União Europeia, na versão de língua portuguesa, mantém a grafia anterior à entrada em vigor, em janeiro de 2009, do novo Acordo Ortográfico de Língua Portuguesa, pergunto se e quando pretende a Comissão adotar nos textos oficiais a grafia resultante do mencionado Acordo?
Resposta dada por Viviane Reding em nome da Comissão
(30 de Março de 2012)
Em sintonia com a adoção por parte do Diário da República (jornal oficial português) da nova ortografia portuguesa, as instituições, os órgãos e os organismos da União, incluindo o Serviço das Publicações da União Europeia (OPOCE), decidiram aplicar o «Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa» a partir de 1 de janeiro de 2012.
De facto, desde 1 de janeiro de 2012, os serviços de correção linguística do OPOCE aplicam o novo acordo em todos os documentos produzidos. No entanto, e tendo em conta a duração inerente ao processo de produção de certos documentos, não pôde evitar-se a coexistência da antiga e da nova ortografia durante um período inicial, o que explica que alguns dos números do Jornal Oficial publicados após 1 de janeiro do corrente ano contivessem ainda textos redigidos com base na antiga ortografia. 
Para assegurar a transparência junto dos leitores do Jornal Oficial, o OPOCE incluiu informações a esse propósito nos números publicados no final de 2011.
As restantes publicações do OPOCE respeitam também a nova ortografia da língua portuguesa. Os conteúdos dos sítios Web estão a ser revistos com vista a integrarem as correções necessárias. O Código de Redação Interinstitucional, coordenado pelo OPOCE, estará brevemente disponível em linha com uma nova versão que aplica os princípios do novo acordo ortográfico.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001582/12
to the Commission
Vital Moreira (S&D)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Implementing the Portuguese Language Orthographic Agreement in the Official Journal of the European Union

I have ascertained that the Portuguese edition of the Official Journal is continuing to use the spelling pre-dating the entry into force of the new Portuguese Language Orthographic Agreement in January 2009. Can the Commission therefore say whether and when it intends to adopt the spelling resulting from this Agreement for official texts?
(Version française)
S'alignant sur le passage par le Diário da República (journal officiel portugais) à la nouvelle orthographe portugaise, les institutions, organes et organismes de l'Union, y compris l'Office des publications de l'Union européenne (OP), ont décidé d'appliquer l'«Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa» à partir du 1er janvier 2012.
De fait, depuis le 1er janvier 2012, les services de correction linguistique de l'OP appliquent le nouvel accord dans tous les documents produits. Cependant, et compte tenu de la durée du processus de production de certains de ces documents, la coexistence de l'ancienne et de la nouvelle orthographe pendant une période initiale n'a pu être évitée, ce qui explique que quelques éditions du Journal officiel publiées après le 1er janvier contiennent encore des textes rédigés selon l'ancienne orthographe.
Pour assurer la transparence auprès des lecteurs du Journal officiel, l'OP a inclus dans les éditions de la fin 2011 une information à ce sujet.
Les autres publications éditées par l'OP respectent la nouvelle orthographe de la langue portugaise. Les sites web sont en cours de révision en vue d'y intégrer les corrections nécessaires. Le Code de rédaction interinstitutionnel, coordonné par l'OP, sera bientôt disponible en ligne dans une version qui applique les principes du nouvel accord.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-001583/12
à Comissão
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(9 de Fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: Produção de combustíveis a partir de alimentos
Numa entrevista à Agência Lusa, uma consultora da Organização das Nações Unidas para a Alimentação e Agricultura (FAO) afirmou que considera «ridícula» a produção de biocombustíveis a partir de alimentos e defende a retirada de subsídios a esta indústria.
«É um uso ridículo para os alimentos quando há pessoas a morrer de fome», afirmou a especialista em mercado e diretora da Bolsa de Chicago.
A representante da FAO disse ainda que a utilização de alimentos para produzir combustíveis tem um impacto enorme na disponibilidade e nos preços, apontando casos como o dos Estados Unidos da América, onde 40 por cento do milho cultivado é usado em biocombustíveis.
Pergunto à Comissão:
Que avaliação faz a Comissão acerca da produção de combustíveis a partir de alimentos?
Existem, ou estão previstos no espaço comunitário, subsídios afetos a este tipo de indústria? Qual ou quais?
Resposta dada por Günther Oettinger em nome da Comissão
(11 de abril de 2012)
A Comissão considera que os biocombustíveis podem contribuir positivamente para os objetivos climáticos e energéticos da UE, caso todas as questões da sustentabilidade sejam corretamente abordadas. Um relatório recente da Comissão concluiu que os aumentos dos preços dos alimentos podem ter sido causados por uma série de fatores, que não apenas o aumento da produção de combustíveis (186). A Comissão irá acompanhar um certo número de questões ambientais e sociais relacionadas com a produção de biocombustíveis, incluindo segurança alimentar, e apresentará um relatório sobre as mesmas de dois em dois anos. O primeiro relatório bienal será publicado antes do final de 2012.
Há várias formas de subvenções que se aplicam aos biocombustíveis a nível da UE. As principais fontes para projetos de energia renovável a nível da UE são o Sétimo Programa‐Quadro de Investigação e o programa Energia Inteligente — Europa. 
Os Fundos Estruturais e de Coesão oferecem possibilidades de financiamento para investimentos, mas a seleção dos projetos é da responsabilidade do Estado-Membro. 
Finalmente, após sucessivas reformas da Política Agrícola Comum, a UE alinhou uma vasta proporção dos seus pagamentos diretos com as normas «caixa verde» da OMC de modo que esses pagamentos foram dissociados de qualquer tipo de produção. Esta mudança significa que os agricultores são livres de escolher o seu mercado que, naturalmente, pode incluir produção de matérias-primas para os biocombustíveis. Tal apoio não pode, por conseguinte, ser considerado como uma subvenção específica para a indústria de biocombustíveis.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001583/12
to the Commission
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Food-based fuel production
In an interview with the Portuguese news agency Lusa, a UN adviser attached to the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) has stated that she believes food-based biofuel production is ‘ridiculous’, and is defending the withdrawal of subsidies to that industry.
The market specialist and director of the Chicago Board of Trade has stated that ‘this is a ridiculous way for food to be used when there are people dying of hunger’.
The FAO representative also said that food-based fuel production has an enormous impact on availability and prices, and gave examples of cases such as that of the US, where 40 % of the maize grown is used in biofuels.
In view of the above:
How does the Commission view food-based fuel production?
Are there currently EU subsidies available for this kind of industry, or are there plans for such subsidies? Which ones?
Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(11 April 2012)
The Commission believes that biofuels can make a positive contribution toward the EU's climate and energy objectives, if all sustainability issues are properly addressed. A recent report from the Commission's concluded that the increase s in food prices were likely to have been caused by a number of factors other than just increasing biofuels production (187). The Commission will monitor a number of environmental and social issues related to the production of biofuels, including food security, and report on them every second year. The first biennial report will be published before the end of 2012.
Several forms of subsidies at EU level apply to biofuels. The main sources for renewable energy research projects at the EU level are the Seventh Framework Programme and the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme. 
The Structural and Cohesion Funds offer funding possibilities for investment, but the selection of projects is the responsibility of the Member State. 
Finally, following successive reforms of the CAP, the EU has aligned the vast bulk of its direct payments with WTO ‘green box rules’ such that these payments have been de-linked from any type of production. This in turn means that farmers are free to choose their market outlet, which of course can include biofuel feedstock production. Hence such support cannot be considered as a specific subsidy to the biofuel industry. 
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-001587/12
à Comissão
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(9 de Fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: Violação da lei da proteção de dados
Segundo notícia publicada na imprensa espanhola, uma empresa de telecomunicações, através do seu site da internet, revela identidades introduzindo apenas um número de telefone fixo. Dados como a morada, o nome do proprietário e até contas do facebook passam a estar disponíveis a qualquer pessoa que aceda ao site da empresa.
A notícia acrescenta ainda que esta informação é disponibilizada sem o consentimento prévio dos visados.
Pergunto à Comissão:






—


Tem conhecimento desta situação?










—


Qual o parecer da Comissão sobre esta matéria?










—


Entende ou não a Comissão que os dados disponibilizados violam regras básicas de privacidade, enquanto direitos fundamentais?




Resposta dada por Viviane Reding em nome da Comissão 
(12 de abril de 2012)
A Comissão está consciente dos riscos relacionados com os serviços de pesquisa da morada a partir de um número de telefone. Tal como mencionado no artigo 6.° da Diretiva 95/46, os dados de caráter pessoal devem ser «Objeto de um tratamento leal e lícito», … «Recolhidos para finalidades determinadas, explícitas e legítimas», … «Adequados, pertinentes e não excessivos relativamente às finalidades para que são recolhidos e para que são tratados posteriormente».
A Diretiva 2002/58/CE (188) estabelece, no seu artigo 12.°, que o fornecedor de listas públicas deve informar os assinantes antes de serem nelas inscritos, em particular no que diz respeito à função de pesquisa inversa. O assinante tem o direito de decidir se os seus dados devem ou não constar de listas públicas. A não inscrição numa lista pública é gratuita. Os Estados-Membros podem exigir que seja solicitado o consentimento adicional dos assinantes para qualquer utilização de uma lista pública que não seja para a mera busca dos elementos de contacto das pessoas com base no nome e, quando necessário, num número limitado de outros dados. 
Sem prejuízo dos poderes da Comissão enquanto guardiã dos tratados, a supervisão e a aplicação da legislação sobre a proteção de dados é da responsabilidade das autoridades competentes, em particular das autoridades de proteção de dados, que para Espanha é a «Agencia Española de Protección de Datos
». A Comissão não tem competência para verificar a conformidade do tratamento de dados, nem para investigar possíveis violações ou impor sanções.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001587/12
to the Commission
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Violation of data protection law
It has been reported in the Spanish press that a telecommunications company is revealing the identity of people using its website when their fixed telephone number is entered. Data including the address, the name of the owner and even Facebook accounts are available to anyone who accesses the company website.
It is further reported that this information is provided without the prior consent of those concerned.






—


Is the Commission aware of this situation?










—


What is the Commission’s view on the matter?










—


Is the Commission aware that making data available in this way is a violation of basic privacy regulations, and therefore of fundamental rights?




(Version française)
La Commission est consciente des risques liés à la prolifération de services d'annuaires inversés. Comme la Directive 95/46 le mentionne à l'article 6, les données à caractère personnel doivent être «traitées loyalement et licitement»,… «collectées pour des finalités déterminées, explicites et légitimes», … «adéquates, pertinentes et non excessives au regard des finalités pour lesquelles elles sont collectées et pour lesquelles elles sont traitées ultérieurement».
La Directive 2002/58/EC (189) exige à l'article 12 que le fournisseur d'un annuaire public informe les abonnés avant d'être inscrits, en particulier des fonctions de recherche inverse. L'abonné a le droit de décider si ses données personnelles doivent figurer dans un annuaire public. La non-inscription dans un annuaire public d'abonnés est gratuite. Les États membres peuvent exiger que le consentement des abonnés soit également requis pour toute finalité d'annuaire public autre que la simple recherche des coordonnées d'une personne sur la base de son nom et, au besoin, d'un nombre limité d'autres paramètres. 
Sans préjudice des pouvoirs de la Commission en tant que gardienne des traités, la supervision et la mise en œuvre de la législation protection des données est du ressort des autorités compétentes, en particulier les autorités de protection des données, c'est-à-dire en Espagne la «

Agencia Española de Protección de Datos

»
. La Commission n'a pas de compétences pour vérifier la conformité des traitements de données ou faire des enquêtes sur les possibles violations ou pour imposer des sanctions.
(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-001619/12
a Bizottság számára
Mészáros Alajos (PPE)
(2012. február 9.)

Tárgy: A munkavállalás szabadságának korlátozása
A rendelkezésünkre álló iratokból egyértelműen kitűnik, hogy az érintett személyek tanári állás gyakorlásához szükséges képesítéseket szereztek Magyarországon, és végzettségüket a szlovák hatóságok/intézmények egyenértékűnek ismerték el (190). A PaedDr (paedagogicae doctor) képzésből kizárólag azzal az indokkal zárták ki az érintetteket – nagy részüket közvetlenül a záróvizsgákat megelőzően –, hogy a vonatkozó szlovák szabályozás e képzésben való részvételt kizárólag Mgr egyetemi végzettséggel rendelkezők számára teszi lehetővé.
Álláspontunk szerint is bizonytalannak tekinthető ebben a helyzetben a 2005/36/EK irányelv alkalmazhatósága. Az uniós jog azonban megköveteli, hogy a tagállamok az oktatás területén meglévő hatásköreik gyakorlása során ne akadályozzák többek között a munkavállalás szabadságát (191). Másrészt az az elv, miszerint a tagállamoknak figyelembe kell venniük a más tagállamokban megszerzett végzettségeket, a szerződések által biztosított alapszabadságok részét képezi, így az nem függhet egy irányelv megalkotásától/alkalmazhatóságától (192).
Ha a PaedDr képzettség nem elengedhetetlen feltétele Szlovákiában a tanári szakma gyakorlásának, e képzettség előnyt jelent a munkavállaláshoz, gyorsabb szakmai előmenetelt, magasabb fizetést tesz lehetővé (193). Azok, akik – a tanári képzettség megszerzésének ideje alatt – nem Szlovákiában tartózkodtak, rosszabb helyzetbe kerülnek a szlovák állampolgárokhoz képest, ami felveti az állampolgárság szerinti diszkriminációt a munkavállalás szabadságával összefüggésben (194).
A hivatkozott döntések, valamint a Bíróság gyakorlatának fényében a Bizottság bizonyítottnak találja-e az adott kérdésben az uniós jog megsértését?
Androulla Vassiliou válasza a Bizottság nevében
(2012. április 17.)
A Bizottság először is kiemelné, hogy míg elsősorban a tagállamok felelősek az oktatási tartalomért és oktatási rendszerük megszervezéséért, az Európai Unió működéséről szóló szerződés (EUSz.) 165. cikke értelmében az oktatáshoz való hozzáféréssel kapcsolatos kérdések a Szerződés hatálya alá tartoznak (lásd.: 293/83. sz. Gravier-ügy [1985] EBHT 593. o, 19. pont). Az EUSz. 165. cikke alapján a tagállami egyetemek, mielőtt egy másik tagállamban szerzett diplomával rendelkező hallgatót egyetemük képzésére bocsáthatónak minősítenének, kérhetik a hallgatótól diplomája előzetes akadémiai elismerési eljárás keretében történő elismertetését. Ugyanakkor az összes olyan jelentkező általános kizárása, aki nem rendelkezik egy bizonyos nemzeti diplomával, alapvetően ellentétes lenne az uniós joggal. Pontosabban: ha a jelentkezők az adott tagállam állampolgárai, tekinthető úgy, hogy ezen intézkedések büntetik őket azért, mert úgy döntöttek, hogy külföldön folytatnak tanulmányokat, ami ellentétben állhat az EUSz. 21. cikkével; amennyiben pedig a jelentkezők egy másik tagállam állampolgárai, egy ilyen kizárás nemzeti alapon történő hátrányos megkülönböztetésnek minősülhet, amit az EUSz. 18. cikke tilt.
Jelen esetben a rendelkezésünkre álló információk alapján nem derül ki világosan, hogy a szlovák hatóságok ténylegesen egy ilyen általános kizárást alkalmaztak-e. A Bizottság ezért szívesen venne a tisztelt képviselőtől minden olyan további információt, ami segíthet e kérdés tisztázásában.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001619/12
to the Commission
Alajos Mészáros (PPE)
(9 February 2012)

Subject: Limiting the freedom of employment
It is clear from documents at my disposal that certain persons have obtained qualifications in Hungary necessary for employment as teachers, and Slovak authorities/institutions have recognised their education as equivalent (195). They were excluded from the PaedDr (paedagogicae doctor) programme, most of them immediately prior to their final examinations, only on the grounds that the relevant Slovak regulations allow participation in this programme for people with Mgr university qualifications only.
I agree that the applicability of Directive 2005/36/EC may be considered uncertain in these circumstances. EC law, however, requires Member States not to limit, inter alia, freedom of employment when exercising their power related to education (196). Secondly, the principle according to which Member States should recognise qualifications obtained in other Member States is one of the fundamental freedoms provided for by the Treaties and therefore cannot depend on the adoption/applicability of a directive (197).
If the PaedDr qualification is not a condition sine qua non‐for employment of a teacher in Slovakia, this qualification offers an advantage in obtaining employment — it makes faster professional development and higher salaries possible (198). Those who, during the period when they obtained their teacher’s qualifications, were not in Slovakia, get into a more difficult situation as compared to Slovak citizens, which raises the issue of discrimination on grounds of citizenship in relation to the freedom of employment (199).
In light of the decisions referred to and the case-law of the Court, does the Commission consider that there is clear evidence for the infringement of EC law in this situation?
Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission
(17 April 2012)
The Commission would first recall that, while Member States are primarily responsible for the content of the teaching and the organisation of their educational systems, in accordance with Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), matters concerning access to education fall within the scope of the Treaty (see Case 293/83 Gravier [1985] ECR 593, paragraph 19). Pursuant to Article 165 TFEU, universities in one Member State are entitled to require prospective students holding diplomas delivered in other Member States to undergo academic recognition proceedings prior to declaring them eligible for admission. However, a blanket exclusion of all applicants not in possession of a certain national diploma would in principle be incompatible with EC law. More specifically, if the applicants hold the nationality of that Member State, the measure in question could be viewed as penalising them for having chosen to study abroad, in possible contradiction with Article 21 TFEU; if the applicants hold the nationality of another Member State, such an exclusion could amount to discrimination on grounds of nationality prohibited by Article 18 TFEU. 
In the present case, it is not clear from the information available whether the Slovak authorities have indeed applied such a blanket exclusion. The Commission would therefore be grateful to the Honourable Member for any additional information that might clarify this matter. 
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001627/12
a la Comisión
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE) y Jill Evans (Verts/ALE)
(10 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Financiación para los campamentos de refugiados saharauis
Con motivo del panorama actual de crisis financiera y económica, muchos donantes públicos de ayuda humanitaria han reducido considerablemente sus contribuciones. A consecuencia de esta política, entre 90 000 y 165 000 refugiados saharauis que se encuentran en la provincia de Tinduf (Argelia) ahora tienen que afrontar todavía más dificultades. Sus condiciones de vida empeorarán y la reducción de fondos podría llevarles al borde de una crisis humanitaria. De acuerdo con la evaluación de las necesidades básicas realizada por la Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR), los refugiados saharauis necesitarán 32 millones de dólares estadounidenses, mientras que el Frente Polisario calcula que solo recibirán alrededor de 8,7 millones de dólares.
Por consiguiente, es de importancia capital que la Comisión adopte medidas en este ámbito y aumente su financiación para los refugiados saharauis, especialmente considerando la responsabilidad de determinados Estados miembros en cuanto a la situación actual del Sáhara Occidental, así como de las relaciones UE-Marruecos.
1. ¿Cómo valora la Comisión la situación humanitaria de los refugiados saharauis?
2. ¿Puede detallar la Comisión todos los fondos y programas correspondientes que ha destinado a los refugiados saharauis (en Tinduf y en otros lugares) durante los últimos cinco años, así como aquellos que tiene previsto asignar, directamente a las ONG o indirectamente a través de organismos?
3. ¿Está de acuerdo la Comisión en que es menos probable que la financiación canalizada a través de las ONG experimente gastos generales, a diferencia de la ayuda canalizada a través de organismos? ¿Qué canal prefiere la Comisión y por qué? ¿Qué medidas está tomando la Comisión a fin de reducir los gastos generales?
4. ¿Tiene intención la Comisión de incrementar la financiación para los refugiados saharauis? ¿Tiene algún indicio de que los dos contribuyentes más importantes, España e Italia, puedan reducir drásticamente sus donaciones?
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001628/12
a la Comisión
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE) y Jill Evans (Verts/ALE)
(10 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Financiación para los campamentos de refugiados saharauis
Con motivo del panorama actual de crisis financiera y económica, muchos donantes públicos de ayuda humanitaria han reducido considerablemente sus contribuciones. A consecuencia de esta política, entre 90 000 y 165 000 refugiados saharauis que se encuentran en la provincia de Tinduf (Argelia) ahora tienen que afrontar todavía más dificultades. Sus condiciones de vida empeorarán y la reducción de fondos podría llevarles al borde de una crisis humanitaria. De acuerdo con la evaluación de las necesidades básicas realizada por la Oficina del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (ACNUR), los refugiados saharauis necesitarán 32 millones de dólares estadounidenses, mientras que el Frente Polisario calcula que solo recibirán alrededor de 8,7 millones de dólares.
Por consiguiente, es de importancia capital que la Comisión adopte medidas en este ámbito y aumente su financiación para los refugiados saharauis, especialmente considerando la responsabilidad de determinados Estados miembros en cuanto a la situación actual del Sáhara Occidental, así como de las relaciones UE-Marruecos.






1.


¿Cómo valora la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante la situación humanitaria de los refugiados saharauis?










2.


¿Puede detallar la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante todos los fondos y programas correspondientes que ha destinado a los refugiados saharauis (en Tinduf y en otros lugares) durante los últimos cinco años, así como aquellos que tiene previsto asignar, directamente a las ONG o indirectamente a través de organismos?










3.


¿Está de acuerdo la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante en que es menos probable que la financiación canalizada a través de las ONG experimente gastos generales, a diferencia de la ayuda canalizada a través de organismos? ¿Qué canal prefiere la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante y por qué? ¿Qué medidas está tomando la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante a fin de reducir los gastos generales?










4.


¿Tiene intención la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante de incrementar la financiación para los refugiados saharauis? ¿Tiene la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante algún indicio de que los dos contribuyentes más importantes, España e Italia, puedan reducir drásticamente sus donaciones?




Respuesta conjunta de la Sra. Georgieva en nombre de la Comisión
(25 de mayo de 2012)
La ayuda proporcionada por la UE a los campamentos de refugiados saharauis ha consistido exclusivamente en ayuda humanitaria y asciende a alrededor de 50 millones de euros en los cinco últimos años, incluidos los 10 millones de euros del año 2012. Desde 2004, la ayuda humanitaria de la UE ha apoyado con regularidad y sin interrupción el programa de ayuda alimentaria del Programa Mundial de Alimentos (PMA) (a través de sus operaciones prolongadas de socorro y recuperación (OPSR)) en los campos de refugiados saharauis. En 2012, este apoyo se ha incrementado, con un aumento mensual del 14 % respecto a 2011 (financiación de 0,57 millones de euros al mes en 2012 en comparación con una financiación de 0,5 millones de euros al mes en 2011).
Por lo que se refiere a los gastos generales, cualquiera que sea el canal utilizado para prestar ayuda (ONG, organización internacional u organismo de las Naciones Unidas), la Unión Europea nunca ha pagado más del 7 % del importe total de los costes directos de los proyectos financiados con cargo al presupuesto de la UE. La elección de los socios con los que trabajar se realiza siempre a través de un análisis exhaustivo de las actividades propuestas, de los resultados de la actividad del socio de que se trate, la presencia y la experiencia previa en el campo de intervención, su eficiencia y su estabilidad financiera.
Por lo que se refiere a cualquier posible aumento de la financiación, la ayuda a los refugiados saharauis se financia sobre la base de las necesidades humanitarias que son supervisadas periódicamente por las organizaciones humanitarias presentes en los campos y por la Comisión, mediante su red de expertos altamente cualificados sobre el terreno, que efectúan evaluaciones de las necesidades y operaciones de control periódicamente. Es sobre la base de este análisis de los expertos como se decide la ayuda humanitaria de la UE para los refugiados saharauis. Se ha informado a la Comisión de que, probablemente, la ayuda humanitaria española a los refugiados saharauis no se verá reducida. No se ha informado de disminución alguna en la financiación de la organización de la sociedad civil italiana para los refugiados saharauis.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001627/12
aan de Commissie
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE) en Jill Evans (Verts/ALE)
(10 februari 2012)

Betreft: Financiering voor Sahrawi-vluchtelingenkampen
In de context van de huidige economische en financiële crisis hebben veel humanitaire hulporganisaties hun bijdragen aanzienlijk verminderd. Als gevolg van dit beleid worden de 90 000 tot 165 000 Sahrawi-vluchtelingen in de provincie Tindouf (Algerije) nu met nog grotere problemen geconfronteerd. Hun levensomstandigheden zullen verslechteren, en de vermindering van de financiële hulp zou hen tot aan de rand van een humanitaire crisis kunnen brengen. Volgens de door het Vluchtelingenagentschap van de Verenigde Naties (UNHCR) verrichte basisbehoeftenbeoordeling benodigen de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen 32 miljard USD, terwijl het Frente Polisario schat dat zij slechts 8,7 miljard USD zullen ontvangen.
Het is daarom van het grootste belang dat de Commissie actie onderneemt in deze kwestie en haar financiële hulp aan de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen verhoogd, voo.a. indachtig de verantwoordelijkheid van bepaalde lidstaten voor de huidige situatie in de Westelijke Sahara en de betrekkingen tussen de EU en Marokko.
1. Hoe beoordeelt de Commissie de humanitaire situatie van de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen?
2. Kan de Commissie in detail aangeven welke financiële middelen en overeenkomstige programma's zij gedurende de afgelopen vijf jaar heeft bestemd voor de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen (in Tindouf en elders), alsmede de middelen die zij voornemens is toe te wijzen, hetzij direct aan ngo's hetzij indirect via agentschappen?
3. Deelt de Commissie de mening dat bij financiële hulpverlening die via ngo's loopt, waarschijnlijk minder overheadkosten worden gemaakt dan wanneer de hulp via agentschappen loopt? Welk hulpkanaal geniet haar voorkeur, en waarom? Welke stappen onderneemt zij om de overheadkosten te verminderen?
4. Is de Commissie voornemens de financiële hulp aan Sahrawi-vluchtelingen te verhogen? Beschikt zij over aanwijzingen dat de twee grootste donoren, Spanje en Italië, hun donaties drastisch zouden kunnen gaan verminderen?
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001628/12
aan de Commissie
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE) en Jill Evans (Verts/ALE)
(10 februari 2012)

Betreft: Financiering voor Sahrawi-vluchtelingenkampen
In de context van de huidige economische en financiële crisis hebben veel humanitaire hulporganisaties hun bijdragen aanzienlijk verminderd. Als gevolg van dit beleid worden de 90 00. t/m 165 000 Sahrawi-vluchtelingen in de provincie Tindouf (Algerije) nu met nog grotere problemen geconfronteerd. Hun levensomstandigheden zullen verslechteren, en de vermindering van de financiële hulp zou hen tot aan de rand van een humanitaire crisis kunnen brengen. Volgens de door het Vluchtelingenagentschap van de Verenigde Naties (UNHCR) verrichte basisbehoeftenbeoordeling benodigen de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen 32 miljard USD, terwijl het Frente Polisario schat dat zij slechts 8,7 miljard USD zullen ontvangen.
Het is daarom van het grootste belang dat de Commissie actie onderneemt in deze kwestie en haar financiële hulp aan de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen verhoogd, voo.a. indachtig de verantwoordelijkheid van bepaalde lidstaten voor de huidige situatie in de Westelijke Sahara en de betrekkingen tussen de EU en Marokko.






1.


Hoe beoordeelt de vice-voorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger de humanitaire situatie van de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen?










2.


Kan de vice-voorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger in detail aangeven welke financiële middelen en overeenkomstige programma's hij gedurende de afgelopen vijf jaar heeft bestemd voor de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen (in Tindouf en elders), alsmede de middelen die hij voornemens is toe te wijzen, hetzij direct aan ngo's hetzij indirect via agentschappen?










3.


Deelt de vice-voorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger de mening dat bij financiële hulpverlening die via ngo's loopt, waarschijnlijk minder overheadkosten worden gemaakt dan wanneer de hulp via agentschappen loopt? Welk hulpkanaal geniet de voorkeur van de vice-voorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger en waarom? Welke stappen onderneemt de vice-voorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger om de overheadkosten te verminderen?










4.


Is de vice-voorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger voornemens de financiële hulp aan Sahrawi-vluchtelingen te verhogen? Beschikt de vice-voorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger over aanwijzingen dat de twee grootste donoren, Spanje en Italië, hun donaties drastisch zouden kunnen gaan verminderen?




Antwoord van mevrouw Georgieva  namens de Commissie
(25 mei 2012)
De hulp van de EU voor de Sahrawi-vluchtelingenkampen is uitsluitend van humanitaire aard en bedraagt ongeveer 50 miljoen euro voor de afgelopen vijf jaar (10 miljoen euro voor 2012). Sinds 2004 heeft de EU regelmatig en continu humanitaire hulp verleend voor de Sahrawi-vluchtelingenkampen in het kader van het voedselhulpprogramma van het Wereldvoedselprogramma (via de langlopende hulpverlenings‐ en hersteloperatie, afgekort PRRO). In 2012 is deze steun met 14 % verhoogd (wat overeenkomt met een financiering van 0,57 miljoen euro per maand in 2012 in plaats van 0,5 miljoen euro per maand in 2011).
Ongeacht het kanaal voor de hulpverlening (ngo's, internationale organisaties of een VN-agentschap), bedragen overheadkosten maximaal 7 % van de totale directe kosten van projecten die worden gefinancierd uit een EU-budget. De samenwerkingspartners worden steeds gekozen na een grondige analyse van de voorgestelde activiteiten, hun prestaties, hun ervaring en aanwezigheid op het actieterrein, hun doelmatigheid en hun financiële stabiliteit. 
Of de financiële hulp voor Sahrawi-vluchtelingen mogelijk verhoogd kan worden, hangt af van de humanitaire behoeften. Deze worden regelmatig beoordeeld door humanitaire organisaties die aanwezig zijn in de vluchtelingenkampen en door het netwerk van hooggekwalificeerde deskundigen van de Commissie die  ter plaatse regelmatig toezicht houden op de operaties. Op grond van deze deskundige analyse wordt de humanitaire hulp van de EU voor de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen vastgelegd. De Commissie is ervan in kennis gesteld dat Spanje de humanitaire hulp voor de Sahrawi-vluchtelingen waarschijnlijk niet zal verminderen. De Commissie heeft geen kennis van een vermindering van de financiering van de Italiaanse maatschappelijke organisaties voor Sahrawi-vluchtelingen.
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-001736/12
till kommissionen
Åsa Westlund (S&D)
(13 februari 2012)

Angående: Den humanitära situationen i flyktingläger i Saharawi
Flyktingar i Västsahara sägs stå inför allvarliga brister på livsmedel – förra torsdagen informerade Polisario Front Europaparlamentets tvärpolitiska grupp om Västsahara att den nuvarande livsmedelstillgången som längst kommer att räcka till slutet av februari. Den angivna orsaken till detta är att Echos biståndsprogram inte är regelbundet, trots att det har kapaciteten att täcka alla behov.
I oktober 2011 slog FN:s flyktingkommissariat (UNHCR) i Tindouf och icke-statliga organisationer som arbetar i flyktinglägren i Saharawi fast att de totala behoven 2012 i olika sektorer som inte täcks av andra biståndsgivare uppgår till minst 32 miljoner US-dollar. Med tanke på att UNHCR har en budget på 8,7 miljoner US-dollar för 2012 finns en brist på 70 procent.
Om inte flyktingarna får ytterligare bistånd snart kommer de drastiska bristerna att få allvarliga konsekvenser för deras hälsa, vilket kommer att leda till höga nivåer av anemi och undernäring bland spädbarn, barn och gravida och ammande kvinnor.
FN säger att på grund av bristen på internationell uppmärksamhet på de problem som flyktingarna i Västsahara lider av är det extremt svårt att få regelbundet livsmedelsbistånd till dem. I avsaknad av en politisk lösning på situationen i Västsahara kommer flyktingarna i Saharawi att fortsätta att vara beroende av internationellt bistånd för sin överlevnad.
— Med tanke på att Västsahara är ett exempel på en utdragen flyktingsituation där de omedelbara utsikterna till en varaktig lösning är små, och där programmen för att hjälpa och skydda flyktingarna fortfarande är allvarligt underfinansierade, vad tror kommissionen kan göras för att lösa livsmedelsbristen?
— Varför är Echos biståndsprogram oregelbundet?
— Hur kommer EU att hjälpa flyktingarna med tanke på den humanitära situationen?
— Vilka är kommissionens framtidsplaner i syfte att hjälpa flyktingarna?
Samlat svar från Kristalina Georgieva  på kommissionens vägnar
(25 maj 2012)
EU:s stöd till de västsahariska flyktinglägren har varit av enbart humanitärt slag och uppnått ca 50 miljoner euro de senaste fem åren, inklusive 10 miljoner euro 2012. Sedan 2004 har EU:s humanitära bistånd kontinuerligt stött FN:s livsmedelsprogram i sitt arbete med livsmedelsbistånd och hjälpinsatser i de västsahariska lägren. Under 2012 har stödet ökat med 14 % från 2011 (0,57 miljoner euro per månad 2012 jämfört med 0,5 miljoner euro per månad 2011).
Vad gäller omkostnader betalar EU aldrig mer än 7 % av de totala direkta kostnaderna för projekt som finansieras av en EU-budget, oavsett vilken kanal som förmedlat stödet (icke-statliga organisationer, internationella organisationer eller ett FN-organ). Valet av samarbetspartner görs alltid efter en grundlig analys av de föreslagna projekten, partnerns prestationsförmåga, nuvarande och tidigare erfarenheter inom verksamhetsområdet, dess effektivitet och dess ekonomiska stabilitet.
Vad gäller en möjlig ökning av stödet, finansieras biståndet till de västsahariska flyktingarna på basis av humanitära behov som regelbundet övervakas av humanitära organisationer i lägren, och av kommissionens nätverk av högt kvalificerade experter på plats som genomför behovsbedömningar och regelbundet övervakar insatserna. Det är på grundval av denna expertanalys som EU:s humanitära stöd för de västsahariska flyktingarna avgörs. Kommissionen har meddelats att det spanska humanitära stödet till västsahariska flyktingar troligtvis inte kommer att sänkas, och har inte fått något meddelande om någon sänkning av det italienska civila samhällets bistånd till de västsahariska flyktingarna.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001627/12
to the Commission
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE) and Jill Evans (Verts/ALE)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Funding for Sahrawi refugee camps
In the context of the current financial and economic crisis, many public humanitarian aid donors have significantly reduced their contributions. As a consequence of this policy, the 90 000 to 165 000 Sahrawi refugees in Tindouf province (Algeria) now have to face even greater difficulties. Their living conditions will worsen, and the reduction of funds could push them to the brink of a humanitarian crisis. According to the basic needs assessment made by the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR), the Sahrawi refugees will need USD 32 million, whereas the Frente Polisario estimates that they will only receive approximately USD 8.7 million.
It is therefore of paramount importance that the Commission should take action on the matter and increase its funding for the Sahrawi refugees, especially taking into account the responsibility of certain Member States for the current situation in the Western Sahara, as well as EU‐Morocco relations.
1. How does the Commission assess the humanitarian situation of the Sahrawi refugees?
2. Can the Commission detail all the funds and corresponding programmes which it has dedicated to the Sahrawi refugees (in Tindouf and elsewhere) over the last five years, as well as those it is planning to allocate, directly to NGOs or indirectly via agencies?
3. Does the Commission agree that funding channelled through NGOs is less likely to suffer from overhead costs as opposed to aid channelled through agencies? Which channel does it prefer and why? What steps is it taking to reduce the overhead costs?
4. Does the Commission intend to increase the funding for the Sahrawi refugees? Does it have any indications that the two biggest contributors, Spain and Italy, may dramatically reduce their donations?
Question for written answer E-001628/12
to the Commission
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Frieda Brepoels (Verts/ALE) and Jill Evans (Verts/ALE)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Funding for Sahrawi refugee camps
In the context of the current financial and economic crisis, many public humanitarian aid donors have significantly reduced their contributions. As a consequence of this policy, the 90 000 to 165 000 Sahrawi refugees in Tindouf province (Algeria) now have to face even greater difficulties. Their living conditions will worsen, and the reduction of funds could push them to the brink of a humanitarian crisis. According to the basic needs assessment made by the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR), the Sahrawi refugees will need USD 32 million, whereas the Frente Polisario estimates that they will only receive approximately USD 8.7 million.
It is therefore of paramount importance that the Commission should take action on the matter and increase its funding for the Sahrawi refugees, especially taking into account the responsibility of certain Member States for the current situation in the Western Sahara, as well as EU‐Morocco relations.
1. How does the Vice-President/High Representative assess the humanitarian situation of the Sahrawi refugees?
2. Can the Vice-President/High Representative detail all the funds and corresponding programmes that have been dedicated to the Sahrawi refugees (in Tindouf and elsewhere) over the last five years, as well as those it is planned to allocate, directly to NGOs or indirectly via agencies?
3. Does the Vice-President/High Representative agree that funding channelled through NGOs is less likely to suffer from overhead costs as opposed to aid channelled through agencies? Which channel does the Vice-President/High Representative prefer and why? What steps is the Vice-President/High Representative taking to reduce the overhead costs?
4. Does the Vice-President/High Representative intend to increase the funding for the Sahrawi refugees? Does the Vice-President/High Representative have any indications that the two biggest contributors, Spain and Italy, may dramatically reduce their donations?
Question for written answer E-001736/12
to the Commission
Åsa Westlund (S&D)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: Humanitarian situation in Saharawi refugee camps
Western Saharan refugees are said to be facing serious food shortages: last Thursday the Polisario Front informed the EP Intergroup on Western Sahara that current food supplies will last only until the end of February at the longest. The reported reason for this is that the ECHO aid programme is not regular, even though it has the capacity to cover all needs.
In October 2011 the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) in Tindouf and non-governmental organisations working in the Saharawi refugee camps concluded that the overall requirements in different sectors for 2012 which are not covered by other donors amount to at least USD 32 million. Given that the UNHCR has a budget of USD 8.7 million for 2012, there is a shortfall of 70 %.
Unless the refugees receive additional aid soon, the drastic shortages will have severe consequences for their health, resulting in high rates of anaemia and malnutrition among infants, children and pregnant and lactating women.
The UN says that, owing to the lack of international attention given to the problems faced by Western Saharan refugees, it is extremely difficult to obtain regular contributions of food aid for them. In the absence of a political solution to the situation in Western Sahara, the Saharawi refugees will continue to depend on international assistance for survival.
— Given that Western Sahara is an example of a protracted refugee situation in which there is little immediate prospect of a lasting solution, and in which programmes to assist and protect the refugees remain severely under-funded, what does the Commission think can be done to solve the food shortage?
— Why is the ECHO aid programme irregular? 
— How will the EU aid the refugees, given the humanitarian situation?
— What are the Commission’s future plans with a view to aiding the refugees?
Joint answer given by Ms Georgieva  on behalf of the Commission
(25 May 2012)
The EU aid provided to the Sahrawi refugee camps has been exclusively humanitarian and amounts to about EUR 50 million for the past five years, including EUR 10 million for 2012. Since 2004, EU humanitarian aid has been supporting regularly and without interruption the World Food Programme (WFP)'s Food Aid programme (through its Protracted Relief and Recovery Operation (PRRO)) in the Sahrawi camps. In 2012, this support has been scaled up, with a monthly 14 % increase compared to 2011 (funding of EUR 0.57 million per month in 2012 compared to a funding of EUR 0.5 million per month in 2011).
As regards overhead costs, whatever the channel used to deliver aid (NGO, International Organisation or UN Agency), the European Union never pays more than 7 % of the total direct costs of projects funded from an EU budget. The choice of partners to work with is always made through a thorough analysis of the activities proposed, the partner's performance, presence and past experience in the field of intervention, its efficiency and its financial stability. 
As regards any possible increase of funding, aid to the Sahrawi refugees is financed on the basis of humanitarian needs that are regularly monitored by humanitarian organisations present in the camps and by the Commission's network of highly qualified experts on the ground who carry out needs assessments and monitor operations regularly. It is on the basis of this expert analysis that EU humanitarian support for the Sahrawi refugees is decided. The Commission has been informed that Spanish humanitarian aid to Sahrawi refugees will probably not be decreased. It has not been informed about a decrease in the Italian civil society's funding to Sahrawi refugees.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-001660/12
à Comissão
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(10 de Fevereiro de 2012)

Assunto: Políticas de proteção do mercado e de criação de emprego na UE II
Os números do desemprego são um flagelo que atinge a Europa no atual cenário de crise.
A manutenção e a criação de empregos dependem largamente da capacidade de fixação das empresas no nosso espaço comum, demovendo a sua deslocalização para países emergentes, com enormes consequências laborais e sociais.
Os Estados Unidos decidiram claramente várias medidas protecionistas do seu mercado interno, beneficiando fiscalmente as empresas que se proponham produzir no território americano e agravando fiscalmente, por seu lado, a atividade das que optem por sair para outros países.
Na Europa, pelo contrário, a deslocalização das empresas e o encerramento de postos de trabalho acontecem cada vez mais, sem que se conheçam quaisquer medidas politicamente relevantes, mesmo nos casos das empresas que anteriormente beneficiaram de fundos destinados a fixá-las no espaço europeu.
Pior do que isso, na Europa aceita-se a abertura do mercado a produtos produzidos em países emergentes, cujas empresas não cumprem as mesmas regras, nem suportam os mesmos custos administrativos, sociais e ambientais que são exigidos às empresas europeias, violando-se as normais regras de um mercado saudável e promovendo-se a concorrência mais desleal.
Paradoxalmente, exige-se aos países — principalmente aos que tiveram de adotar planos de austeridade — que produzam mais e exportem mais, enquanto que pouco ou nada se faz para assegurar a imposição das mesmas regras a todos quantos pretendam produzir e vender os seus produtos no nosso espaço comum.
Pergunto à Comissão:






—


Não considera a Comissão evidente que as atuais condições concorrenciais — em que produtos produzidos na Europa competem com os de empresas de países emergentes que não suportam as mesmas regras, com reflexo no preço final — questionam intoleravelmente o mercado saudável que deveria ser o desígnio da UE, além de condenarem empresas e empregos?




Resposta dada por Karel De Gucht em nome da Comissão
(26 de março de 2012)
A situação económica na Europa é grave, em especial no que diz respeito ao emprego. Contudo, o protecionismo não pode ser a resposta. A redução do desemprego passa, sim, por retomar a via do crescimento. 
Para esse fim, é essencial aproveitar em pleno as fontes dinâmicas de crescimento fora da UE. Ao longo dos próximos dois anos, 90 % da procura mundial suplementar serão gerados fora da Europa. O comércio externo representa já a maior contribuição para o crescimento da UE e é provável que assim permaneça no futuro. 
A progressão das economias emergentes tem intensificado a concorrência. Criou também milhões de novos consumidores ricos. A UE está já a tirar partido dessas novas oportunidades: é o primeiro exportador mundial de bens e serviços, o primeiro recipiente e emissor de investimentos internacionais; o excedente da UE no setor da transformação mais do que triplicou em dez anos. 
Por conseguinte, a UE será a primeira a ser afetada por uma guerra protecionista que ameaçaria os empregos dos 25 milhões de europeus que trabalham nos setores exportadores da UE. A Comissão prossegue ativamente uma política comercial que visa reduzir os obstáculos às empresas da UE, a fim de dinamizar o emprego e o crescimento. 
A abertura das economias à concorrência internacional traz, de facto, novas oportunidades, mas a realização dos efeitos positivos só é possível se nos adaptarmos. Para responder a esta necessidade, a União Europeia criou o Fundo Europeu de Ajustamento à Globalização (FEG), que dá apoio aos trabalhadores despedidos em consequência da globalização do comércio, através de medidas ativas do mercado de trabalho (200). A Comissão aprovou também, em 17 de janeiro de 2012, um Livro Verde intitulado «Reestruturação e antecipação da mudança: que lições tirar da experiência recente» (201).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001660/12
to the Commission
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Market protection and job creation policies in the EU II
The numbers of unemployed are a scourge affecting Europe in the current crisis.
Job retention and creation depends mainly on our ability to attract companies to our common European space and discouraging them from relocating to emerging countries, with huge employment and social consequences.
The United States has clearly decided to adopt various protectionist measures, giving tax advantages to companies who undertake to operate on American territory and penalising those who decide to move their operations to other countries.
However, in Europe, on the other hand, company relocation and loss of employment are happening more and more, without any appropriate political measures, even in the case of companies which have previously benefited from funding to encourage them to remain in Europe.
Even worse, here in Europe we accept the opening of our markets to products from emerging countries whose companies do not adhere to the same rules and do not have the same administrative, social and environmental overheads as European companies, thus violating the normal rules of a healthy market and promoting unfair competition.
Paradoxically, we demand that other countries — particularly those who are forced to adopt austerity measures — produce and export more, but we do little or nothing to ensure that the same rules are applied to all those who wish to produce and sell their products within our shared territory.
I should like to ask the Commission:






—


Does the Commission not think that the current competition situation — in which goods produced in Europe are competing with those of companies in emerging countries which are not subject to the same rules, thus affecting the final price — are an affront to the healthy market which should characterise the EU, as well as a threat to companies and jobs?




Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission
(26 March 2012)
The economic situation in Europe is serious, in particular regarding employment. Yet, protectionism cannot be the answer. To reduce unemployment, the best way is to resume growth.
To that aim it is crucial to take full advantage of the dynamic sources of growth outside the EU. Over the next two years, 90 % of supplementary world demand will be generated outside Europe. External trade already constitutes the fastest growing contribution to EU's growth and is likely to remain so in the future.
The rise of emerging economies has intensified competition. It has also created millions of new affluent consumers. The EU is already taking advantage of these new opportunities: EU is the first world exporter in goods and services, the first receptacle and emitter of international investments; and EU surplus for manufacturing products has more than trebled over 10 years. 
Therefore, the EU would be the first to suffer from a protectionist war which would threaten the jobs of the 25 million Europeans working for EU exports. The Commission actively pursues a trade policy which aims at reducing barriers to EU companies in order to boost jobs and growth. 
The opening of economies to international competition brings indeed new opportunities but the positive effects can only happen if adaptation is taking place. To answer this need, the European Union has established the European Globalisation adjustment Fund (EGF), which provides support to workers made redundant as a consequence of trade globalisation through active labour market measures (202). The Commission has also adopted on 17 January 2012 a Green Paper on ‘Restructuring and anticipation of change: what lessons from the economic crisis’ (203).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001679/12
to the Commission
Marta Andreasen (EFD)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: Cash shortfall for payments at the end of 2011 and effects on the 2012 budget
I understand that Commissioner Lewandowski has spoken, on behalf of DG BUDG, of a EUR 11 billion shortfall in the Commission's 2011 payments budget.
It appears that actual payment claims made in December 2011 amount to EUR 15 billion, as against an expected EUR 4 billion, while the remaining EUR 11 billion is to be set against the 2012 budget, resulting in a shortfall equivalent to approximately one month's payments in the current year's budget.
1. What was the equivalent position at the end of 2010?
2. Can the Commission provide a list of the individual budget lines affected, and detail the projects involved?
Question for written answer P-002587/12
to the Commission
Nicole Sinclaire (NI)
(6 March 2012)

Subject: Commission budget shortfall
According to the La Via report (A7‐0040/2012) on general guidelines for the preparation of 2013 Budget — Section III — Commission, ‘the Council refused in December 2011 to finance identified additional needs, some payment claims amounting to more than EUR 10 billion could not be honoured in late 2011, which is now impacting directly on available 2012 payments’.
Could the Commission confirm this situation?
If so, could the Commission explain how a situation has arisen whereby it is EUR 10 billion short of its commitments at year end?
Joint answer given by Mr Lewandowski on behalf of the Commission
(27 March 2012)
Some EUR 15 billion of payment claims were indeed received by the Commission during the last three weeks of the year 2011 for the Structural and Cohesion Fund. At the end of the year, nearly EUR 11 billion remained unpaid (of which some EUR 1 billion was subject to interruptions or suspensions).
These payment claims, higher than usual at the end of the year, came too late to be taken into consideration in an amending budget. It should be recalled that the voted budget for 2011 was 3.6 billion below the draft budget (for all budget items) initially presented for the Commission.
The comparable figure of payment requests arrived at the end of 2010 for the 2007-2013 programmes, but not paid in 2010 amounted to EUR 6.3 billion.
The cash shortfall at the end of 2011 only concerned Cohesion and Structural Funds’ policy. The outstanding payment claims for the 2007-2013 programmes stood at EUR 3.2 billion for the European Social Fund (ESF), EUR 6.3 billion for European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and EUR 1.3 billion for the Cohesion Fund.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-001681/12
alla Commissione
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(10 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Cina: compagnie aeree fuori dall'ETS — violazione della direttiva 2008/101/CE
Secondo quanto riportato dall’agenzia Nuova Cina, il governo di Pechino, facendo espresso «divieto alle società aeree cinesi di partecipare al sistema europeo ETS senza l’autorizzazione delle autorità governative», avrebbe vietato a sei compagnie aeree nazionali di pagare la tassa sulle emissioni inquinanti, la c.d. carbon tax, approvata con la direttiva 2003/87/CE, in seguito modificata dalla direttiva 2008/101/CE.
Tale quadro normativo, istitutivo del sistema per lo scambio di quote di emissioni dei gas a effetto serra (ETS), a partire dal 2012 include anche il settore aereo, compresi i vettori di paesi extra UE.
A conferma della legittimità dell'applicazione della direttiva, estesa a tutti i voli diretti o provenienti dall'Europa, ovvero a compagnie non europee e a rotte esterne allo spazio aereo europeo, era già intervenuta la sentenza del 21 dicembre 2011 della Corte di giustizia dell'UE, in merito al ricorso proposto da alcune compagnie aeree nordamericane che accusavano la normativa dell'UE di violare diversi accordi internazionali, tra i quali l'Open Skies Agreement. In particolare, secondo la Corte, la legislazione europea non viola il Protocollo di Kyoto, laddove prevede un accordo sui gas serra degli aerei in seno all'Organizzazione delle Nazioni Unite ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization).
Alla luce della suddetta normativa e della recente pronuncia della Corte UE, la decisione unilaterale presa dal governo cinese appare di tutta evidenza: 1) un atto di concorrenza sleale, poiché l'esenzione dalla carbon tax potrebbe determinare tariffe aeree inferiori a quelle uniformemente applicate in Europa in regime di concorrenza; 2) una condotta internazionale «ostruzionistica» in spregio della politica ambientale europea e internazionale, nonostante la Cina risulti ad oggi uno dei Paesi con il tasso di inquinamento mondiale maggiore, «vantando il primato» sull'uso di carbone pari all'80 %.
Può, pertanto, la Commissione riferire se ritiene la decisione unilaterale comunicata dalle autorità cinesi conforme alle normative dell'UE, soprattutto alla luce della recente sentenza della Corte di giustizia UE nella causa C-366/10 Air Transport Association of America e A. contro Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change?
Risposta data da Connie Hedegaard a nome della Commissione
(28 marzo 2012)
In base alle informazioni a disposizione della Commissione, l’autorità per l’aviazione civile della Repubblica popolare cinese (CAAC) avrebbe emesso un provvedimento amministrativo che vieta alle compagnie aeree nazionali di «partecipare» al sistema ETS dell’Unione «senza l’autorizzazione delle autorità governative».
I vettori aerei che effettuano voli da e verso l’Unione europea devono ovviamente rispettare le normative e lo stato di diritto dell’UE. Se un operatore viene meno agli obblighi derivanti dalla direttiva 2008/101/CE, per provvedimenti come quello in questione, disposizioni analoghe o altre ragioni, le autorità dello Stato membro interessato sono tenute a prendere le misure adeguate per applicare le normative in materia, quanto meno per impedire alle compagnie inadempienti di ottenere un ingiusto vantaggio competitivo sugli operatori che agiscono in modo corretto.
La Commissione è impegnata in discussioni approfondite e consultazioni con molti paesi, tra cui la Cina, al fine di trovare un accordo in seno all’Organizzazione internazionale per l’aviazione civile (ICAO) su misure da prendere a livello mondiale per ridurre le emissioni di gas a effetto serra. L’UE resta disponibile a discutere dell’eventuale esenzione dal sistema ETS per i voli in arrivo da paesi terzi sulla base delle misure prese in tali paesi.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001681/12
to the Commission
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(10 February 2012)

Subject: China: airlines outside the ETS — violation of Directive 2008/101/EC
According to a report by the New China Agency, the government in Beijing, by expressly ‘preventing Chinese airline companies from taking part in the European ETS scheme without the authorisation of the government authorities’, has prohibited six national airline companies from paying the tax on polluting emissions, the so-called carbon tax, adopted by Directive 2003/87/EC, subsequently amended by Directive 2008/101/EC.
This legislation, instituting the emissions trading scheme for greenhouse gases (ETS), also includes the airlines sector from 2012, including the carriers of countries outside the EU.
Confirmation of the legitimacy of the application of the directive, which covers all flights to or from Europe, i.e. non-European airlines and routes outside European air space, had already been given by the judgment of 21 December 2011 of the EU Court of Justice concerning the appeal by several North American airlines which accused EU legislation of violating various international agreements, including the Open Skies Agreement. In particular, according to the Court, the European legislation did not violate the Kyoto Protocol, which provides for an agreement on airline greenhouse gases within the UN agency ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organisation).
In the light of the above legislation and the recent judgment of the EU Court, the unilateral decision taken by the Chinese Government clearly appears to be: 1) an act of unfair competition, since exemption from the carbon tax could lead to lower air fares than those uniformly applied throughout Europe according to competition rules; 2) international ‘obstructionist’ behaviour in contempt of European and international environmental policy, notwithstanding that China is today one of the countries with the highest pollution rates in the world, with a record 80 % use of coal.
Can the Commission therefore state whether it considers the unilateral decision communicated by the Chinese authorities to be compliant with EU legislation, particularly in the light of the recent judgment of the EU Court of Justice in Case C‐366/10 — Air Transport Association of America and Others v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change?
Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)
From the information available to the Commission it appears that the Civil Aviation Authority of China (CAAC) has issued an administrative order prohibiting Chinese airlines to ‘participate’ in the EU ETS ‘without permission by related departments’.
Aircraft operators who choose to fly to and from the European Union must of course respect EU legislation and the rule of law. If any operators were to fail to comply with obligations arising from Directive 2008/101/EC — be it due to the above or similar orders or for other reasons — the relevant Member State authorities will have to take appropriate steps to enforce the legislation, not least to prevent non-compliant airlines from illegally gaining unfair competitive advantages over compliant operators. 
The Commission is engaged in active discussions and outreach with a large number of countries, including China, regarding the prospects for reaching an agreement in the International Civil Aviation Organisation on global measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from aviation. The EU also remains open to discuss the potential exemption of incoming flights from the EU ETS on the basis of action taken by third countries.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-001699/12
alla Commissione
Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)
(13 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Progetto «Sartoria sociale»
In provincia di Caserta è partito il progetto «Vestiamo la libertà», un laboratorio di sartoria sociale in un bene confiscato alle mafie di Castel Volturno per ragazze vittime della tratta, in prevalenza africane, inserite in percorsi di recupero.
Il progetto punta al reinserimento sociale delle ex prostitute. A breve saranno anche ristrutturati i locali del bene confiscato e saranno acquistati i macchinari industriali e si procederà alle selezione delle ragazze beneficiarie.
Alla luce dei fatti sopraesposti, s'interroga dunque la Commissione per sapere:







se, considerando gli obiettivi sociali del progetto «Vestiamo la libertà», l'associazione Opera può usufruire di fondi europei per le proprie attività,











se pensa che l'iniziativa in questione possa essere replicata in altri paesi europei nell'ambito di futuri progetti pilota.




Risposta data da László Andor a nome della Commissione
(26 aprile 2012)
La Commissione interviene nella regione Campania, in Italia, con il programma Campania 2007/2013 finanziato con 559 milioni di euro del Fondo sociale europeo, e con il programma «Sicurezza per lo Sviluppo» finanziato con 579 040 437 di euro del Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale, di cui 45 500 000 euro sono destinati a progetti volti al riutilizzo delle proprietà confiscate alla mafia. 
La Commissione non è in condizione di dire se il progetto possa essere replicato altrove. Inoltre, mentre la selezione dei progetti è di competenze delle autorità nazionali, l'iniziativa e l'elaborazione dei progetti fanno parte delle competenze delle organizzazioni operanti nel territorio.
Nel quadro del programma Progress la Commissione pubblica inviti a presentare proposte al fine di cofinanziare progetti di innovazione e sperimentazione nell'ambito della politica sociale. Un invito verrà indetto nel 2012. A titolo d'esempio, l'invito 2011 (ora chiuso) può essere consultato al seguente indirizzo: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=987&langId=fr&callId=331&furtherCalls=yes.
Per verificare se i progetti che rientrano nello stesso ambito del progetto «Vestiamo la libertà» sono in via di selezione per essere finanziati con risorse comunitarie, l'onorevole deputato può consultare direttamente: 







l'Autorità di gestione del programma POR FSE Campania all'indirizzo: http://www.regione.campania.it/portal/media— type/html/user/anon/page/POR_Home.psml;











l'Autorità di gestione del programma POR FESR all'indirizzo: http://porfesr.regione.campania.it/opencms/opencms/FESR/Home;











il Ministero dell'Interno è l'autorità di gestione del programma «Sicurezza per lo Sviluppo»:




Ministero dell'Interno
Dipartimento della Pubblica Sicurezza
Ufficio Coordinamento e Pianificazione delle Forze di Polizia
Direttore pro-tempore
Piazza del Viminale
00100 Roma
Tel. +39 0646535585 Fax +39 0646535453
e-mail: autoritadigestione_pon@interno.it.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001699/12
to the Commission
Sergio Paolo Frances Silvestris (PPE)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: ‘Social tailoring’ project
The project known as ‘Dressing for Freedom’ has been launched in the province of Caserta (Italy). It is a ‘social tailoring’ laboratory installed in a property confiscated from the Castel Volturno mafia, with the aim of helping young women, mainly African, who have been the victims of trafficking and are being rehabilitated.
The project aims to achieve the social integration of former prostitutes. The rooms in the confiscated property are due to be rebuilt shortly; the industrial equipment will be purchased, and the women who will benefit from the project will be selected.
In the light of the above, can the Commission state:







Whether, considering the social objectives of the ‘Dressing for Freedom’ project, the association concerned (‘Opera’) may use EU funds for its activities;











Whether it believes the initiative concerned could be replicated in other Member States as part of future pilot projects?




(Version française)
La Commission intervient dans la région Campania en Italie, avec le programme Campania 2007/2013 qui est financé avec 559 000 000 euros du Fond Social Européen, et le Programme«Sicurezza per lo Sviluppo» qui est financé avec 579 040 437 euros du Fonds Européen de Développement Régional dont 45 500 000 euros pour des projets destinés à la réutilisation des propriétés confisquées à la mafia.
La Commission n'est pas en mesure de dire si le projet peut être reproduit ailleurs. En outre, si la sélection des projets est une compétence des autorités nationales, l'initiative et l'élaboration des projets font partie des compétences des organisations qui travaillent sur le territoire.
Dans le cadre du programme Progress, la Commission publie des appels à proposition visant à cofinancer des projets d'innovation et d'expérimentation de politique sociale. Un appel est prévu en 2012. À titre d'exemple, l'appel 2011 (clôturé) peut être consulté à l'adresse suivante:
(http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=987&langId=fr&callId=331&furtherCalls=yes).
Pour vérifier si des projets relevant du même domaine que le projet «Vestiamo la libertà» sont en cours de sélection pour être financés avec des ressources communautaires, l'Honorable Parlementaire peut consulter directement:







l'Autorité de gestion du programme POR FSE Campania à l'adresse:




http://www.regione.campania.it/portal/media— type/html/user/anon/page/POR_Home.psml






2)


l'Autorité de gestion du programme POR FEDER à l'adresse:




http://porfesr.regione.campania.it/opencms/opencms/FESR/Home






3)


le Ministero dell'Interno qui est l'Autorité de Gestion du Programme«Sicurezza per lo Sviluppo»: Ministero dell'Interno — Dipartimento della Pubblica Sicurezza — Ufficio Coordinamento e Pianificazione delle Forze di Polizia — Direttore pro-tempore. Piazza del Viminale, Roma. Phone +39 0646535585 Fax +39 0646535453 e-mail 




autoritadigestione_pon@interno.it.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-001712/12
alla Commissione
Elisabetta Gardini (PPE)
(13 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Fondi per il ripristino ambientale
La corretta preservazione dell'ambiente è diventata, da tempo, una tematica meritevole di attenzione da parte non solo degli Stati ma anche degli enti locali. Nonostante questo, danni ambientali di diversa entità accadono con regolare frequenza. Gli Stati membri basano sull'eventuale disponibilità dei fondi europei una grossa parte degli interventi in ambito ambientale.
A questo proposito, può dire la Commissione quanti fondi della DG Regio sono ancora disponibili? Può dire, altresì, se la quota destinata all'Italia è già stata versata? Quali sono gli specifici programmi in riferimento al ripristino ambientale?
Risposta data da Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione
(30 marzo 2012)
Per quanto concerne i finanziamenti europei per il ripristino ambientale, compresa la prevenzione delle catastrofi naturali, la politica di coesione è disponibile per assistere gli Stati membri e le regioni. Nel periodo 2007-2013 circa 5,8 miliardi di euro sono destinati alla «prevenzione del rischio» e circa 3,4 miliardi di euro per la riabilitazione dei siti industriali e dei terreni contaminati. 
Per quanto concerne l'Italia, il 32 % del contributo comunitario dei Fondi strutturali 2007-2013 (8,9 miliardi di euro) è destinato a politiche ambientali. Su tale importo 413 milioni di euro riguardano misure di prevenzione dei rischi (314 milioni di euro nelle regioni dell'obiettivo Convergenza e 99 milioni di euro nelle regioni dell'obiettivo Competitività). Sulla base delle informazioni contenute nei rapporti annuali d'esecuzione, a tutto il 31.12.2010 il 27 % delle risorse previste era stato stanziato per dei progetti. La situazione al 31.12.2011 sarà nota dopo il 30 giugno 2012 quando verranno presentati alla Commissione i rapporti annuali 2011. 16 programmi regionali prevedono misure di prevenzione dei rischi (Toscana, Veneto, Umbria, Bolzano, Marche, Liguria, Molise, Lazio, Friuli, Abruzzo, Sardegna, Basilicata, Campania, Puglia, Calabria e Sicilia).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001712/12
to the Commission
Elisabetta Gardini (PPE)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: Funds for environmental restoration
Proper conservation of the environment has for a long time been an issue that deserves attention not just from the Member States but also from local authorities. Nevertheless, varying degrees of environmental damage still occur all too frequently. Member States base a large part of their environmental operations on the potential availability of EU funds.
In this context, can the Commission say what funds DG Regio still has available? Can the Commission also say whether the funds allocated to Italy have already been paid? Which specific programmes are concerned with environmental restoration?
(Version française)
En ce qui concerne la restauration de l'environnement, y compris la prévention des catastrophes naturelles, des fonds européens sont mis à la disposition des États membres et des régions au titre de la politique de cohésion de l'UE. Pour la période 2007-2013, il est prévu de consacrer près de 5,8 milliards d'euros à la prévention des risques et quelque 3,4 milliards à la réhabilitation de sites industriels et de zones contaminées.
S'agissant de l'Italie, 32 % de la contribution des Fonds structurels de l'UE pour la période 2007-2013 (8,9 milliards d'euros) sont alloués à des politiques environnementales, dont 413 millions d'euros à des mesures de prévention des risques (314 millions d'euros dans les régions de l'objectif «Convergence» et 99 millions d'euros dans les régions de l'objectif «Compétitivité»). Sur la base des informations contenues dans les rapports annuels d'exécution, en date du 31 décembre 2010, 27 % des ressources prévues ont été accordées à des projets. La situation au 31 décembre 2011 sera connue après le 30 juin 2012, lors de la présentation à la Commission des rapports annuels 2011. Seize programmes régionaux prévoient des mesures de prévention des risques dans les régions ou provinces suivantes: Toscane, Vénétie, Ombrie, Bolzano, Marches, Ligurie, Molise, Latium, Frioul, Abruzzes, Sardaigne, Basilicate, Campanie, Pouilles, Calabre et Sicile.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001721/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(13 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Almacén Temporal Centralizado (ATC) de residuos nucleares en Villar de Cañas (Cuenca)
El pasado 30 de diciembre de  2011, el Gobierno español aprobó la instalación del Almacén Temporal Centralizado (ATC) de residuos nucleares en el municipio de Villar de Cañas, Cuenca. Según la Plataforma contra el Cementerio Nuclear de Cuenca y varias asociaciones ecologistas, la decisión ha sido tomada siguiendo parámetros meramente políticos ya que no se ha tenido en cuenta ni la necesaria participación de la ciudadanía en este tipo de decisiones, que se han mostrado ampliamente en contra de albergar el almacén, ni el análisis de los criterios técnicos que relegaban a Villar de Cañas a un cuarto puesto por detrás de otros municipios con mayor capacidad técnica.
En su respuesta E-001351/2011, el Sr. Potočnik, en nombre de la Comisión, deja claro la obligación recogida en el Directiva 85/337/CEE de que el proyecto cuente con un estudio de Impacto Ambiental previo favorable antes de que la autoridad competente pueda proceder a autorizar el almacén. Pero la decisión ha sido tomada sin este tipo de autorización de desarrollo del proyecto. Asimismo, el Sr. Potočnik apunta la necesidad de que la población sea escuchada, informada y participe en la toma decisión y en los diferentes EIA que deben realizarse.
Tal y como alerta la Plataforma ciudadana contra el Cementerio Nuclear de Cuenca, «no puede hacerse recaer la decisión de donde emplazar el ATC en las corporaciones municipales pues la duración de su mandato es infinitamente menor que la radioactividad de los residuos almacenados.»
— Teniendo en cuenta la Directiva citada anteriormente y el resto del acervo comunitario respecto a instalaciones y residuos nucleares, así como el Convenio de Aarhus, especialmente lo que establece respecto a la participación ciudadana, ¿piensa la Comisión investigar la instalación del Almacén Nuclear Centralizado en el municipio de Villar de Cañas?
— ¿Ha exigido o piensa exigir la Comisión la realización del pertinente Estudio de Impacto Ambiental con la consecuente congelación del proyecto?
— ¿Exigirá la Comisión que se respete la participación ciudadana en la toma de decisión y se cumpla con lo establecido en el Convenio de Aarhus?
— ¿Cree oportuno la Comisión que la ubicación de una infraestructura tan comprometida como un almacén de residuos nucleares sea decidida siguiendo criterios políticos y no técnicos?
— ¿Piensa la Comisión estudiar la posibilidad de aprobar una moratoria a la construcción de nuevas centrales nucleares, o la prorroga de las ya existentes, hasta que no exista solución viable para eliminar de manera segura y sostenible los desechos nucleares que generan?
Respuesta provisional del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión
(28 de marzo de 2012)
La Comisión investigará los hechos planteados en esta pregunta escrita para determinar si se han cumplido las disposiciones de la Directiva de evaluación del impacto ambiental (204) e informará a Su Señoría en consecuencia.
Respuesta complementaria del Sr. Potočnik en nombre de la Comisión
(15 de octubre de 2012)
Remitimos a Su Señoría a las respuestas ya dadas por la Comisión a las preguntas (205) relativas a la construcción de un almacén temporal centralizado de residuos nucleares en España.
La Comisión ha examinado los nuevos datos proporcionados por la pregunta E-1721/2012, así como la información sobre la situación de este proyecto.
El análisis del expediente no ha puesto de manifiesto ninguna infracción del Derecho medioambiental de la UE aplicable.
Mediante decisión de 30 de diciembre de  2011, el Gobierno español escogió el municipio en que se ubicaría esta instalación: Villar de Cañas (Cuenca). Esta decisión, publicada en el Boletín Oficial de 20 de enero de 2012, concluye el procedimiento de selección iniciado en diciembre de 2009, durante el cual ha habido un período de consulta y participación pública. Los elementos principales, las candidaturas presentadas, los informes técnicos de evaluación, las alegaciones recibidas y su consideración se han publicado y se pueden consultar en un sitio de Internet específico.
Además, el proyecto de construcción de esta instalación deberá someterse ahora a un procedimiento de evaluación de impacto medioambiental con arreglo a la Directiva 2011/92/UE (206).
Por otra parte, la Audiencia Nacionaldesestimó, mediante sentencia de 1 de febrero de 2012, un recurso contencioso-administrativo interpuesto contra la convocatoria pública abierta en diciembre de 2009, fallando que esta se ajustaba a la ley. Además, la decisión del Gobierno español de diciembre de 2011 es objeto de varios recursos contencioso-administrativos ante el Tribunal Supremo, que podrá pronunciarse sobre la legalidad de este proyecto desde el punto de vista del Derecho nacional y del de la UE.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001721/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: Centralised Temporary Storage (ATC) of nuclear waste in Villar de Cañas (Cuenca)
On 30 December 2011 the Spanish Government approved the installation of a Centralised Temporary Storage (ATC) facility for nuclear waste in the municipality of Villar de Cañas, Cuenca. According to the Platform against the Cuenca Nuclear Cemetery and various ecological associations, the decision was made on purely political grounds, since it did not take into account the citizen participation necessary in a case of this kind, bearing in mind the widespread public opposition to the siting of the storage area. Nor did not take into account the analysis of the technical criteria that relegated Villar de Cañas to fourth place behind other municipalities with greater technical capacity.
In his answer to Question E‐001351/2011, Mr Potočnik, on behalf of the Commission, makes clear the obligation laid down in Directive 85/337/EEC, namely that there has to be a favourable environmental impact study on the project before the authority concerned can authorise the storage area. But the decision has been made even though the project has not obtained authorisation in this form. Mr Potočnik also points out the need for the public to be heard and informed and to participate in the decision-making and the necessary EIAs.
As the Citizens’ Platform against the Cuenca Nuclear Cemetery warns, ‘decisions on the location of ATC facilities cannot rest with municipal councils, since the duration of their term is infinitely less than that of the radioactivity of stored waste’.






—


Given the aforementioned directive and the 




acquis communautaire
 regarding nuclear facilities and waste, as well as the Aarhus Convention, especially its provisions on citizen participation, will the Commission investigate the installation of the Centralised Temporary Storage facility in the municipality of Villar de Cañas?






—


Has the Commission called for, or will it call for, the relevant environmental impact study to be conducted and for the project to be suspended in the mean time?










—


Will the Commission insist on respect for citizen participation in decision-making and on compliance with the Aarhus Convention?










—


Does the Commission think it appropriate for the location of infrastructure as sensitive as a nuclear waste storage area to be determined on the basis of political criteria as opposed to technical criteria?










—


Will the Commission study the possibility of approving a moratorium on the construction of new nuclear plants, or extending those already in force, until there is a viable solution enabling the nuclear waste produced to be safely and sustainably eliminated?




Preliminary answer given by Mr Potočnik  on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)
The Commission will investigate the facts raised in this written question to ascertain if the provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (207) have been complied with and will inform the Honourable Member accordingly.
(Version française)
L'Honorable Parlementaire voudra bien se reporter aux réponses que la Commission a déjà données aux questions (208) concernant la construction d'un entrepôt temporaire centralisé pour les déchets nucléaires en Espagne.
La Commission a examiné les nouvelles informations fournies par la question E-1721/2012, ainsi que les informations disponibles sur la situation de ce projet.
L'analyse du dossier n'a pas permis de conclure à une infraction au droit environnemental de l'UE applicable.
Par décision du 30 décembre 2011, le Gouvernement espagnol a choisi la municipalité qui devrait accueillir cette installation: Villar de Cañas (Cuenca). Cette décision, publiée au journal officiel du 20 janvier 2012, met fin à la procédure de sélection entamée en décembre 2009. Lors de cette procédure, une période de consultation et de participation publique a eu lieu. Les éléments principaux, les candidatures présentées, les rapports techniques d'évaluation, les allégations reçues et leurs prises en considération, ont été publiés et sont accessibles sur un site web spécifique.
En outre, le projet de construction de cette installation devra maintenant faire l'objet d'une procédure d'évaluation d'impact environnemental aux termes de la directive 2011/92/UE (209).
Par ailleurs, l'Audiencia Nacionala rejeté, par arrêt du 1 février 2012, un recours contentieux-administratif à l'encontre de l'appel d'offres lancé en décembre 2009, en signalant que celui-ci est conforme à la loi. De plus, la décision du Gouvernement espagnol de décembre 2011 fait l'objet de divers recours contentieux-administratifs auprès du Tribunal Suprême, qui pourra se prononcer sur la légalité de ce projet du point de vue du droit national et de celui de l'UE.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001738/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Sir Graham Watson (ALDE)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Aid to the Middle East and North Africa
Can the Vice-President/High Representative detail, for the years 2010, 2011 and 2012, the amount of aid received (or projected to be received) by:







the countries of the Middle East; and











the countries of North Africa?











Is it possible to be provided with a further breakdown by recipient country?




Can the Vice-President/High Representative specify what human rights conditions are attached to the aid going to countries in North Africa and the Middle East?
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(21 May 2012)
Over the three years (2010-2012), the amount of aid committed in North Africa and Middle East amounts to EUR 4.27 billion. Details are provided in the annex (210).
In accordance with the High Representative/Vice-President/Commission joint communication ‘A new response to a changing neighbourhood’ of 25 May 2011, EU assistance to the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) countries, including the North African and Middle Eastern partners, is based on a new, differentiated and more incentive-based approach (‘more for more’). According to this approach, the EU is ready to offer greater support to those countries which are ready to work on a common agenda and progress faster and further with agreed reforms. 
The EU steps up its bilateral political dialogues with the ENP countries at all levels with a strong focus on political mutual accountability. Closer cooperation will entail advancing towards higher standards of democracy and constitutional reform processes. In this vein, the EU is committed to supporting the development and maintaining the direct contact with thriving civil societies that will be able to monitor respective governmental activities. They should also provide support for reforms and become involved in areas close to citizens' fundamental concerns such as human rights, environment and development. 
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-001745/12
adresată Comisiei
Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D)
(13 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Parteneriate transfrontaliere — violențe împotriva femeilor și copiilor
Lupta împotriva violențelor de orice tip împotriva femeilor, copiilor și tinerilor este importantă și capătă din ce în ce mai multă importanță la nivel european.
În acest domeniu, o contribuție semnificativă o au organizațiile neguvernamentale de mici dimensiuni, mai ales în noile state membre. Ele au reușit să acumuleze deja o experiență în baza realităților din regiunile unde activează.
— Cum intenționează Comisia să sprijine programele lansate de aceste organizații și, mai ales, parteneriatele multidisciplinare, inclusiv cele transfrontaliere, pentru a spori eficiența lor și pentru a consolida politica în acest domeniu?
— Ce strategie are în vedere Comisia pentru ca politicile naționale să fie mai bine corelate cu politica europeană și pentru a permite o contribuție la acestea din partea organizațiilor neguvernamentale de mici dimensiuni, pe baza bunelor practici și a experienței acumulate?
Răspuns dat de dl Reding în numele Comisiei
(2 aprilie 2012)
Comisia s-a angajat să ofere un răspuns de politică puternic pentru combaterea tuturor formelor de violență împotriva femeilor, astfel cum s-a confirmat în Programul de la Stockholm și în Strategia pentru egalitatea între femei și bărbați (2010-2015).
Comisia lucrează în direcția emancipării femeilor, sensibilizării, promovării schimbului de bune practici și îmbunătățirii colectării datelor privind violența împotriva femeilor. Programul Daphne III oferă asistență financiară în acest domeniu.
De asemenea, Comisia întreprinde măsuri în spațiul de justiție penală și a adoptat legislație în domeniul traficului de persoane (211), abuzului sexual și exploatării copiilor (212) și al drepturilor victimelor infracțiunilor. În mai 2011, aceasta a prezentat pachetul legislativ privind victimele, ce include o propunere de directivă privind drepturile victimelor infracțiunilor care se bazează pe legislația existentă a UE și consolidează drepturile victimelor. Propunerea include dreptul la respect și recunoaștere, dreptul de a furniza și de a primi informații și dreptul la protecție. Aceasta vizează, de asemenea, asigurarea faptului că nevoile victimelor sunt evaluate individual și că victimele cele mai vulnerabile, inclusiv victimele actelor de violență sexuală, primesc tratament specific adecvat cerințelor lor (213). Pachetul legislativ privind victimele include, de asemenea, o propunere de regulament privind recunoașterea reciprocă a măsurilor de protecție în materie civilă, care completează ordinul european de protecție adoptat recent (care se aplică în materie penală). Aceste două instrumente vor asigura faptul că măsurile de protecție adoptate într-un stat membru pot fi recunoscute în alt stat membru pentru a se evita situația în care victimele își pierd protecția în cazul în care își schimbă domiciliul sau călătoresc. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001745/12
to the Commission
Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: Cross-border partnerships — violence against women and children
Measures to prevent all violence against women, children and young people are of great importance and are being given increasingly high priority at European level.
In this area, the smaller non-governmental organisations have made a significant contribution, especially in the new Member States. They have managed to accumulate enough experience based on the realities of the regions where they operate.
— How does the Commission intend to support the programmes launched by these organisations and, in particular, the multidisciplinary partnerships, including those operating across borders, in order to increase their efficiency and strengthen policy in this field?
— What strategy does the Commission envisage for a better correlation between national policies and European policy, and to allow the smaller non-governmental organisations to contribute on the basis of good practice and accumulated experience?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(2 April 2012)
The Commission is committed to a strong policy response to combat all forms of violence against women, as confirmed in the Stockholm Programme and the strategy for equality between women and men (2010-2015).
The Commission works for the empowerment of women, awareness raising, the promotion of exchanges of good practices and the improvement of collection of data on violence against women. The Daphne III Programme provides financial support in this field.
The Commission is also taking measures in the criminal justice area and has put in place legislation on human trafficking (214), sexual abuse and exploitation of children (215) and the rights of victims of crime. In May 2011, it presented the Victims' Package including a proposal for the directive on the rights of victims of crimethat builds on existing EU legislation and strengthens the rights of victims. The proposal includes the right to respect and recognition, the right to provide and receive information, and right to protection. It also aims at ensuring that the needs of victims are individually assessed and that the most vulnerable including victims of sexual violence receive specific treatment appropriate to their requirements (216). The Victims' Package also includes a proposal for a regulation on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters, which complements the recently adopted European Protection Order (which applies in criminal matters). These two instruments will ensure that protection measures issued in one Member State can be recognised in another Member State to avoid that the victims loses their protection if they move or travel.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001759/12
aan de Commissie
Luca. Hartong (NI)
(13 februari 2012)

Betreft: Huisaankoop commissaris De Gucht
Op 7 februari jl. verscheen een uitgebreid artikel in het Belgische magazine Humo over commissaris De Gucht. De Bijzondere Belastinginspectie (BBI) blijkt een uitgebreid onderzoek te hebben lopen tegen de commissaris inzake een buitenverblijf in Toscane, Italië. In dat kader de volgende vragen:







De Gucht blijkt na herhaaldelijke verzoeken van de BBI niet mee te willen werken aan het openbaren van de manier waarop hij de aankoop van de villa heeft gefinancierd, direct of indirect. Vindt u het handelen van de commissaris in overeenstemming met de transparantie die de EU voorstaat?











Op 19 december 2011 doet de fiscale kamer in Gent een tussenuitspraak in het onderzoek tegen De Gucht. De BBI komt met tenminste zes redenen waarom zij de commissaris verdenkt van fraude. De rechter acht die aanwijzingen van de BBI voldoende om „het onderzoek tegen De Gucht te verantwoorden en op volle kracht voort te zetten”. Is de Commissie met de PVV van mening dat dit al voldoende zou moeten zijn voor een lid van de Commissie om de eer aan zichzelf te houden of hem te verzoeken zijn functie neer te leggen, ondanks het feit dat er nog geen onherroepelijke uitspraak in deze zaak is, maar wel al een duidelijke verdenking van onrechtmatige activiteiten?











De Gucht blijkt subsidie te hebben ontvangen van de Europese Unie voor „het aantrekken van een consultant die hem moet adviseren over het maken van biodynamische wijn”. Kan de Commissie de PVV een kopie van de stukken doen toekomen die betrekking hebben op deze subsidieverlening en eventueel andere subsidieverleningen aan de heer De Gucht, op grond van de Wet openbaarheid van bestuur?











Commissaris De Gucht blijkt op alle mogelijke manieren het onderzoek te frustreren en te vertragen. De grote vraag is waarom hij dat doet als hij niets te verbergen heeft. Is de Commissie met de PVV van mening dat de heer De Gucht zo spoedig mogelijk volledige medewerking dient te verlenen aan het BBI-onderzoek, om zo elke zweem van verdenking tegen hem weg te nemen?











Is de Commissie voornemens afscheid te nemen van de heer De Gucht indien hij deze medewerking aan het onderzoek weigert, transparantie tegenwerkt of blijkt verplichte opgave van bijverdiensten en commissariaten bewust te hebben verzwegen?




Antwoord van de heer Barroso namens de Commissie
(16 april 2012)
1, 2, 4 en 5. De Commissie heeft in dit stadium niets toe te voegen aan het antwoord dat reeds op schriftelijke vraag P-011951/2011 van de heer Eppink (217) werd gegeven. Het betreft een fiscaal onderzoek van administratieve aard, waarvan een procedureonderdeel bij het Belgische gerecht in behandeling is.







3.


De verklaring inzake de financiële belangen van het in de vraag genoemde lid van de Commissie is openbaar en, zoals de verklaringen van alle leden van de Commissie, te vinden op de Europa-website










3.


De verklaring inzake de financiële belangen van het in de vraag genoemde lid van de Commissie is openbaar en, zoals de verklaringen van alle leden van de Commissie, te vinden op de Europa-website




 (218). Er wordt inderdaad melding gemaakt van een subsidie van 1 500 EUR voor de diensten van een consultant voor de productie van „biodynamische” wijn.De Commissie is niet in het bezit van de gevraagde stukken, die door de bevoegde nationale autoriteiten werden afgegeven.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001759/12
to the Commission
Lucas Hartong (NI)
(13 February 2012)

Subject: House purchase by Commissioner De Gucht
On 7 February 2012, the Belgian magazine Humo published an extensive article about Commissioner De Gucht. It reveals that Belgium’s Special Tax Inspectorate (ISI) is investigating the European Commissioner in connection with a holiday home in Tuscany, Italy. In connection with this, please answer the following questions:







Apparently, despite repeated requests by the ISI, De Gucht is not willing to disclose how he financed the purchase of the villa, directly or indirectly. Does the Commission consider the European Commissioner’s actions to be in conformity with the transparency advocated by the EU?











On 19 December 2011, the tax chamber in Ghent issued an interlocutory judgment in the investigation against De Gucht. The ISI outlined at least six reasons why it suspects the European Commissioner of fraud. The judge considers the evidence presented by the ISI sufficient ‘to justify the investigation into De Gucht and to pursue it unremittingly’. Does the Commission agree with the PVV that this should be sufficient for a member of the Commission to take the honourable way out or to urge him to resign, despite the fact that no irrevocable judgment has yet been given in this case, as there are unmistakable grounds for suspecting that he has acted unlawfully?











It emerges that De Gucht has received a grant from the European Union ‘to hire a consultant to advise him on the production of biodynamic wine’. Can the Commission please send the PVV a copy of the documents relating to the awarding of this grant and any other grants to Mr De Gucht on the grounds of the Government Information Act?











Commissioner De Gucht is doing all he can to frustrate and delay the investigation. The big question is why he is doing this if he has nothing to hide. Does the Commission agree with the PVV that Mr De Gucht must give, as soon as possible, his full cooperation to the ISI investigation, to dispel any hint of suspicion against him?











Does the Commission intend to let Mr De Gucht go if he refuses to cooperate with the investigation, hinders transparency or proves to have deliberately concealed his extra earnings and directorships, which he is required to disclose?




(Version française)
1, 2, 4 et 5. La Commission n'a rien à ajouter à ce stade à la réponse déjà donnée à la question écrite P-011951/2011 par M. Eppink (219). Il s'agit d'une enquête fiscale de nature administrative dont un élément de procédure est en instance devant la justice belge.







3.


La Déclaration portant sur les intérêts financiers du membre de la Commission cité dans la question est publique et figure, comme celles de tous les Membres de la Commission sur le site Europa










3.


La Déclaration portant sur les intérêts financiers du membre de la Commission cité dans la question est publique et figure, comme celles de tous les Membres de la Commission sur le site Europa




 (220). Il y est en effet fait mention d'un financement à hauteur de 1 500 euros pour les services d'un consultant pour la production de vin «bio-dynamique». La Commission ne dispose pas du document demandé qui a été délivré par les autorités nationales compétentes.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-001762/12
alla Commissione
Giovanni La Via (PPE)
(14 febbraio 2012)

Oggetto: Valori da rispettare per gli indici di maturazione dell'«Arancia rossa di Sicilia IGP»
Il disciplinare di produzione dell'«Arancia rossa di Sicilia IGP», autorizzato con regolamento (CE) n. 1107/96 della Commissione del 12 giugno 1996, prevede limiti minimi per gli indici di maturazione (rapporto minimo fra zuccheri e acidità) specifici per le diverse cultivar:






—


Tarocco: 6










—


Moro: 6










—


Sanguinello: 5.5




Il regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 543/2011 della Commissione del 7 giugno 2011, attualmente in vigore per la commercializzazione dei prodotti ortofrutticoli, ha introdotto, rispetto al regolamento (CE) n.1228/08 della Commissione, un requisito relativo a questo aspetto e, per le arance sanguigne, pone il limite minimo dell'indice di maturazione a 6.5.
I limiti imposti dal regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 543/2011 della Commissione risultano più restrittivi rispetto a quelli indicati nel disciplinare di produzione, per cui rispetto esclusivamente all'indice di maturazione, un`arancia della cultivar Tarocco con un indice di maturazione pari a 6.1 risulterebbe conforme al disciplinare, ma non sarebbe conforme ai requisiti minimi stabiliti dal regolamento in questione.
Può la Commissione chiarire:







cosa accade, a livello giuridico, quando i valori dei parametri relativi a caratteristiche del prodotto immesso al consumo fissati da un disciplinare di produzione per un prodotto IGP o DOP, già approvato dalla Commissione, contrastano con quelli stabiliti da un suo regolamento di successiva emanazione che pone valori più restrittivi rispetto a quelli previsti dal disciplinare stesso;











se ritiene necessario modificare il disciplinare di produzione del prodotto in questione;











se sia sufficiente una modifica del piano dei controlli ministeriale dello Stato membro?




Risposta data da Dacian Cioloş a nome della Commissione
(16 marzo 2012)
All'articolo 1, paragrafo 2, del regolamento (CE) n. 510/2006 del Consiglio, del 20 marzo 2006, relativo alla protezione delle indicazioni geografiche e delle denominazioni d'origine dei prodotti agricoli e alimentari (221), si legge: «Il presente regolamento si applica senza pregiudizio di altre disposizioni comunitarie particolari
».
I prodotti tutelati da una denominazione registrata sono pertanto soggetti all'insieme delle normative europee, siano esse in materia di norme di commercializzazione, di igiene o altro, eccettuate le eventuali normative che escludessero espressamente dal loro campo di applicazione le indicazioni geografiche.
Nel caso di specie, i valori dei parametri relativi alle caratteristiche del prodotto devono essere conformi ai requisiti minimi prescritti dal regolamento di esecuzione (UE) n. 543/2011 della Commissione (222), del 7 giugno 2011, recante modalità di applicazione del regolamento (CE) n. 1234/2007 del Consiglio (223) nei settori degli ortofrutticoli freschi e degli ortofrutticoli trasformati, ovverosia, per le arance sanguigne, un rapporto minimo zucchero/acidità di 6,5:1.
A fini di chiarezza e trasparenza, sia per gli operatori sia per gli organismi di controllo nei punti di vendita, sia per i consumatori, potrebbe risultare utile procedere a un aggiornamento del disciplinare di produzione. In tal caso occorre seguire le procedure indicate all'articolo 9 del regolamento (CE) n. 510/2006.
I piani dei controlli dovrebbero in ogni caso includere gli atti legislativi applicabili al prodotto in questione al momento della sua commercializzazione.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-001762/12
to the Commission
Giovanni La Via (PPE)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Values to be adhered to for sugar-acid ratios of ‘Red orange of Sicily PGI’
The product specification for ‘Red orange of Sicily PGI’, authorised by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1107/96 of 12 June 1996, establishes minimum limits for sugar-acid ratios specifically for the following cultivars:






—


Tarocco: 6










—


Moro: 6










—


Sanguinello: 5.5




The Commission’s implementing regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011, currently in effect for marketing fruit and vegetable products, has introduced, with regard to Commission’s Regulation (EC) No 1228/08, a requirement relating to this aspect and imposes a minimum sugar-acid ratio limit of 6.5 for blood oranges.
The limits imposed by the Commission’s implementing regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are stricter than those indicated in the product specification whereby, exclusively with regard to the sugar-acid ratio, an orange of the Tarocco cultivar with a sugar-acid ratio of 6.1 would comply with the specification, but would not comply with the minimum requirements established by the implementing regulation in question.
Can the Commission please clarify:







what happens, from a legal perspective, when there are parameters relating to the characteristics of products marketed for consumption that have been established by a product specification for PGI or PDO products and already approved by the Commission, but do not comply with those established by a successive regulation which imposes stricter values compared to those provided for in the specification;











whether it deems it necessary to amend the product specification of the product in question;











whether it is sufficient to amend the ministerial inspection plan of the Member State?




(Version française)
Aux termes de l'article 1, deuxième alinéa, du règlement (CE) no 510/2006 (224) du Conseil du 20 mars 2006 relatif à la protection des indications géographiques et des appellations d'origine des produits agricoles et des denrées alimentaires «le présent règlement s'applique sans préjudice d'autres dispositions communautaires particulières».
Les produits couverts par une dénomination enregistrée sont de ce fait soumis à toutes les règlementations européennes que ce soit en matière de normes de commercialisation, d'hygiène ou autre à l'exception des règlementations qui prévoiraient explicitement que les indications géographiques sont exclues de leur champ d'application.
Dans le cas d'espèce, les valeurs des paramètres relatifs aux caractéristiques du produit doivent être conformes au minimum requis par le règlement d'exécution (UE) no 543/2011 (225) de la Commission du 7 juin 2011 portant modalités d'application du règlement (CE) no 1234/2007 (226) du Conseil en ce qui concerne les secteurs des fruits et légumes et des fruits et légumes transformés, à savoir un ratio sucre-acide de 6,5:1 pour les oranges sanguines.
La mise à jour du cahier des charges pourrait être utile à des fins de clarté et de transparence tant pour les opérateurs que pour les organismes de contrôle sur le lieu de vente et les consommateurs. Dans ce cas, les procédures prévues à l'article 9 du règlement (CE) no 510/2006 devraient être suivies.
Les plans de contrôle devraient en tout état de cause intégrer les législations applicables au produit au moment de leur mise sur le marché.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-001772/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (NI)
(14. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Griechischer Zaun an der Grenze zur Türkei
Laut dem griechischen Minister für Zivilschutz, Christos Papoutsis, hat Griechenland mit dem Bau eines 12,6 km langen, mit NATO-Draht versehenen Zauns begonnen, der das Land vor Migranten schützen soll. Für den Bau sind Kosten in Höhe von 5,5 Mio. EUR veranschlagt. Der Zaun wird in der Evros-Region an der griechisch-türkischen Grenze errichtet und soll bis September 2012 fertiggestellt sein.
1. Warum betrachtet die Kommission diesen Zaun als ein nationales Thema?
2. Wird die EU diesen Zaun finanzieren oder kofinanzieren?
3. Ist die Kommission der Ansicht, dass dieser Zaun Menschenrechte verletzt oder dass er die Interessen des griechischen Staats schützt?
4. Verletzt Griechenland die Asylregelungen der EU (Dublin-Verordnung)?
5. In den ersten neun Monaten des Jahres 2010 nahmen die griechischen Behörden 96 398 illegale Einwanderer fest (von denen 94 747 auf dem Landweg und 1 651 auf dem Seeweg kamen). Die entsprechende Zahl für den gleichen Zeitraum 2009 lag bei 96 085. Ist die Kommission der Ansicht, dass Griechenland ausreichend Kapazitäten besitzt, um mit einer so großen Anzahl illegaler Einwanderer fertig zu werden?
6. Welche Unterstützung erfährt Griechenland aktuell durch die Kommission vor dem Hintergrund, dass sich das Land völlig außerstande gezeigt hat, dieses Einwanderungsstroms Herr zu werden?
7. Was sind die Vorschläge der Kommission angesichts des drohenden finanziellen Bankrotts Griechenlands und der Tatsache, dass weder Infrastruktur noch Kapazität für Einwanderer vorhanden sind?
Antwort von Frau Malmström im Namen der Kommission
(19. April 2012)
Die Kommission wird alles tun, um Griechenland bei der Bewältigung irregulärer Migrationsströme zu unterstützen. Sie hat dazu bereits einige Maßnahmen technischer Art eingeleitet. Zudem erhält Griechenland beträchtliche finanzielle Unterstützung. Diese Anstrengungen müssen insbesondere durch die Ausdehnung der derzeitigen, von Frontex koordinierten Aktionen an der griechisch-türkischen Grenze ergänzt werden, um die Zusammenarbeit zwischen den verschiedenen Stellen — vor allem zwischen Frontex, Europol und EASO — zu stärken und Griechenland weiter beim Aufbau eines effizienten Grenzmanagementsystems und der Gestaltung einer wirksamen Rückkehrpolitik beizustehen.
Den Bau einer technischen Barriere entlang eines Teils der griechisch-türkischen Landgrenze hält die Kommission nicht für eine wirksame Maßnahme gegen irreguläre Migration. Sie hat Griechenland mitgeteilt, dass sie einer Aufnahme des Zauns in das Jahresprogramm 2011 des Außengrenzenfonds nicht zustimmen würde.
Die Kommission ist darüber unterrichtet, dass Griechenland beschlossen hat, mit dem Bau einer solchen technischen Barriere zu beginnen, der mit nationalen Mitteln finanziert werden soll. Sie wird aufmerksam überwachen, dass die von den griechischen Behörden geplanten Maßnahmen den EU-Rechtsvorschriften, einschließlich der EU-Grundrechtecharta, entsprechen. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001772/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (NI)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Greek fence on the border with Turkey
Greece has started the construction of a 12.6 km-long razor-wire-topped fence, costing an estimated EUR 5.5 million, in order to keep out migrants, according to the Greek Civil Protection Minister Christos Papoutsis. It is being built in the Evros region on the Greek— Turkish border and is to be completed by September 2012.
1. Why does the Commission regard this fence as a national issue?
2. Will the EU finance or co‐finance this fence?
3. Does the Commission believe that this fence violates human rights or that it protects the interest of the Greek state?
4. Is Greece violating the EU asylum rules (Dublin regulation)?
5. Over the first nine months of 2010, the Greek authorities arrested 96 398 illegal immigrants (94 747 arriving by land and 1651 by sea). The equivalent figure for the same period for 2009 was 96 085. Does the Commission believe that Greece has the capacity to cope with such large numbers of illegal immigrants?
6. What support is being given the Commission to Greece, given that the country has proved completely incapable of handling this influx of immigrants?
7. What are the Commission's proposals in view of Greece’s near-bankrupt state and the fact that it lacks the infrastructure and capacity to cope with immigrants?
Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(19 April 2012)
The Commission is fully committed to assist Greece in tackling irregular migration flows and to this end has already put in place several measures of technical nature. Considerable financial support is also provided. It is essential to strengthen these efforts, notably by expanding the current operations at the Greek/Turkish border coordinated by Frontex, to increase inter-agency cooperation, notably between Frontex, Europol and EASO, and to continue to assist Greece in building an efficient border management system and return policy.
The Commission considers that the construction of a technical barrier along a section of the Greek/Turkish land border is not an effective measure to counter irregular migration and has informed Greece that it would not accept that the fence be included in the 2011 External Borders Fund (EBF) Annual Programme.
The Commission has been informed of Greece's decision to start the construction of such technical barrier to be financed with national resources. The Commission will closely monitor that the measures envisaged by the Greek authorities comply with the EU acquis, including the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001794/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Spyros Danellis (S&D)
(14 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Αξιοπιστία των στοιχείων της Εταιρικής Κοινωνικής Ευθύνης
Η δυνατότητα της Ενιαίας Αγοράς να παράγει βιώσιμη ανάπτυξη και εργασία προϋποθέτει μεταξύ άλλων την υπεύθυνη στάση των επιχειρήσεων όσον αφορά τις επιπτώσεις των δραστηριοτήτων τους. Η κοινοποίηση των περιβαλλοντικών και κοινωνικών στοιχείων των επιχειρήσεων αποτελεί καίριο εργαλείο για τη διασφάλιση της υπεύθυνης επιχειρηματικότητας και ήδη 2 500 ευρωπαϊκές εταιρείες εκδίδουν ετήσιο απολογισμό βιωσιμότητας.
Ωστόσο, αυτές συνιστούν μόνο ένα μικρό μέρος του συνόλου των 42 000 μεγάλων επιχειρήσεων στην ΕΕ. Επιπλέον, χρήστες των απολογισμών βιωσιμότητας και περιβαλλοντικές οργανώσεις έχουν επισημάνει ότι το παρόν πλαίσιο δεν εξασφαλίζει με πλήρη τρόπο την αξιοπιστία και την πληρότητα των πληροφοριών. Την ίδια στιγμή, σειρά διαφορετικών απαιτήσεων κοινοποίησης μη-οικονομικών (περιβαλλοντικών, κοινωνικών) στοιχείων έχουν θεσμοθετηθεί σε κράτη μέλη, επιβαρύνοντας άσκοπα τις επιχειρήσεις. Στην Aνακοίνωσή της COM 2011 (681), η Επιτροπή σημειώνει πως «θα υποβάλει νομοθετική πρόταση σχετικά με τη διαφάνεια των κοινωνικών και περιβαλλοντικών πληροφοριών που παρέχονται από επιχειρήσεις σε όλους τους τομείς.»
1. Σκοπεύει η Επιτροπή να υποβάλει νομοθετική πρόταση εντός του 2012 για την υποχρεωτική κοινοποίηση των κοινωνικών και περιβαλλοντικών παραμέτρων;
2. Θα υπολογίσει στην Αξιολόγηση Επιπτώσεων τον εκτιμώμενο αντίκτυπο της νομοθετικής δράσης στους περιβαλλοντικούς και κοινωνικούς στόχους της ΕΕ;
3. Θα εξασφαλιστεί η αξιοπιστία και η πληρότητα των στοιχείων που κοινοποιούν οι εισηγμένες εταιρείες με την υποχρέωση κατάθεσης των στοιχείων για εξωτερικό έλεγχο, εξουσιοδοτημένο να αποδείξει την πληρότητα, τη σημαντικότητα και την ακρίβειά τους; Αν όχι, πώς θα μπορούσε εναλλακτικά να εξασφαλίσει ένα ικανοποιητικό επίπεδο αξιοπιστίας των στοιχείων;
Απάντηση του κ. Barnier εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(3 Απριλίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή συμμερίζεται το ενδιαφέρον του Αξιότιμου Μέλους του Κοινοβουλίου για το θέμα της διαφάνειας σχετικά με την εταιρική κοινωνική ευθύνη, η οποία χρήζει ιδιαίτερης προσοχής λόγω της σημασίας της για το σχέδιο ισόρροπης και βιώσιμης οικονομικής ανάπτυξης.
Στις ανακοινώσεις σχετικά με την Πράξη για την Ενιαία Αγορά της 13ης Απριλίου 2011 και σχετικά με την εταιρική κοινωνική ευθύνη της 25ης Οκτωβρίου 2011, η Επιτροπή δεσμεύθηκε να υποβάλει νομοθετική πρόταση σχετικά με τη διαφάνεια των πληροφοριών κοινωνικού και περιβαλλοντικού χαρακτήρα που παρέχονται από τις επιχειρήσεις σε όλους τους τομείς.
Εκπονείται, επί του παρόντος, εκτίμηση επιπτώσεων για να αναλυθούν οι εναλλακτικές επιλογές και να διαμορφωθεί ισόρροπη πρόταση στα μέσα του 2012. Στο πλαίσιο της εκτίμησης επιπτώσεων θα εξεταστούν, μεταξύ άλλων, τα ζητήματα της ποιότητας, της αξιοπιστίας, της ενημέρωσης και των διεθνών σημείων αναφοράς ποιότητας. Αναμένεται ότι η πρόταση θα επιτρέψει την επίτευξη προόδου όσον αφορά τη διαφάνεια των πληροφοριών εκ μέρους των επιχειρήσεων, αποφεύγοντας ταυτόχρονα την άσκοπη διοικητική επιβάρυνση των επιχειρήσεων, και ιδίως των ΜΜΕ.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001794/12
to the Commission
Spyros Danellis (S&D)
(14 February 2012)

Subject: Reliability of Corporate Social Responsibility data
The power of the single market to generate sustainable growth and employment depends, not least, on the responsibility of companies regarding the impact of their activities. Issuing the environmental and social data of companies is a key tool in ensuring responsible entrepreneurship and 2 500 European companies are already issuing annual sustainability reports.
However, these are only a small fraction of the 42 000 major companies in the EU. In addition, users of the sustainability reports and environmental organisations have pointed out that the current framework does not fully guarantee the reliability and completeness of the information. At the same time, a number of different requirements regarding non-financial (environmental, social) data have been introduced in certain Member States, thereby burdening companies unnecessarily. In Communication COM(2011)0681 the Commission indicates that it ‘will present a legislative proposal on the transparency of the social and environmental information provided by companies in all sectors.’






1.


Does the Commission intend to submit a legislative proposal in 2012 for obligatory provision of social and environmental data?










2.


Will it carry out an Impact Assessment on the legislative action for the EU’s environmental and social objectives?










3.


Will measures be taken to guarantee the reliability and completeness of the data issued by listed companies, making it obligatory to submit the data for external checks, by bodies authorised to check the completeness, relevance and accuracy of the data? If not, how else could it guarantee that the information provided is sufficiently reliable?




(Version française)
La Commission partage l'intérêt de l'Honorable Parlementaire pour la question de la transparence concernant la responsabilité sociale des entreprises qui, de par son importance quant au projet d'une croissance économique équilibrée et durable, nécessite une attention particulière. 
Dans les communications sur l'Acte pour le Marché Unique du 13 avril 2011 et sur la responsabilité sociale des entreprises du 25 octobre 2011, la Commission s'est engagée à présenter une proposition législative sur la transparence de l'information sociale et environnementale fournie par les entreprises de tous les secteurs.
Une étude d'impact est en cours d'élaboration afin d'analyser les différentes options, et d'aboutir à une proposition équilibrée dans le courant de l'année 2012. Entre autres, les questions de la qualité, de la fiabilité de l'information et des référentiels internationaux de qualité seront abordés au cours de l'étude d'impact. La proposition devrait permettre de faire des progrès dans la transparence de l'information de la part des entreprises, tout en évitant aux entreprises, en particulier les PME, des charges administratives inutiles. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001835/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(15 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Πλήγματα κατά της ευρωπαϊκής αλληλεγγύης
Στο βρετανικό Channel 4 προβλήθηκε εκπομπή με τίτλο «Go Greek for a week», στην οποία οι Έλληνες προβάλλονται ως λαός της κακοδιαχείρισης της φοροδιαφυγής και της διαφθοράς.
Μαθητές του Πειραματικού Γυμνάσιου Ρεθύμνου στη προσπάθεια να διασώσουν την αξιοπρέπεια της Ελλάδας απέστειλαν επιστολή στο εν λόγω κανάλι, με την οποία το καλούσαν να εξετάσει λογικά την πραγματικότητα, βάσει της αρχής της αλληλεγγύης, στην οποία εδράζεται το ευρωπαϊκό οικοδόμημα. Τα παιδιά για μια ακόμα φορά έδειξαν ότι έχουν περισσότερο ευρωπαϊκό πνεύμα από τους πολιτικούς, οι οποίοι πρέπει να ακολουθήσουμε το παράδειγμα τους.
Το κανάλι ανταπάντησε προσπαθώντας να τεκμηριώσει επιστημονικά την ανθελληνική επίθεση, γεγονός που φέρνει στην Ευρώπη μνήμες προ 70ετίας.
Αποδεικνύεται από το περιστατικό αυτό ότι δυστυχώς η οικονομική κρίση έχει επιφέρει μια διάσταση και διάσπαση της ψυχικής ενότητας στο επίπεδο της βάσης των λαών της Ευρώπης, η οποία είναι αντίθετη προς το πνεύμα των ιδρυτικών πράξεων της Ένωσης και τις αρχές του αλληλοσεβασμού μεταξύ των κρατών μελών και των λαών τους και του σεβασμού της αξιοπρέπειας του ανθρώπου.
Το σίγουρο είναι ότι η οικονομική κρίση κάποτε θα περάσει. Είναι λοιπόν προφανές ότι πρέπει πάση θυσία να διατηρηθεί η ψυχική ενότητα και στην κορυφή αλλά και στη βάση των λαών της Ευρώπης.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


Τι μέτρα προτίθεται να λάβει ώστε με ενημερωτικές καμπάνιες ή με άλλο τρόπο οι λαοί της Ευρώπης να μάθουν καλύτερα ο ένας τον άλλον, ώστε να γνωρίζουν ότι οι Έλληνες δεν είναι τεμπέληδες και απατεώνες, οι Ιταλοί δεν είναι δειλοί, όπως παρουσιάζονται σε άλλα ανάλογα δημοσιεύματα και εικόνες, ούτε οι Ισπανοί, οι Πορτογάλοι, οι Γάλλοι και οι λοιποί Ευρωπαίοι είναι ανυπόληπτοι;










—


Είναι βέβαιο ότι όλοι οι λαοί έχουν τα καλά τους και τα κακά τους. Αφού σήμερα προβάλλονται και δηλητηριάζουν τη βάση των λαών τα κακά, μήπως είναι σκόπιμο να γίνει μια πανευρωπαϊκή προσπάθεια να τονιστούν και τα καλά των λαών;




Απάντηση της κας Reding εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(4 Απριλίου 2012)
Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή υποστηρίζει και σέβεται απόλυτα την ελευθερία έκφρασης και την ανεξαρτησία των μέσων ενημέρωσης.
Παράλληλα, η Επιτροπή αναγνωρίζει ότι είναι σημαντικό να ενισχυθεί το αίσθημα της ευρωπαϊκής ταυτότητας, του σεβασμού, της αλληλεγγύης και της αμοιβαίας κατανόησης που βρίσκονται στο επίκεντρο του ευρωπαϊκού οράματος. 
Στο πλαίσιο αυτό η Επιτροπή έχει αναπτύξει αρκετές δραστηριότητες: 







Όπως προτείνει το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο στην έκθεσή του για τη δημοσιογραφία και τα νέα μέσα ενημέρωσης (227), η Επιτροπή παρέχει στους δημοσιογράφους, ως παράγοντες διαμόρφωσης της κοινής γνώμης, σεμινάρια σχετικά με ευρωπαϊκά ζητήματα με στόχο, μεταξύ άλλων, να συμβάλει στην αμφισβήτηση των στερεοτύπων και των παρανοήσεων που επικρατούν μεταξύ των πολιτών της ΕΕ. Ορισμένες πρόσφατες επισκέψεις δημοσιογράφων από διάφορα κράτη μέλη στην Ελλάδα και μια επίσκεψη ελλήνων δημοσιογράφων στη Γερμανία επιβεβαίωσαν την επιτυχία της πρωτοβουλίας αυτής.











Το πρόγραμμα <QT.START>«</QT.START>Ευρώπη για τους πολίτες<QT.END>»</QT.END> (228) αποσκοπεί να καλλιεργήσει το αίσθημα της ευρωπαϊκής ιθαγένειας παρέχοντας στους πολίτες τη δυνατότητα να ανταλλάξουν εμπειρίες και απόψεις, επισημαίνοντας τις βασικές αξίες πάνω στις οποίες έχει οικοδομηθεί η ΕΕ και υπερβαίνοντας τα πολιτιστικά εμπόδια μεταξύ των ευρωπαίων μέσω της ανταλλαγής απόψεων, αξιών και εμπειριών. Οι συναντήσεις πρόσωπο με πρόσωπο μεταξύ πολιτών σε τοπικό επίπεδο αποτελούν ένα πολύ αποτελεσματικό μέσο για να ξεπεραστούν τα αρνητικά στερεότυπα και να ενισχυθεί το αίσθημα της ευρωπαϊκής ιθαγένειας. Σκοπός της πρότασης για νέο πρόγραμμα <QT.START>«</QT.START>Ευρώπη για τους πολίτες<QT.END>»</QT.END> για την περίοδο 2014-2020 (229) είναι να εξακολουθήσει να συμβάλει στην επίτευξη των στόχων αυτών.











Ωστόσο, η πρόταση της Επιτροπής για το Ευρωπαϊκό Έτος Πολιτών 2013 (230) έχει στόχο να ενισχύσει την ευαισθητοποίηση γύρω από τα δικαιώματα των πολιτών της ΕΕ και να δώσει έναυσμα για διάλογο σχετικά με τα οφέλη που συνεπάγεται η ιθαγένεια της ΕΕ στην καθημερινή τους ζωή, ιδιαίτερα όσον αφορά την ενδυνάμωση της κοινωνικής συνοχής και της αμοιβαίας κατανόησης.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-001835/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(15 February 2012)

Subject: Undermining European solidarity 
On the British TV station Channel 4, a programme entitled ‘Go Greek for a week’ was broadcast, in which Greeks are represented as a people of misgovernment, tax evasion and corruption. 
In their endeavour to salvage Greek self-respect, pupils at the Experimental High School of Rethymnon sent a letter to the television station in question, requesting that they should examine the reality rationally, on the basis of the principle of solidarity, the foundation on which the European edifice is built. Yet again, these young people have shown that they have a more European spirit than the politicians, who should follow their example. 
Τhe channel replied, attempting in its reply to provide scientific documentation for its anti-Greek attack, so reviving memories of the Europe of 70 years ago…
This incident reveals that unfortunately the economic crisis has brought a distancing and a rupture of psychological unity at grassroots level in Europe, contravening the spirit of the founding acts of the Union and the principles of mutual respect between its Member States and its peoples and respect for human dignity. 
What is certain is that the economic crisis will one day be a thing of the past. It is obviously vital that at all costs, psychological unity must be preserved both at leadership and grassroots level in Europe. 
In view of this: 







What measures does the Commission intend to take so that, through informational campaigns or by other means, the people of Europe can get to know each other better and thus become aware that Greeks are not idlers and cheats and Italians are not cowardly, as depicted in various publications and images, while neither the Spanish, Portuguese, French nor any other European nation is disreputable. 











Certainly all peoples have their qualities and shortcomings. Given that today it is their shortcomings that are being publicised, poisoning popular perceptions, would it not be a good idea to launch a pan-Europe initiative to highlight national qualities? 




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(4 April 2012)
The European Commission fully supports and respects the freedom of expression and the independence of the media.
At the same time, the Commission recognises the importance of enhancing the feeling of European identity, of respect, solidarity and mutual understanding that are at the core of the European project. 
In this context the Commission has developed several activities:







As recommended by the European Parliament in its Report on journalism and new media (231), the Commission offers journalists, as multipliers of public opinion, seminars on EU matters with the objective, among others, of contributing to contest stereotypes and misunderstandings among EU citizens. A number of recent visits to Greece by journalists from various Member States and one visit to Germany by Greek journalists have confirmed the success of this initiative.











The ‘Europe for Citizens’ programme (232) aims at fostering European citizenship by giving citizens the opportunity to interact, by highlighting the basic values on which the EU is built, and by bridging the cultural barriers between Europeans through the exchange of opinions, values and experiences. Face to face meetings between citizens at local level are a very effective way to overcome negative stereotypes and strengthen the feeling of being European. The proposal for the new ‘Europe for Citizens’ programme 2014-2020 (233) aims at continuing to contribute to these objectives.











Moreover, the Commission proposal for a European Year of Citizens 2013 (234) aims at raising awareness about EU citizens' rights and stimulating the debate about the benefits of EU citizenship on their daily lives, in particular in terms of strengthening societal cohesion and mutual understanding.




(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-002139/12
à la Commission
Marc Tarabella (S&D)
(23 février 2012)

Objet: Le virus de Schmallenberg
Depuis le mois de novembre 2011, sept États membres de l'Union européenne, dont la Belgique, sont touchés par le virus de Schmallenberg. Pour l'instant, l'on ne dispose ni de diagnostic sérologique, ni de vaccin. Cette affection ne fait l'objet d'aucune réglementation européenne ou internationale. Toutefois, compte tenu de son caractère émergent, les pays touchés ont pris l'initiative d'en informer la Commission européenne et l'OIE (Organisation mondiale de la santé animale). Ces notifications ont entraîné à ce stade un nombre limité de fermetures de marchés à l'exportation (animaux vivants et semences).
La Commission avait inscrit ce point à l'ordre du jour du Comité permanent (CPCASA) des 11 et 12 janvier derniers qui a adopté une position en faveur de la définition de lignes directrices pour la surveillance. Le 20 janvier, la DG SANCO a donc réuni un groupe d'experts pour faire un point plus précis. En-dehors de la préparation de lignes directrices pour la surveillance et les investigations, elle ne semble pas vouloir prendre de mesures particulières ni même financer des actions de recherche.
Or, le sujet a été traité lors de la dernière réunion du Conseil des ministres du 23 janvier 2012 à la demande du ministre des Pays-Bas, et plusieurs États membres ont souhaité «une approche coordonnée de l'UE comportant notamment un échange rapide d'informations sur les cas détectés, la conjugaison des efforts de recherche sur les diagnostics, l'épidémiologie et la mise au point d'un vaccin, ainsi qu'un soutien financier de la CE en faveur du suivi et de la recherche».
— La Commission compte-t-elle répondre favorablement aux demandes de ces États membres, notamment par un soutien financier en faveur du suivi et de la recherche?
— Dans la mesure où les organisations membres de la Fesass (Fédération européenne pour la santé animale et la sécurité sanitaire) sont fortement impliquées aux côtés de l'administration dans le suivi sur le terrain du développement de cette infection, la Commission compte-t-elle les associer à son suivi épidémiologique au niveau des États membres?
Réponse commune donnée par M. Dalli au nom de la Commission
(28 mars 2012)
La Commission suit de près l'apparition du virus de Schmallenberg (SBV) afin de garantir une réponse coordonnée au niveau de l'UE. Depuis décembre 2011, ce problème a fait l'objet de plusieurs discussions avec des experts et des chercheurs des États membres dans le cadre du comité permanent de la chaîne alimentaire et de la santé animale (CPCASA), et également au sein du groupe de travail du Conseil rassemblant les chefs des services vétérinaires. 
En conséquence, la Commission a publié un document d'orientation sur les actions prioritaires à mener dans l'Union européenne dans les mois à venir (Guidance document on the priority actions to be undertaken in the EU in the next months) (235) concernant le virus de Schmallenberg, qui a été approuvé par tous les États membres lors de la réunion du CPCASA du 7 février 2012. 
Le 17 février 2012, la Commission a présenté ledit document à l'occasion de la réunion du comité consultatif sur la santé animale, qui réunit des associations d'éleveurs et des associations sectorielles actives au niveau de l'UE, telles que la Fédération européenne pour la santé animale et la sécurité sanitaire (Fesass). Le comité a pleinement soutenu l'approche présentée par la Commission. 
Afin d'assurer une transparence totale et de fournir des informations aux éleveurs et aux autres parties concernées, la Commission a mis en place un site web consacré au SBV (236).
Elle explore également les possibilités d'octroi d'un soutien financier pour la conduite d'études sur le SBV en collaboration avec les chercheurs des États membres.
Ni l'UE ni l'OIE ne répertorient cette maladie comme une maladie à déclaration obligatoire et, en conséquence, la Commission recommande que chaque État membre applique ses propres procédures de vigilance vétérinaire pour la détection des cas suspects et leur signalement aux autorités vétérinaires. La Commission a demandé à l'Autorité européenne de sécurité des aliments (EFSA) de procéder à la collecte et à l'analyse des données épidémiologiques recueillies sur le SBV dans les États membres touchés et de produire un rapport d'ici le 31 mars 2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001855/12
to the Commission
Diane Dodds (NI)
(15 February 2012)

Subject: Schmallenberg virus
To date, what measures has the Commission taken to communicate to farmers and Member State governments ways to contain or reduce the outbreak of the Schmallenberg virus (SBV)?
Will it provide details of the number of confirmed cases of the Schmallenberg virus, broken down by Member State and animals infected, as well as a timeline of events after the virus was identified, and indicate the action taken and when each Member State was contacted?
Question for written answer E-002139/12
to the Commission
Marc Tarabella (S&D)
(23 February 2012)

Subject: The Schmallenberg virus
Since November 2011, seven EU Member States, including Belgium, have been affected by the Schmallenberg virus. There is currently no serological diagnosis, and no vaccine. This condition is not covered by any European or international regulations. However, given that it is an emerging virus, the countries affected have taken the initiative to inform the European Commission and the OIE (World Organisation for Animal Health) about it. These notifications have led, at this stage, to a limited number of export market closures (live animals and seeds).
The Commission had included this item on the agenda of the Standing Committee (SCFCAH) of 11 and 12 January, which adopted a position in favour of establishing guidelines for monitoring. On 20 January, the Directorate-General for Health and Consumers (DG SANCO) called together a group of experts to provide a more detailed report. Beyond preparing guidelines for monitoring and investigations, it does not appear to want to take any special measures or even fund research activities.
Yet the subject was discussed at the last meeting of the Council of Ministers on 23 January 2012 at the request of the Dutch Minister, and several Member States called for ‘a coordinated EU approach regarding this new disease, including rapid exchange of information on the detected cases, combined research efforts on diagnostics, epidemiology and vaccine development, and financial support by the Commission for monitoring and research’.
— Does the Commission intend to respond positively to the requests of these Member States, in particular through financial support for monitoring and research?
— In so far as organisations belonging to the European Federation for Animal Health and Sanitary Security (FESASS) are closely involved with the authorities in monitoring the development of this infection on the ground, does the Commission intend to involve them in its epidemiological monitoring at Member State level?
Joint answer given by Mr Dalli on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)
The occurrence of Schmallenberg virus (SBV) has been closely followed by the Commission in order to ensure an EU coordinated response. Since December 2011, this issue has been discussed several times with Member States' experts and scientists in the framework of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health (SCoFCAH) and at the Council working party of the Chief Veterinary Officers. 
As a result, the Commission has issued a ‘Guidance document on the priority actions to be undertaken in the EU in the next months’ (237) concerning the Schmallenberg virus which was endorsed by all Member States at SCoFCAH on 7 February 2012. 
On 17 February 2012, the Commission presented the above document at the meeting of the Animal Health Advisory Committee, which includes EU farmer associations and sector associations like the Fédération Européenne pour la Santé Animale et la Sécurité Sanitaire (FESASS). The Committee was fully supportive of the approach indicated by the Commission. 
In order to ensure full transparency, and provide information to farmers and other stakeholders, the Commission has a website dedicated to SBV (238).
The Commission is also exploring possibilities, to provide financial assistance to perform studies together with Member States' scientists related to SBV.
The disease is not listed among notifiable diseases by the EU or by the OIE and therefore, the Commission recommends that each Member State activates its veterinary vigilance procedures for identifying suspect cases and reporting to the veterinary authorities. The Commission has requested the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) to collect and analyse the epidemiological data gathered on SBV in the affected Member States and to produce a report by 31 March 2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-001867/12
to the Commission
Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE)
(16 February 2012)

Subject: Hydraulic fracturing
Can the Commission ascertain the reasons why the French Government prohibited hydraulic fracturing in June 2011, as this will have important consequences for other Member States which are currently engaged in debate as to whether to permit this practice?
Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(13 March 2012)
The Commission is aware that the French law (239) prohibits the exploration and exploitation of liquid or gaseous hydrocarbons using hydraulic fracturing on the French territory. It is not in the Commission's remit to ascertain the reasons why a Member State, and in this case France, takes a particular decision concerning the conditions for exploiting its energy resources. 
Indeed, according to Article 194(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Member States have the right to determine the conditions for exploiting their energy resources, with due regard to the need to preserve and improve the environment (Article 194(1) TFEU). Member States are also allowed to introduce more stringent measures that go beyond the EU environmental legislation (Article 193 TFEU).
The Commission is currently gathering information and monitoring closely scientific and project developments in EU Member States and outside Europe (see for example Written Questions P‐4342/2011 by Mr Bas Eickhout, E‐6090/2011 by Mr Aylward; E‐7655/2011 by Mrs Childers and E‐9227/2011 by Mr Bas Eickhout (240)).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001872/12
to the Commission
Pat the Cope Gallagher (ALDE)
(16 February 2012)

Subject: Hydraulic Fracturing
In the absence of a comprehensive directive establishing EU legal provisions on mining, can the Commission clarify the precise safety assessment and inspection activities which must currently be complied with, prior to the commencement of hydraulic hacking, in order to ensure the protection of the environment and human health?
Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(16 April 2012)
Under the current framework, it is up to Member States to ensure — via appropriate assessment, licensing and permitting regimes as well as through monitoring and inspections activities — that any exploration or exploitation of energy sources, including those using hydraulic fracturing practices, complies with the requirements of the existing legal framework in the EU, including provisions on the protection of the human health and environment. 
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the note provided to the European Parliament (241) regarding the applicable EU environmental legislation to unconventional hydrocarbon projects involving the use of advanced technologies such as horizontal drilling and high-volume hydraulic fracturing, as well as to the guidance note on the application of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (242) (2011/92/EU) to such projects (243).
EU provisions on workers' health and safety also apply to these projects. Article 6 of Directive 89/391/EEC (244) requires the employer to take the necessary measures for the safety and health protection of workers on the basis of the general principles of prevention, inter alia, avoiding, evaluating and combating risks at source, depending on the nature of activities and the size of the undertaking. It also obliges employers to carry out and document a risk assessment. Directive 92/91/EEC addresses minimum health and safety requirements relevant to workers in the extractive industries through drilling (245). 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-001887/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(16. februára 2012)

Vec: Pašeráctvo na východnej hranici EÚ
Európska agentúra pre riadenie operačnej spolupráce na vonkajších hraniciach členských štátov Európskej únie Frontex konštatovala, že výrazné cenové rozdiely medzi členskými štátmi a štátmi východnej Európy spôsobujú pašovanie cigariet, benzínu a rôzneho spotrebného tovaru. Bezpečnostná situácia na východných hraniciach Európskej únie sa v poslednom období nejako výrazne nezmenila a najväčšiu hrozbu predstavuje práve problematika pašeráctva. Významnú kriminálnu aktivitu predstavuje aj pašovanie ukradnutých vozidiel. V menšej miere sú to drogy, alkohol a menšie zbrane. Pašovanie podporuje šedú a čiernu ekonomiku a spôsobuje štrukturálnu nezamestnanosť. Členským štátom teda spôsobuje stratu príjmov.
— Akým spôsobom plánuje Európska komisia eliminovať pašovanie cigariet, benzínu, či rôzneho spotrebného tovaru na východnej hranici Európskej únie?
Odpoveď pani Malmströmovej v mene Komisie
(11. apríla 2012)
Komisiu takisto znepokojuje problém pašovania na východných hraniciach EÚ.
Problematika celkového boja proti závažnej a organizovanej trestnej činnosti sa rieši v rámci Štokholmského programu, súvisiaceho akčného plánu a stratégie vnútornej bezpečnosti EÚ (246). Cieľom tohto strategického rámca je najmä prevencia, odhaľovanie a zamedzenie prenikania takejto trestnej činnosti do oficiálnej ekonomiky. Stratégia vnútornej bezpečnosti EÚ stanovuje viacero cielených opatrení, týkajúcich sa najmä posilňovania bezpečnosti prostredníctvom riadenia hraníc.
Jedným z najvýznamnejších druhov trestnej činnosti na východných hraniciach je pašovanie vysoko zdaňovaného tovaru, najmä cigariet, ktoré spôsobuje EÚ a jej členským štátom značné straty príjmov. Konkrétne sa s problematikou pašovania cez východné hranice zaoberá akčný plán boja proti pašovaniu cigariet a alkoholu na východnej hranici EÚ prijatý 24. júna 2011.
Spoločná colná operácia Barrel bola vôbec prvá operácia zameraná na pašovanie po železnici pozdĺž východnej hranice EÚ. Zhabané cigarety (1,2 milióna) predstavujú stratu najmenej štvrť milióna eur v podobe úniku cla a daní (247).
Okrem toho EÚ v uplynulých rokoch vyvinula viacero mechanizmov na zabezpečenie harmonizovaného vykonávania colných kontrol na vonkajších hraniciach v členských štátoch, napr. zmeny a doplnenia Colného kódexu (248), ktorými sa zaviedla všeobecná právne záväzná požiadavka, aby sa colné kontroly vykonávali na základe analýzy rizík (249).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001887/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(16 February 2012)

Subject: Smuggling on the EU's eastern borders
The European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union, Frontex, has stated that substantial price differences between the Member States and the countries of Eastern Europe are at the root of the smuggling of cigarettes, petrol and various consumer goods. The security situation on the EU’s eastern borders has not changed significantly recently, and the greatest threat is the issue of smuggling. The smuggling of stolen vehicles is a major criminal activity. The smuggling of drugs, alcohol and smaller arms is a smaller‐scale problem. Smuggling supports the grey and black economies and causes structural unemployment, thus causing a loss of revenue for Member States.






—


How does the Commission plan to eliminate the smuggling of cigarettes, petrol and various consumer goods across the EU’s eastern borders? 




Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(11 April 2012)
The Commission shares the concern expressed about the problem of smuggling at the EU's eastern borders.
The overall fight against serious and organised crime is addressed within the Stockholm programme, the associated action plan and the EU internal security strategy (250). This strategic framework aims notably to prevent, detect and root out infiltration of the mainstream economy by such crime. The EU internal security strategy set out more targeted measures, notably concerning the strengthening of security through border management.
One of the prevailing criminal phenomena at the Eastern Border is smuggling of highly taxed goods, especially cigarettes, which causes significant losses of revenue for the EU at its Member States. Smuggling through the Eastern borders is specifically addressed through the action plan to fight against smuggling of cigarettes and alcohol along the EU Eastern Border adopted on 24 June 2011. 
Joint Customs Operation Barrel was the first-ever operation targeting rail traffic along the EU's Eastern border. The cigarettes seized (1.2 million) represent losses of at least one quarter of a million euros in terms of evaded duties and taxes (251).
Furthermore the EU developed several mechanisms in recent years in order to ensure harmonised application of customs controls at the external borders in the Member States such as amendments to the Customs code (252) introducing a general legal requirement for notably basing customs controls on risk analysis (253). 
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-001905/12
adresată Comisiei
Cătălin Sorin Ivan (S&D)
(16 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Atitudini discriminatorii— PVV
Partidul Libertăţii din Olanda (PVV) a lansat pe site-ul său o aplicaţie cu caracter discriminatoriu, având ca ţintă lucrătorii din Europa Centrală sau de Est.
Prin acest demers sunt violate drepturi şi libertăţi fundamentale ale cetăţenilor UE, înscrise în legislaţia primară şi secundară a UE, dar şi în Carta drepturilor fundamentale.
Chiar dacă implementarea de măsuri antidiscriminatorii este o prerogativă a statelor membre, în cazul de faţă, prim-ministrul olandez nu a dezaprobat şi nici nu a condamnat acţiunea acestui partid, considerând-o neimportantă. E evident, aşadar, că guvernul olandez nu poate fi apărătorul drepturilor şi libertăţilor cetăţeneşti.
În aceste condiţii, doresc să întreb Comisia cum se poziţionează faţă de acest caz particular şi cum îşi propune să prevină acţiuni similare?
Răspuns dat de dl Reding  în numele Comisiei
(2 aprilie 2012)
Comisia dorește să supună atenției distinsului membru al Parlamentului declarația făcută în cadrul dezbaterii din ședința plenară din 13 martie 2012 (254). Comisia sprijină pe deplin rezoluția comună adoptată de Parlamentul European la 15 martie 2012 (255).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001905/12
to the Commission
Cătălin Sorin Ivan (S&D)
(16 February 2012)

Subject: Discriminatory attitudes — PVV
The Dutch Party for Freedom (PVV) has launched on its website a website of a discriminatory nature which targets workers from Central and Eastern Europe.
This application violates the fundamental rights and freedoms of EU citizens as laid down not only in primary and secondary EU legislation, but also in the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Even though the implementation of anti-discrimination measures is a prerogative of the Member States, in this case the Dutch Prime Minister has not disapproved of or condemned the actions of that party, regarding these as insignificant. It is clear, therefore, that the Dutch Government can be no defender of citizens’ rights and freedoms.
Given these circumstances, can the Commission state its position on this particular case and how it proposes to prevent similar occurrences?
Answer given by Mrs Reding  on behalf of the Commission
(2 April 2012)
The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the statement made in the plenary debate on 13 March 2012 (256). The Commission fully supports the joint resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 15 March 2012 (257).
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-001931/12
adresată Comisiei
Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D)
(17 februarie 2012)

Subiect: Volatilitatea prețurilor agricole
Creșterea prețurilor, atât la materiile prime de natură agricolă, cât și la cele de natură non-agricolă, în paralel cu creșterea cererii la nivel mondial, precum și producțiile mai mici înregistrate din cauza fenomenelor meteo extreme din ultima perioadă impun menținerea unor instrumente specifice de intervenție pe piață capabile să acționeze ca plasă de siguranță în situații de criză. Consider că mecanismul de intervenție trebuie menținut în condițiile actuale de criză economică și în condițiile în care se așteaptă o fluctuație a prețurilor la produsele agricole importante în viitor.
Cred că necesitatea analizării de noi măsuri care să combată efectele volatilității prețurilor și să contribuie la revigorarea piețelor este vitală. În aceste condiții, care este strategia Comisiei pentru a gestiona volatilitatea extremă a prețurilor? Ce măsuri are în vedere Comisia pentru a asigura fermierilor o pondere corectă la nivelul lanțului alimentar?
Răspuns dat de dl Cioloș în numele Comisiei
(28 martie 2012)
Comisia monitorizează și analizează cu atenție volatilitatea manifestată pe piețele agricole. Instrumentul european de monitorizare a prețurilor alimentelor are în componența sa indici de preț care permit compararea evoluției prețurilor mai multor categorii de produse în întregul lanț de aprovizionare cu alimente. (http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/food/competitiveness/prices_monitoring_en.htm).
Un raport periodic privind evoluția prețurilor la produsele alimentare este publicat la adresa http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/foodprices/index_en.htm.
O analiză mai detaliată a volatilității poate fi consultată la
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/tradepol/commodityprices/index_en.htm.
Prin propunerile legislative privind perspectiva PAC 2020, în special în ceea ce privește revizuirea organizării comune a pieței, Comisia își propune să consolideze plasa de siguranță pentru fermieri în contextul menținerii formulei de orientare către piață promovate de reformele anterioare. Propunerile vor îmbunătăți capacitatea de a reacționa rapid și în mod eficace la viitoarele situații de criză, în ceea ce privește atât măsurile care pot fi luate, cât și mijloacele de finanțare disponibile. Ele vizează mai ales modernizarea dispozițiilor privind măsurile excepționale prin stabilirea unei platforme comune simplificate care să facă față potențialelor situații de criză.
Un obiectiv-cheie al propunerii este de se acorda producătorilor din fiecare stat membru și din toate sectoarele instrumentele necesare pentru facilitarea cooperării și colaborării la scară mai mare, pentru ca aceștia să profite de avantaje economice precum o mai bună poziționare în lanțul de aprovizionare, economii de scară și capacitatea de a adăuga valoare. Pentru a asigura condiții de concurență echitabile pe întreg teritoriul UE, propunerea adoptă o abordare orizontală trans-sectorială și conține dispoziții privind recunoașterea obligatorie de către toate statele membre a organizațiilor de producători (inclusiv a asociațiilor acestora) și a organizațiilor interprofesionale.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001931/12
to the Commission
Vasilica Viorica Dăncilă (S&D)
(17 February 2012)

Subject: Volatile agricultural prices
Rising prices, both for agricultural and non-agricultural raw materials, in parallel with the growth of worldwide demand, as well as the lower production recorded due to the recent extreme weather conditions make it essential to maintain specific market intervention mechanisms providing a safety net in times of crisis. Such a mechanism must be maintained during the current economic crisis and where price fluctuations affecting major agricultural products are expected in future.
Careful examination of new measures to combat the effects of price volatility and assist in market recovery is arguably of vital importance. In view of this, what is the strategy of the Commission to manage extreme price volatility? What measures does the Commission envisage in order to ensure a fair share for farmers in the food distribution chain?
Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)
Commission is carefully monitoring and analysing volatility on agricultural markets. Price indices are available in the European food prices monitoring tool which allows comparison of price evolution across the food supply chain for various product categories (http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/food/competitiveness/prices_monitoring_en.htm).
A regular report on food price development is published under http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/foodprices/index_en.htm
Some more detailed analysis on volatility can be found under http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/tradepol/commodityprices/index_en.htm
With the legal proposals on CAP towards 2020, and in particular concerning the revision of the single Common Market Organisation, the Commission aims to strengthen the safety net for farmers within the context of continued market orientation of previous reforms. The proposals will improve the ability to respond quickly and effectively to future crisis situations, both in terms of the measures that can be taken and the available funding. In particular, the proposals aim at modernising the provisions on exceptional measures by providing a simplified and common platform to tackle future potential crisis situations.
A key aim of the proposal is to grant producers in each Member State and in all sectors the necessary tools to facilitate greater cooperation and collaboration in order that they might take advantage of its economic benefits, such as improved positioning in the supply chain, economies of scale and the ability to add value. In order to ensure a level playing field across the EU, the proposal adopts a horizontal approach across all sectors and contains provisions on the obligatory recognition by all Member States of producer organisations (and their associations) and interbranch organisations.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001932/12
a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) y Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(17 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Trato discriminatorio a miembros de delegaciones de la UE en relaciones entre personas del mismo sexo
Miembros de delegaciones de la UE que mantienen una relación con una persona de su mismo sexo gozan actualmente de menos derechos y protección que sus compañeros que mantienen una relación heterosexual.
Hemos recibido informes coincidentes de miembros de delegaciones que se encuentran en la citada situación, en casi todos los casos situados en terceros países donde no son bien aceptadas las relaciones entre personas del mismo sexo. A sus parejas se les exige que se registren como «personal doméstico», con lo que tienen derecho a un menor grado de protección diplomática en caso de adversidad.
Aunque se informa de esta situación a los miembros que se encuentran en esta situación antes de aceptar un puesto, el Servicio de Acción Exterior parece reticente a prestarles ningún tipo de apoyo en el procedimiento de obtención del visado apropiado. En dicho procedimiento, parece ser que el Servicio invita a su personal a realizar declaraciones imprecisas a las autoridades del tercer país, refiriéndose a sus cónyuges como «personal doméstico». Al mismo tiempo, el Servicio de Acción Exterior se muestra reacio a declararlos como cónyuges del miembro de la delegación, lo que les otorgaría el mismo nivel de protección que el que se concede a los cónyuges heterosexuales.
1. ¿Puede indicar el Servicio de Acción Exterior el número de trabajadores de los que tiene constancia que se han enfrentado a esta desgraciada situación?
2. ¿Por qué invita el Servicio de Acción Exterior a los miembros de su personal a hacer declaraciones imprecisas y se niega él mismo a hacer declaraciones?
3. ¿Incitar a los miembros del personal a que hagan declaraciones imprecisas no pone a estos en peligro en terceros países?
4. Habida cuenta del Estatuto de los funcionarios y régimen aplicable a otros agentes, así como de la jurisprudencia de las autoridades de la UE en materia de empleo, ¿considera el Servicio de Acción Exterior que esto puede constituir una discriminación por razones de orientación sexual, en el sentido de un trato menos favorable a las personas por razón de su orientación sexual?
5. ¿Tiene previsto el Servicio de Acción Exterior abordar este trato discriminatorio de su personal? Si es así, ¿cómo?
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-002000/12
a la Comisión
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) y Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(21 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Trato discriminatorio a miembros de delegaciones de la UE en relaciones entre personas del mismo sexo
Miembros de delegaciones de la UE que mantienen una relación con una persona de su mismo sexo gozan actualmente de menos derechos y protección que sus compañeros que mantienen una relación heterosexual.
Hemos recibido informes coincidentes de miembros de delegaciones que se encuentran en la citada situación, en casi todos los casos situados en terceros países donde no son bien aceptadas las relaciones entre personas del mismo sexo. A sus parejas se les exige que se registren como «personal doméstico», con lo que tienen derecho a un menor grado de protección diplomática en caso de adversidad.
Aunque se informa de esta situación a los miembros que se encuentran en esta situación antes de aceptar un puesto, la Comisión parece reticente a prestarles ningún tipo de apoyo en el procedimiento de obtención del visado apropiado. En dicho procedimiento, parece ser que la Comisión invita a su personal a realizar declaraciones imprecisas a las autoridades del tercer país, refiriéndose a sus cónyuges como «personal doméstico». Al mismo tiempo, la Comisión se muestra reacia a declarar a estas personas cónyuges del miembro de la delegación, lo que les otorgaría el mismo nivel de protección que el que se concede a los cónyuges heterosexuales.
— ¿Puede indicar la Comisión el número de trabajadores de los que tiene constancia que se han enfrentado a esta desgraciada situación?
— ¿Por qué invita la Comisión a los miembros de su personal a hacer declaraciones imprecisas y se niega ella misma a hacer declaraciones?
— ¿Incitar a los miembros del personal a que hagan declaraciones imprecisas no pone a estos en peligro en terceros países?
— Habida cuenta del Estatuto de los funcionarios y régimen aplicable a otros agentes, así como de la jurisprudencia de las autoridades de la UE en materia de empleo, ¿considera la Comisión que esto puede constituir una discriminación por razones de orientación sexual, en el sentido de un trato menos favorable a las personas por razón de su orientación sexual?
— ¿Tiene previsto la Comisión abordar este trato discriminatorio de su personal? Si es así, ¿cómo?
Respuesta conjunta de la Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Sra. Ashton en nombre de la Comisión
(8 de junio de 2012)
1. Desde el comienzo del Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior (SEAE), ha habido muy pocas situaciones problemáticas, que no se han registrado por razones de protección de datos. Obviamente, la administración del SEAE solo sabe de los problemas cuando el personal afectado se los comunica a los servicios administrativos del SEAE. Antes de trasladar a miembros del personal a cualquier delegación, el SEAE advierte a los candidatos de las posibles consecuencias para su situación familiar.
2. En primera lugar, el procedimiento consiste en obtener un visado de cortesía por parte de la Embajada en cuestión en Bruselas. Si se detecta algún problema en el momento de pedir la expedición de dicho visado, el agente que realiza la solicitud puede pedir que se examine el destino que se le ha asignado. En ningún caso se aconseja la opción de solicitar un visado de «personal doméstico».
3. El personal doméstico de los diplomáticos goza de protección frente a las acciones judiciales de las autoridades locales.
4. La cuestión planteada no es competencia del Estatuto de los funcionarios. Cada Estado de acogida mantiene su soberanía sobre privilegios e inmunidades en el marco de la Convención de Viena de 1961 sobre relaciones diplomáticas. Ha de tenerse en cuenta el marco de reciprocidad entre las autoridades belgas y las misiones diplomáticas de terceros países.
5. El SEAE ha defendido y defenderá siempre el respeto de los valores fundamentales en sus relaciones con terceros países y su política de personal.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-001932/12
an die Kommission (Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin)
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) und Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(17. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: VP/HR — Diskriminierende Behandlung von EU-Bediensteten, die gleichgeschlechtliche Beziehungen führen
EU-Bedienstete, die eine gleichgeschlechtliche Beziehung führen, genießen derzeit weniger Rechte und Schutz als ihre Kollegen, die andersgeschlechtliche Beziehungen führen.
Wir haben einstimmige Berichte von EU-Bediensteten erhalten, die sich in der oben beschriebenen Situation befinden. Sie sind vorwiegend in Drittländern ansässig, wo gleichgeschlechtliche Beziehungen unerwünscht sind. Ihre Partner werden aufgefordert, sich als „Personal“ registrieren zu lassen und erhalten bei Zwischenfällen somit weniger diplomatischen Schutz.
Während die Bediensteten vor der Annahme einer Position hiervon in Kenntnis gesetzt werden, scheint der Auswärtige Dienst ihnen bei der Beantragung des entsprechenden Visums nur ungern Unterstützung zu leisten. Dabei fordert der Dienst seine Bediensteten allem Anschein nach auf, ungenaue Angaben gegenüber Drittlandsbehörden zu machen, da sie ihre Partner als „Personal“ bezeichnen müssen. Gleichzeitig scheint der Auswärtige Dienst sich dagegen zu wehren, sie als Partner der Bediensteten zu bezeichnen, wodurch sie denselben Schutz wie andersgeschlechtliche Partner genießen würden.
1. Kann der Auswärtige Dienst angeben, wie viele Bedienstete seiner Ansicht nach mit dieser unglücklichen Situation konfrontiert sind?
2. Warum fordert der Auswärtige Dienst seine Bediensteten auf, ungenaue Angaben zu machen, während er selbst genaue Angaben verweigert?
3. Führt die Aufforderung der Bediensteten, ungenaue Angaben zu machen, nicht dazu, dass sie in Drittländern einem größeren Risiko ausgesetzt sind?
4. Ist der Auswärtige Dienst angesichts des Statuts der Beamten und der Beschäftigungsbedingungen für die sonstigen Bediensteten sowie der Rechtsprechung der Arbeitsaufsichtsbehörden der EU der Ansicht, dass dies letztendlich eine Diskriminierung aufgrund der sexuellen Ausrichtung, also eine ungünstigere Behandlung von Personen aufgrund ihrer sexuellen Ausrichtung darstellen könnte?
5. Beabsichtigt der Auswärtige Dienst, gegen diese diskriminierende Behandlung seiner Bediensteten anzugehen, und wenn ja, in welcher Form?
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-002000/12
an die Kommission
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) und Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(21. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Diskriminierende Behandlung von EU-Bediensteten, die gleichgeschlechtliche Beziehungen führen
EU-Bedienstete, die eine gleichgeschlechtliche Beziehung führen, genießen derzeit weniger Rechte und Schutz als ihre Kollegen, die andersgeschlechtliche Beziehungen führen.
Wir haben übereinstimmende Berichte von EU-Bediensteten erhalten, die sich in der oben beschriebenen Situation befinden. Sie sind vorwiegend in Drittländern ansässig, in denen gleichgeschlechtliche Beziehungen unerwünscht sind. Ihre Partner werden aufgefordert, sich als „Personal“ registrieren zu lassen, und genießen bei Zwischenfällen somit weniger diplomatischen Schutz.
Während die Bediensteten vor der Annahme einer Position hiervon in Kenntnis gesetzt werden, scheint die Kommission ihnen bei der Beantragung des entsprechenden Visums nur ungern Unterstützung zu leisten. Dabei fordert die Kommission ihre Bediensteten allem Anschein nach auf, gegenüber Drittlandsbehörden falsche Angaben zu machen, da sie ihre Partner als „Personal“ bezeichnen müssen. Gleichzeitig scheint die Kommission sich dagegen zu wehren, Partner zu Bediensteten zu erklären, wodurch sie denselben Schutz wie andersgeschlechtliche Partner genießen würden.
— Kann die Kommission angeben, wie viele Bedienstete ihrer Ansicht nach mit dieser unglücklichen Situation konfrontiert sind?
— Warum fordert die Kommission ihre Bediensteten auf, falsche Angaben zu machen, während sie in diesem Zusammenhang selbst keine Angaben macht?
— Führt die Aufforderung der Bediensteten, falsche Angaben zu machen, nicht dazu, dass sie in Drittländern einem größeren Risiko ausgesetzt sind?
— Ist die Kommission angesichts des Statuts der Beamten und der Beschäftigungsbedingungen für die sonstigen Bediensteten sowie der Rechtsprechung der Arbeitsaufsichtsbehörden der EU der Ansicht, dass dies letztendlich eine Diskriminierung aufgrund der sexuellen Ausrichtung, also eine ungünstigere Behandlung von Personen aufgrund ihrer sexuellen Ausrichtung darstellen könnte?
— Beabsichtigt die Kommission, gegen diese diskriminierende Behandlung ihrer Bediensteten anzugehen, und wenn ja, in welcher Form? 
Antwort von Frau Catherine Ashton — Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin im Namen der Kommission
(8. Juni 2012)
1. Seit der Einrichtung des Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienstes (EAD) hat es sehr wenige problematische Situationen gegeben und diese sind aus Datenschutzgründen nicht dokumentiert. Der Verwaltung des EAD sind die Probleme natürlich nur bekannt, wenn die betroffenen Bediensteten diese bei den Verwaltungsdienststellen des EAD vorbringen. Bevor Personal in Delegationen entsandt wird, macht der EAD die Kandidaten auf mögliche Folgen für ihre familiäre Situation aufmerksam.
2. Das Verfahren beinhaltet an erster Stelle die Beschaffung eines sogenannten Visa de Courtoisie von der zuständigen Botschaft in Brüssel. Wenn zum Zeitpunkt des Antrags auf Erteilung eines solchen Visums ein Problem auftritt, kann der Einsatz des/der Bediensteten auf sein/ihr Ersuchen geprüft werden. Niemand wird dazu angeregt, ein Visum für „Hausangestellte“ zu beantragen. 
3. Hausangestellte von Diplomaten sind vor Strafverfolgung durch lokale Behörden geschützt.
4. Diese Angelegenheit unterliegt nicht dem Statut der Beamten. Jeder Empfangsstaat behält seine Souveränität in Bezug auf Vorrechte und Immunitäten im Rahmen des Wiener Übereinkommens von 1961 über diplomatische Beziehungen. Der Grundsatz der Gegenseitigkeit zwischen den belgischen Behörden und den diplomatischen Vertretungen der Drittländer muss berücksichtigt werden.
5. Der EAD hat die Wahrung der Grundwerte in seinen Beziehungen mit Drittländern und in seiner Personalpolitik immer verteidigt und wird dies auch in Zukunft tun.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-001932/12
aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter — Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) en Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(17 februari 2012)

Betreft: VP/HR — Iscriminerende behandeling van personeel van EU-delegaties in relaties tussen personen van hetzelfde geslacht
Personeelsleden van EU-delegaties in een relatie tussen personen van hetzelfde geslacht genieten momenteel minder rechten en bescherming dan collega's in relaties tussen personen van verschillend geslacht.
We hebben desbetreffende verslagen ontvangen van personeelsleden van delegaties die zich in voornoemde situatie bevinden en voornamelijk gestationeerd zijn in derde landen waar relaties tussen personen van hetzelfde geslacht ongewenst zijn. Hun partners wordt gevraagd om zich te registreren als „huispersoneel”, waardoor zij in mindere mate recht hebben op diplomatieke bescherming in geval van ongewenste voorvallen.
Terwijl personeelsleden van deze situatie op de hoogte worden gesteld alvorens een positie te aanvaarden, lijkt de Dienst voor extern optreden hen niet te willen helpen bij de procedure voor het verkrijgen van de juiste visa. Bij deze procedure blijkt de dienst haar personeel op te roepen tot overlegging van onjuiste verklaringen aan autoriteiten van derde landen door aan hun echtgenoten te refereren als „huispersoneel”. Tegelijkertijd blijkt de dienst voor extern optreden onwillig te zijn om hen aan te merken als echtgenoten van delegatiepersoneel, waardoor hen dezelfde mate van bescherming geboden zou worden als die welke echtgenoten van verschillend geslacht ontvangen.
1. Kan de dienst voor extern optreden aangeven hoeveel personeelsleden bij haar weten met deze betreurenswaardige situatie zijn geconfronteerd?
2. Waarom roept de dienst voor extern optreden haar personeelsleden op tot overlegging van onjuiste verklaringen, maar wil ze zelf geen verklaringen overleggen?
3. Brengt het aanmoedigen van personeelsleden tot overlegging van onjuiste verklaringen hen in derde landen niet in gevaar?
4. Is de dienst voor extern optreden, gelet op het statuut van de ambtenaren en de regeling welke van toepassing is op de andere personeelsleden, alsmede op de jurisprudentie van de voor werkgelegenheid verantwoordelijke overheden van de EU, van mening dat dit discriminatie op grond van seksuele geaardheid kan opleveren, te verstaan als een minder gunstige behandeling van personen op grond van hun seksuele geaardheid?
5. Is de dienst voor extern optreden voornemens iets te doen aan deze discriminerende behandeling van haar personeel, en zo ja, op welke manier?
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-002000/12
aan de Commissie
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) en Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(21 februari 2012)

Betreft: Discriminerende behandeling van personeelsleden van EU-delegaties die een relatie hebben met een persoon van hetzelfde geslacht
Personeelsleden van EU-delegaties die een relatie hebben met een persoon van hetzelfde geslacht genieten momenteel minder rechten en bescherming dan hun collega's die een relatie hebben met een persoon van het andere geslacht.
We hebben gelijklopende rapporten ontvangen van personeelsleden van delegaties die zich in bovenvermelde situatie bevinden. Ze zijn hoofdzakelijk gevestigd in derde landen waar relaties tussen personen van hetzelfde geslacht ongewenst zijn. Aan hun partners wordt gevraagd zich in te schrijven als „huispersoneel”, waardoor ze desgevallend recht hebben op minder diplomatieke bescherming.
Hoewel personeelsleden over deze situatie geïnformeerd worden voordat ze een plaats aanvaarden, lijkt de Commissie weinig bereid hen enige steun te bieden bij het verkrijgen van de juiste visa. Het schijnt dat de Commissie hierbij aan haar personeelsleden vraagt om onjuiste verklaringen af te leggen aan autoriteiten van derde landen, door naar hun echtgenoten te verwijzen als „huispersoneel”. Tegelijkertijd lijkt de Commissie ervoor  terug te schrikken echtgenoten als delegatiepersoneel aan te geven, waardoor ze hetzelfde beschermingsniveau zouden krijgen als echtgenoten van het andere geslacht.
— Kan de Commissie meedelen hoeveel personeelsleden er bij haar weten geconfronteerd werden met deze ongelukkige situatie?
— Waarom vraagt de Commissie aan haar personeelsleden om onjuiste verklaringen af te leggen, terwijl ze weigert om zelf verklaringen af te leggen?
— Brengt het aanzetten van personeelsleden tot onjuiste verklaringen deze personen niet in gevaar in derde landen?
— Is de Commissie, gelet op het statuut van de ambtenaren en de regeling die van toepassing is op de andere personeelsleden, evenals de rechtspraak van de werkgelegenheidsautoriteiten van de EU, van oordeel dat dit kan neerkomen op discriminatie op basis van seksuele gerichtheid, in de zin van minder gunstige behandeling van personen op basis van hun seksuele gerichtheid?
— Is de Commissie van plan deze discriminerende behandeling van haar personeel aan te pakken, en zo ja hoe?
Antwoord van hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter Ashton namens de Commissie
(8 juni 2012)
1. Sinds de oprichting van de Europese Dienst voor extern optreden (EDEO) hebben zich zeer weinig problematische situaties voorgedaan. Vanwege de gegevensbescherming worden deze niet geregistreerd. De EDEO kan natuurlijk alleen weet hebben van problemen wanneer het betrokken personeel deze bij de administratieve diensten van de EDEO aan de orde stelt. Alvorens personeel aan te nemen voor EU-delegaties, licht de EDEO kandidaten in over mogelijke gevolgen voor hun gezinssituatie.
2. In eerste instantie moet de agent een „visa de courtoisie” verkrijgen via de betrokken ambassade in Brussel. Indien bij de aanvraag van dat visum een probleem aan het licht komt, kan de benoeming van de agent op zijn/haar verzoek worden onderzocht. Het aanvragen van een visa voor „huispersoneel” wordt nooit aangemoedigd. 
3. Het huispersoneel van diplomaten geniet bescherming tegen rechtsvervolging door de lokale autoriteiten.
4. Dit valt niet onder het statuut van de ambtenaren. Elke ontvangende staat beslist soeverein over voorrechten en immuniteiten in het kader van het Verdrag van Wenen betreffende diplomatiek verkeer van 1961. Voor diplomatieke missies in derde landen moet rekening gehouden worden met de voorwaarde van wederkerigheid ten opzichte van de Belgische autoriteiten.
5. De EDEO verdedigt steeds de eerbiediging van fundamentele waarden, ook in zijn betrekkingen met derde landen en zijn personeelsbeleid.
(Suomenkielinen versio)
Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-001932/12
komissiolle (Varapuheenjohtajalle/Korkealle edustajalle)
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) ja Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(17. helmikuuta 2012)

Aihe: VP/HR – Samaa sukupuolta olevien henkilöiden kanssa parisuhteessa olevien työntekijöiden syrjintä EU:n edustustoissa
EU:n edustustojen työntekijöillä, jotka ovat parisuhteessa samaa sukupuolta olevan henkilön kanssa, on tällä hetkellä huonommat oikeudet ja suoja kuin heidän kollegoillaan, jotka ovat parisuhteessa eri sukupuolta olevan henkilön kanssa.
Olemme kuulleet asiasta useilta edellä mainitussa tilanteessa olevilta edustustojen työntekijöiltä, jotka työskentelevät pääasiassa kolmansissa maissa, joissa samaa sukupuolta olevien henkilöiden välisiä parisuhteita ei hyväksytä. Heidän puolisoitaan on pyydetty rekisteröitymään ”talon henkilökunnaksi”, jolloin heihin sovelletaan vaaratilanteissa heikompaa diplomaattista suojelua.
Vaikka henkilöstölle kerrotaan tilanteesta ennen tehtävän hyväksymistä, ulkosuhdehallinto vaikuttaa haluttomalta avustamaan heitä asianmukaisen viisumin hankkimisessa. Vaikuttaa siltä, että ulkosuhdehallinto kehottaa henkilöstöään ilmoittamaan kolmansien maiden viranomaisille viisumiprosessissa vääriä tietoja kutsumalla puolisoita ”talon henkilökunnaksi”. Samalla ulkosuhdehallinto vaikuttaa kieltäytyvän kutsumasta heitä edustuston työntekijöiden puolisoiksi, jolloin heihin sovellettaisiin samaa suojelun tasoa kuin eri sukupuolta oleviin puolisoihin.
1. Voisiko ulkosuhdehallinto kertoa, monenko työntekijän se tietää olleen tässä valitettavassa tilanteessa?
2. Miksi ulkosuhdehallinto kehottaa henkilöstöään ilmoittamaan virheellisiä tietoja ja kieltäytyy itse tekemästä ilmoituksia?
3. Eikö työntekijöiden kehottaminen tekemään virheellisiä ilmoituksia saata heidät vaaraan kolmansissa maissa?
4. Ottaen huomioon virkamiehiin sovellettavat henkilöstösäännöt ja muuta henkilöstöä koskevat palvelussuhteen ehdot sekä EU:n työviranomaisten oikeuskäytännön katsooko ulkosuhdehallinto, että kyseessä on seksuaaliseen suuntautumiseen perustuva syrjintä, jolla tarkoitetaan ihmisten epäsuotuisaa kohtelua heidän seksuaalisen suuntautumisensa vuoksi?
5. Aikooko ulkosuhdehallinto puuttua tähän henkilöstönsä syrjivään kohteluun, ja jos aikoo, miten?
Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-002000/12
komissiolle
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) ja Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(21. helmikuuta 2012)

Aihe: Samaa sukupuolta olevien henkilöiden kanssa parisuhteessa olevien työtekijöiden syrjintä EU:n edustustoissa
EU:n edustustojen työntekijöillä, jotka ovat parisuhteessa samaa sukupuolta olevan henkilön kanssa, on tällä hetkellä huonommat oikeudet ja suoja kuin kollegoillaan, jotka ovat heteroparisuhteissa.
Olemme kuulleet asiasta useilta edellä mainitussa tilanteessa olevilta edustustojen työntekijöiltä, jotka työskentelevät pääasiassa kolmansissa maissa, joissa samaa sukupuolta olevien henkilöiden välisiä parisuhteita ei hyväksytä. Heidän puolisoitaan on pyydetty rekisteröitymään ”talon henkilökunnaksi”, jolloin heihin sovelletaan vaaratilanteissa heikompaa diplomaattista suojelua.
Vaikka henkilöstölle kerrotaan tilanteesta ennen tehtävän hyväksymistä, komissio vaikuttaa olevan haluton avustamaan heitä asianmukaisen viisumin hankkimisessa. Vaikuttaa siltä, että komissio kehottaa henkilöstöään antamaan kolmansien maiden viranomaisille vääriä tietoja viisumiprosessissa kutsumalla puolisoita ”talon henkilökunnaksi”. Samalla komissio vaikuttaa kieltäytyvän kutsumasta heitä edustuston työntekijöiksi, jolloin heillä olisi sama suojelun taso kuin eri sukupuolta olevilla puolisoilla.
— Voisiko komissio kertoa, monenko työntekijän se tietää olleen tässä valitettavassa tilanteessa?
— Miksi komissio kehottaa henkilöstöään antamaan virheellisiä ilmoituksia ja kieltäytyy itse tekemästä ilmoituksia?
— Eikö työntekijöiden kehottaminen antamaan virheellisiä ilmoituksia vaaranna heidät kolmansissa maissa?
— Ottaen huomioon virkamiehiin sovellettavat henkilöstösäännöt ja muuta henkilöstöä koskevat palvelussuhteen ehdot ja EU:n työviranomaisten oikeuskäytännön katsooko komissio, että kyseessä on seksuaaliseen suuntautumiseen perustuva syrjintä, jolla tarkoitetaan ihmisten epäsuotuisaa kohtelua heidän seksuaalisen suuntautumisensa vuoksi?
— Aikooko komissio puuttua tähän henkilöstönsä syrjivään kohteluun, ja jos aikoo, miten? 
Catherine Ashtonin komission puolesta antama yhteinen vastaus
(8. kesäkuuta 2012)
1. Euroopan ulkosuhdehallinnon (EUH) olemassaolon aikana ongelmallisia tilanteita on ollut hyvin vähän, eikä niitä tietosuojan vuoksi ole kirjattu ylös. Ulkosuhdehallinto on tietoinen vain niistä ongelmista, joista asianosaiset henkilöstön jäsenet ilmoittavat ulkosuhdehallinnon hallintopalveluille. Ulkosuhdehallinto ilmoittaa hakijoille mahdollisista hakijan perhetilanteeseen vaikuttavista asioista ennen työntekijöiden sijoittamista edustustoihin.
2. Ensisijaisesti käytäntönä on hankkia courtoise-viisumi kyseisen maan suurlähetystöstä Brysselissä. Mikäli courtoise-viisumin hankinnassa ilmenee ongelmia, voidaan henkilöstön jäsenen siirtoa hänen pyynnöstään tarkastella uudelleen. Puolisoita ei milloinkaan kehoteta hakemaan viisumia kotiapuhenkilöstön jäsenen ominaisuudessa. 
3. Diplomaattisten edustajien kotiapuhenkilöstön jäsenillä on syytesuoja paikallisten viranomaisten nostamilta kanteilta.
4. Tapauksessa ei voida soveltaa henkilöstösääntöjä. Vuonna 1961 tehdyn diplomaattisia suhteita koskevan Wienin yleissopimuksen mukaan jokainen vastaanottajavaltio säilyttää diplomaattisia erioikeuksia ja vapauksia koskevan itsemääräämisoikeutensa. Lisäksi on otettava huomioon vastavuoroisuus Belgian viranomaisten ja kolmansien maiden diplomaattisten edustustojen välillä.
5. Ulkosuhdehallinto on aina puolustanut ja puolustaa jatkossakin perusarvojen kunnioittamista henkilöstöpolitiikassaan sekä suhteissaan kolmansiin maihin.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001932/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) and Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(17 February 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Discriminatory treatment of EU delegation staff in same-sex relationships
EU delegation staff members who are in a same-sex relationship currently enjoy less rights and protection than their colleagues in different-sex relationships.
We have received concurring reports from delegation staff members in the abovementioned situation, mostly based in third countries where same-sex relationships are unwelcome. Their partners are requested to register as ‘house staff’, thus being entitled to less diplomatic protection in case of adverse events.
Whilst staff members are informed of this situation before accepting a position, the External Action Service seems reluctant to provide them with any support in the process of obtaining the appropriate visa. In this process, it appears that the Service invites its staff to make inaccurate declarations to third-country authorities, referring to their spouses as ‘house staff’. At the same time, the External Action Service seems to balk at declaring them as spouses of delegation staff, which would provide them with the same level of protection as that afforded to different-sex spouses.
1. Can the External Action Service state how many staff members it is aware of who have faced this unfortunate situation?
2. Why does the External Action Service invite its staff members to make inaccurate declarations while refusing to make declarations itself?
3. Does encouraging staff members to make inaccurate declarations not put them at risk in third countries?
4. In view of the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, as well as the jurisprudence of the EU employment authorities, does the External Action Service consider that this may amount to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, understood as a less favourable treatment of persons on the basis of their sexual orientation?
5. Is the External Action Service planning to address this discriminatory treatment of its staff, and if so, how?
Question for written answer E-002000/12
to the Commission
Michael Cashman (S&D), Ulrike Lunacek (Verts/ALE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE) and Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE)
(21 February 2012)

Subject: Discriminatory treatment of EU delegation staff in same-sex relationships
EU delegation staff members who are in a same-sex relationship currently enjoy less rights and protection than their colleagues in different-sex relationships.
We have received concurring reports from delegation staff members in the abovementioned situation, mostly based in third countries where same-sex relationships are unwelcome. Their partners are requested to register as ‘house staff’, thus being entitled to less diplomatic protection in case of adverse events.
Whilst staff members are informed of this situation before accepting a position, the Commission seems reluctant to provide them with any support in the process of obtaining the appropriate visa. In this process, it appears that the Commission invites its staff to make inaccurate declarations to third-country authorities, referring to their spouses as ‘house staff’. At the same time, the Commission seems to balk at declaring spouses as delegation staff, which would provide them with the same level of protection as that afforded to different-sex spouses.
— Can the Commission state how many staff members it is aware of who have faced this unfortunate situation?
— Why does the Commission invite its staff members to make inaccurate declarations while refusing to make declarations itself?
— Does encouraging staff members to make inaccurate declarations not put them at risk in third countries?
— In view of the Staff Regulations of Officials and the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants, as well as the jurisprudence of the EU employment authorities, does the Commission consider that this may amount to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, understood as a less favourable treatment of persons on the basis of their sexual orientation?
— Is the Commission planning to address this discriminatory treatment of its staff, and if so, how?
Joint answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(8 June 2012)
1. Since the launch of the European External Action Service (EEAS), there have been very few problematic situations, which are not recorded for data protection reasons. Obviously the EEAS administration is only aware of problems when the staff concerned raise them with EEAS administration services. Before posting staff to delegations, the EEAS alerts candidates of potential consequences for their family situation.
2. In the first instance, the procedure involves obtaining a courtesy visa, from the Embassy concerned in Brussels. If a problem is discovered at the time of the request to issue such a visa, the agent’s assignment could be examined at his/her request. The option of requesting a ‘domestic staff’ visa is never encouraged. 
3. Domestic staff of diplomatic agents benefit from protection from prosecution by local authorities.
4. The issue is not a matter of the Staff Regulations. Each Receiving State keeps its sovereignty concerning privileges and immunities in the framework of the Vienna Convention of 1961 on diplomatic relations. The framework of reciprocity with the Belgian Authorities to diplomatic missions of third countries has to be taken into account.
5. The EEAS has and always will defend the respect of fundamental values in its relations with third countries and its personnel policy.
(Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej P-001941/12
do Komisji
Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE)
(20 lutego 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Dyskryminacja Polaków w Holandii
Na łamach dziennika „De Telegraaf” z dnia 17.1.2012 r. holenderski minister spraw socjalnych i zatrudnienia udzielił wywiadu, w którym po raz kolejny swoją dyskryminującą i obraźliwą wypowiedzią podważył zasadę równego traktowania obywateli Unii Europejskiej. Ponadto 8.2.2012 r. populistyczna Partia Wolności Geerta Wildersa utworzyła specjalny portal internetowy, na którym obywatele Holandii mogą skarżyć się na obywateli pochodzących z Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej, przez których stracili pracę.
— W wyniku takich zachowań wzrasta niechęć i agresja w stosunku do osób pochodzących z Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej a zamieszkujących w Holandii. Czy list wystosowany przez komisarzy Viviane Reding i Laszlo Andora do holenderskich ministrów Henka Kampa i Gerda Leersa w maju ubiegłego roku okazał się wystarczającym instrumentem do powstrzymania rządu holenderskiego przed przyjmowaniem zapisów w ustawodawstwie krajowym niezgodnych z prawem Unii Europejskiej?
— Jeśli nie, to czy Komisja rozpoczęła w stosunku do Holandii procedurę pociągnięcia do odpowiedzialności za naruszenie przepisów i jeśli tak, to na jakim jest etapie?
— Jeśli Komisja nie rozpoczęła takiej procedury, jakie inne środki nacisku ma zamiar zastosować w stosunku do rządu holenderskiego, aby powstrzymać takie akty otwartej wrogości i nierównego traktowania?
Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarz Viviane Reding w imieniu Komisji
(2 kwietnia 2012 r.)
Komisja odsyła Szanowną Panią Poseł do oświadczenia wygłoszonego w czasie debaty plenarnej w dniu 13 marca 2012 r. (258). Komisja w pełni popiera wspólną rezolucję przyjętą przez Parlament Europejski w dniu 15 marca 2012 r. (259).
(English version)
Question for written answer P-001941/12
to the Commission
Joanna Katarzyna Skrzydlewska (PPE)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: Discrimination against Poles in the Netherlands
The Dutch Minister for Social Affairs and Employment gave an interview to the daily newspaper De Telegraaf on 17 January 2012 in which he once again undermined the principle of equal treatment of EU citizens with his discriminatory and offensive statements. In addition to this, on 8 February 2012 the populist Freedom Party of Geert Wilders launched a special Internet portal on which Dutch citizens can level complaints against citizens of Central and Eastern European origin who have caused Dutch citizens to lose their jobs.
— As a result of such conduct, hatred and aggression towards people of Central and Eastern European origin residing in the Netherlands is growing. Has the letter sent by Commissioners Reding and Andor to the Dutch Ministers Henk Kamp and Gerd Leers in May of last year proven to be an adequate instrument in restraining the Dutch government from adopting provisions in national legislation that are incompatible with EC law?
— If not, has the Commission initiated a procedure to have the Netherlands held liable for infringement of the rules, and, if so, what stage is that procedure currently at?
— If the Commission has not initiated such a procedure, what other means of applying pressure on the Dutch government does it intend to adopt in order to bring a halt to such acts of open hostility and unequal treatment?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(2 April 2012)
The Commission refers the Honourable Member to the statement made in the plenary debate on 13 March 2012 (260). The Commission fully supports the joint resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 15 March 2012 (261).
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001943/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(20 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Proyectos financiados en Andalucía por parte de la BEI
En 2010, el Banco Europeo de Inversiones (BEI) firmó contratos de financiación en España por un total de 9 329 millones de euros, confirmando a dicho Estado por séptimo año consecutivo como el primer receptor de préstamos del BEI (262). En apenas cuatro semanas desde el inicio de 2012, el Gobierno autonómico de Andalucía ha recibido cerca de 600 millones de euros en préstamos del organismo en el que Magdalena Álvarez, ex Ministra de Fomento del Gobierno español y antigua Consejera de Economía de la Junta de Andalucía, ejerce como Vicepresidenta. De hecho, en lo poco que va de año España acapara casi el 40 % de los préstamos que el organismo supranacional ha concedido en el ámbito de la Unión Europea, por valor de 1 648 millones de euros.
De ese 40 %, la mayoría ha ido a parar a Andalucía. Destaca la partida referida al proyecto de universidades en la región, que se ha llevado la friolera de 450 millones de euros, aunque lo que más llama la atención ha sido la celeridad con la que se ha concedido el préstamo, ya que los trámites se iniciaron a comienzos del pasado mes de noviembre y antes de que finalizara el año ya se firmó un primer tramo del crédito, mientras que el resto se formalizó en los primeros días de 2012. Más lento fue el proceso del préstamo para la finalización del metro de Granada, que ha cristalizado también durante enero. En este caso, el BEI ha concedido un préstamo de 130 millones de euros que harán posible que las obras, que se iniciaron en 2007, lleguen a su fin.
Pero no son éstos los únicos proyectos que unen a Andalucía con el BEI. La Junta está pendiente del apoyo del organismo supranacional para poner en marcha la licitación de la tercera línea del metro de Sevilla, un proyecto que de ninguna manera podrá ser llevado a cabo en las actuales circunstancias sin el apoyo financiero de la institución europea. Las autoridades andaluzas mostraron hace dos semanas, en una reunión con interesados en participar en la licitación de la línea 3 del suburbano sevillano, su confianza en lograr finalmente el préstamo que permita ampliar la red de metro de Sevilla. El proyecto está valorado en unos 1 200 millones de euros, aproximadamente (263).






1.


¿Esta la Comisión informada de la financiación de estos proyectos?










2.


¿Considera la Comisión que estos proyectos y, en particular, el proyecto del metro de Sevilla, respetan los criterios y directrices de la revisión de los TEN-T?










3.


¿Considera la Comisión que estos proyectos tienen un 




«valor añadido europeo» por la cohesión y por el completo del mercado único europeo?






4.


¿Podría la Comisión comunicarnos si se ha hecho un análisis de coste-beneficio de estos proyectos? Y, en su caso, ¿cuál es su resultado?




Respuesta del Sr. Rehn en nombre de la Comisión
(25 de abril de 2012)
Conforme a lo dispuesto en el artículo 19 de los Estatutos del BEI, que constituyen un Protocolo del Tratado de la Unión Europea, la Comisión es consultada y emite un dictamen sobre cualquier operación de financiación que vaya a valorar el BEI antes de que los órganos rectores del BEI tomen cualquier decisión.
El proyecto de Metro de Sevilla (línea 3) es un proyecto recientemente reconocido por el BEI, el cual no lo ha sometido aún a la Comisión para su consulta.
Todos los proyectos en Andalucía son subvencionables en el marco del objetivo prioritario de funcionamiento del BEI «cohesión económica y social», dado que Andalucía es una región de convergencia. Además, el Metro de Granada, en su calidad de proyecto de transporte urbano, también es subvencionable al amparo del objetivo «protección del medio ambiente y comunidades sostenibles» y el proyecto de universidades de Andalucía lo es al amparo del objetivo de «economía del conocimiento».
No incumbe a la Comisión llevar a cabo análisis de coste-beneficio de los proyectos financiados por el BEI. El análisis normal de estos proyectos por el BEI atendiendo a los criterios de evaluación «contribución a los objetivos de la UE», «calidad del intermediario» (incluido un análisis de coste-beneficio) y «valor añadido financiero» se ha revelado satisfactorio para todos los proyectos que han recibido la financiación del Banco.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001943/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: Projects funded in Andalusia by the EIB
In 2010, the European Investment Bank (EIB) signed financing contracts in Spain amounting to EUR 9 329 million, confirming Spain as the top recipient of EIB loans (264) for the seventh consecutive year. In just the first four weeks of 2012, Andalusia’s autonomous government received close to EUR 600 million in loans from the EIB, whose Vice-President is Magdalena Álvarez, former Minister for Public Works in the Spanish Government and former Finance Minister of the Andalusian Regional Government. In fact, Spain has captured almost 40 % of the loans this supranational body has granted within the European Union, namely EUR 1 648 million, in just the short time since the year began. 
Of that 40 %, most has ended up in Andalusia. The item pertaining to the universities project in the region is particularly salient — it has made off with the staggering sum of EUR 450 million. However, what is even more salient is the speed with which the loan was granted; the procedures were initiated at the beginning of November 2011 and a first tranche was approved before the year ended, with the remainder being awarded at the very beginning of 2012. Procedures for the loan to complete the Granada metro were slower, but that was also signed off in January. In this instance, the EIB awarded a loan of EUR 130 million which will enable the works, started in 2007, to be completed.
However, these are not the only projects that link Andalusia with the EIB. The Andalusian Regional Government is awaiting support from the EIB to launch a call for tender for the third underground line in Seville, a project which in no way could be completed under current circumstances without the EIB’s financial support. Two weeks ago, the Andalusian authorities, in a meeting with parties interested in the call for tender for line 3 of the Seville underground, were confident that they would finally be awarded the loan for the extension of Seville’s underground network. The project’s cost are estimated at approximately EUR 1 200 million (265).






1.


Is the Commission informed about the funding of these projects?










2.


Does the Commission consider that these projects, and in particular the Seville underground project, meet the criteria and guidelines for the TEN‐T review?










3.


Does the Commission consider that these projects have 




‘added European value’ on the grounds of cohesion and completion of the single European market?






4.


Has the Commission has carried out a cost-benefit analysis of these projects? If so, with what results?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(25 April 2012)
In accordance with Article 19 of the EIB Statute, which is a Protocol to the EU Treaty, the Commission is consulted and provides an opinion on any financing operations to be appraised by the EIB in advance of any decision by the EIB governing bodies.
The project Metro de Sevilla — Línea 3 is a newly identified project by the EIB, which has not yet been submitted to the Commission for consultation.
All projects in Andalucía are eligible under the EIB Corporate Operating Priority objective ‘Economic and social cohesion’ as Andalucía is a convergence region. In addition to this, the Metro de Granada, as urban transport project, is also eligible under ‘Protection of Environment and Sustainable Communities’ objective, and the Universidades de Andalucía project under the ‘Knowledge Economy’ objectives. 
It is not the responsibility of the Commission to carry out a cost-benefit analysis of projects to be financed by the EIB. The EIB standard analysis of these projects vis-à-vis the criteria of ‘contribution to EU objectives’, ‘quality of the intermediary’ (including a cost-benefit analysis), and ‘financial value-added’ assessment, is satisfactory for all projects which have received the Bank’s financing.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-001944/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(20 de febrero de 2012)

Asunto: Pesticidas
En una reciente intervención en el Parlamento Europeo, el Comisario de Agricultura, Dacian Cioloş, dijo, en respuesta a una pregunta de un diputado, que se debe terminar con las actuaciones que perjudican la competencia en el sector de los abonos y pesticidas, en el que pocas empresas copan todo el sector europeo.
Así, según diferentes estudios, Fertiberia controla en el Estado español casi el 40 % de los abonos que se comercializan en España y más del 50 % de los nitrogenados. Según denuncian diferentes organizaciones agrarias, el precio de los fertilizantes no ha dejado de aumentar de manera notable (266).
A la vista de lo anterior y teniendo en cuenta la aplicación del artículo 101 del TFUE sobre prácticas concertadas, del artículo 102 del TFUE sobre abuso de posición dominante y del artículo 82 del Tratado CE sobre la conducta excluyente abusiva de las empresas dominantes.






1.


¿Puede informar la Comisión si estamos hablando de un abuso de posición dominante y de un obstáculo al comercio?










2.


¿Está la Comisión satisfecha de la evolución de los precios en los abonos y de los nitrogenados en la UE y, en particular, en el Estado español?










3.


¿Puede informar la Comisión si puede existir un caso de acuerdo tanto horizontal y vertical?










4.


¿Cree la Comisión, como así lo reconoce el Banco Mundial en un reciente estudio, que una mayor liberalización y, por ende, un mercado común fuerte y dinámico, mejorarían considerablemente la competitividad de la UE y, en especial, del Estado español?




Respuesta del Sr. Almunia en nombre de la Comisión
(12 de abril de 2012)







1.


La Comision no tiene ningún indicio en el sentido de que la situacion descrita por Su Señoría constituya un abuso de posición dominante por Fertiberia o un obstáculo al comercio. La cuota de mercado de una empresa, aunque sea relativamente alta, no necesariamente conduce a la conclusión de que disfruta de una posición dominante en el mercado afectado










1.


La Comision no tiene ningún indicio en el sentido de que la situacion descrita por Su Señoría constituya un abuso de posición dominante por Fertiberia o un obstáculo al comercio. La cuota de mercado de una empresa, aunque sea relativamente alta, no necesariamente conduce a la conclusión de que disfruta de una posición dominante en el mercado afectado




 (267). Por otro lado, la cuota de mercado de una empresa y el hecho de que los precios aumenten no indican por sí mismos la existencia de un abuso u obstáculo al comercio. Será preciso disponer de más información, por ejemplo con respecto a las circunstancias de los aumentos de precios y de la evolución de las cuotas de mercado, para poder contar con indicios al respecto.





2.


Por el momento, la Comisión no tiene motivos para creer que la tendencia al alza se deba a un comportamiento anticompetitivo. Los precios de la energía y de los minerales determinan, en gran medida, los costes de producción de los fertilizantes; dichos precios se incrementaron considerablemente en 2010 y 2011. Teniendo presentes los aumentos de precios de los abonos en la UE en general, los registrados en España parecen seguir la tendencia observada en otros Estados miembros.










3.


La Comisión considera que, en general, un mercado concentrado es más sensible a infracciones en materia de competencia. Por ello, sigue mostrándose especialmente vigilante con respecto a los mercados de insumos agrícolas.











4.


Tal como el Presidente de la Comisión afirmó en su discurso de 2011 sobre el estado de la Unión, 










4.


Tal como el Presidente de la Comisión afirmó en su discurso de 2011 sobre el estado de la Unión, 




todos los Estados miembros deben promover reformas estructurales de tal forma que podamos incrementar nuestra competitividad en el mundo y promover el crecimiento
 (268)
.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001944/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: Pesticides
In a recent speech at Parliament, the Agriculture Commissioner, Dacian Cioloş, stated in reply to a question by a Member that any activities that harm competition in the fertilisers and pesticides sector — which in Europe is dominated by a handful of companies — should be stopped.
According to a number of different studies, Fertiberia provides almost 40 % of fertilisers and more than 50 % of nitrogen fertilisers sold in Spain. Various farming organisations claim that the price of fertilisers has continued to increase markedly (269).
In view of the forgoing, and given the provisions of Article 101 of the TFEU on price fixing, of Article 102 of the TFEU on abuse of dominant position and of Article 82 of the EC Treaty on the abuse of a dominant position,






1.


Can the Commission say whether this constitutes abuse of a dominant position and a barrier to trade?










2.


Is the Commission satisfied with the trends in the prices of fertilisers and nitrogen fertilisers in the EU, and, in particular, in Spain?










3.


Can the Commission state whether there is any potential for an agreement that could be both horizontal and vertical?










4.


Does the Commission believe, as the World Bank admitted in a recent study, that greater liberalisation and, indeed, a strong and dynamic common market, would considerably improve the competitiveness of the EU and, in particular, of Spain?




Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(12 April 2012)







1.


The Commission does not have any indication that the situation described by the Honourable Member would involve the abuse of a dominant position by Fertiberia or barriers to trade. , The market share of a company, even if relatively high, does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the company has a dominant position in the market in question










1.


The Commission does not have any indication that the situation described by the Honourable Member would involve the abuse of a dominant position by Fertiberia or barriers to trade. , The market share of a company, even if relatively high, does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the company has a dominant position in the market in question




 (270). Further the market share of a company and the fact that prices rise do not in themselves indicate the existence of an abuse or barriers to trade. More information for instance about the circumstances of price rises and of market share evolutions would be required to start to give an indication of an abuse or barriers to trade.





2.


At this stage, the Commission does not have reasons to believe that the increasing trend is due to anti-competitive behaviour. The prices of energy and minerals determine largely the production costs of fertilisers. These prices rose considerably in 2010 and 2011. Considering the price rises of fertilisers in the EU in general, the price rises in Spain appear to follow the trend in fertiliser prices observed in other Member States. 










3.


The Commission considers that a concentrated market is, in general, more susceptible to infringements against competition rules. Therefore it remains particularly vigilant in its surveillance of agricultural inputs markets. 











4.


As the President of the Commission explained in his 2011 State of the Union speech, 










4.


As the President of the Commission explained in his 2011 State of the Union speech, 



‘all Member States need to promote structural reforms so that we can increase our competitiveness in the world and promote growth’ (271).(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-001945/12
an die Kommission
Markus Pieper (PPE)
(20. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: Erwerbsbeteiligung von Frauen — Politik in Deutschland
Die EU-Kommission hat die deutsche Bundesregierung wegen der geplanten Einführung eines Betreuungsgeldes und wegen des bestehenden Ehegattensplittings gerügt. Beides würde Frauen davon abhalten, einen Arbeitsplatz zu suchen.
— Auf welcher Rechtsgrundlage rügt die EU-Kommission die Bundesregierung?
— Weiß die Kommission, dass in Deutschland in der Altersgruppe zwischen 20 und 64 Jahren die Frauenerwerbstätigenrate (69,6 %) deutlich über dem EU-Durchschnitt von 62,1 % liegt? Ist der Kommission bewusst, dass das Ziel der Lissabon-Strategie bei 60 % lag?
— Jeder Berufstätige leistet einen wertvollen Beitrag für die Gesellschaft und ihre sozialen Errungenschaften. Frage an die Kommission: Leisten auch Ehepartner, die sich bewusst für die Kinderziehung zu Hause entscheiden, einen wertvollen Dienst für die Gesellschaft?
— Frauen und Männer in bewusster Elternzeit sind gleichzeitig überdurchschnittlich häufig ehrenamtlich u. a. in Fördervereinen, Kommunalpolitik, Elternvertretungen, Sozialverbänden oder Kirchen aktiv. Sollte dieses ehrenamtliche Engagement in privaten und öffentlichen Einrichtungen aus Sicht der Kommission nicht besser durch den Staat (Verstaatlichung) übernommen werden, um die Erwerbsbeteiligung weiter zu erhöhen?
Antwort von Herrn Andor im Namen der Kommission
(12. April 2012)
Die deutsche Bundesregierung erklärt in ihrem nationalen Reformprogramm (NRP) 2011, dass angesichts der demografischen Herausforderungen, vor denen das Land stehe, eine weitere Erhöhung der allgemeinen Erwerbstätigenquote notwendig sei. Am Ende des ersten Europäischen Semesters richtete der Rat im Einklang mit Artikel 121 und Artikel 148 AEUV eine länderspezifische Empfehlung an Deutschland. Darin forderte er, die Wirkung jüngster Reformen zum Abbau steuerlicher Hemmnisse für eine Arbeitsaufnahme durch den Zweitverdiener genau zu beobachten und gegebenenfalls erforderliche Maßnahmen zu ergreifen. Die Kommission überwacht derzeit die unternommenen Schritte. Im Januar 2012 fand ein bilaterales Treffen mit Deutschland statt, auf dem die Fortschritte erörtert wurden.
Nach der Strategie Europa 2020 sollte in der EU bis 2020 in der Altersgruppe zwischen 20 und 64 Jahren eine Beschäftigungsquote von 75 % erreicht werden. Im NRP 2011 hat sich Deutschland eine nationale Erwerbstätigenquote von 77 % für die Gesamtbevölkerung sowie von 73 % für Frauen zum Ziel gesetzt. Da die Erwerbstätigenquote bei den Frauen 2010 69,6 % betrug, muss Deutschland angesichts der erwarteten demografischen Entwicklung zusätzliche Anstrengungen unternehmen.
Es soll hier nicht beurteilt werden, welchen Dienst Ehepartner für die Gesellschaft leisten, die ihre Kinder zu Hause erziehen. Es sollte jedoch jeder die Möglichkeit bekommen, auf dem Arbeitsmarkt aktiv zu bleiben. Die Kommission tritt daher entschieden für die Vereinbarkeit von Arbeits‐ und Privatleben ein. Zudem muss Deutschland angesichts der eingegangenen Verpflichtungen gegen mögliche Hindernisse für die Beschäftigung von Frauen, auch in Vollzeit, vorgehen.
Die Kommission betrachtet ehrenamtliche Arbeit als eine Möglichkeit, mit der junge Menschen und Berufsanfänger Arbeitserfahrung sammeln können. Bei Personen im Haupterwerbsalter möchte sie jedoch entsprechend der Strategie Europa 2020 die Erwerbsbeteiligung im Rahmen angemessen bezahlter, hochwertiger Arbeitsplätze erhöhen. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001945/12
to the Commission
Markus Pieper (PPE)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: Labour market participation among women — policies in Germany
The Commission has complained to the German Government about the planned introduction of a carer’s allowance and the existing income tax rate for married couples (Ehegattensplitting). It held that both of these provisions would discourage women from seeking employment.
— What is the EU Commission’s legal basis for its complaint to the German Government?
— Is the Commission aware that the employment rate among women in the 20 to 64 age bracket in Germany (69.6 %) is significantly higher than the EU average of 62.1 %? Is the Commission aware that the target identified by the Lisbon strategy was 60 %?
— Every person in employment makes a valuable contribution to society and social progress. A question to the Commission: do spouses who decide to stay at home in order to raise their children also make a valuable contribution to society?
— Men and women who make the choice to be stay-at-home parents are also more than averagely active in the voluntary sector, working in development associations, community politics, parents’ associations, social clubs or churches. Does the Commission not think that it would be better for this voluntary activity in private and public institutions to be taken over by the state, so as to increase the labour market participation?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(12 April 2012)
In its National Reform Programme (NRP) 2011, the German Government states that a further increase in the overall employment rate is needed in light of its demographic challenges. At the end of the first European Semester, the Council addressed a country-specific recommendation to Germany in accordance with Articles 121 and 148 of TFEU. It requested to closely monitor the effects of recent reforms to reduce tax disincentives for second earners and to take any necessary measures. The Commission is currently monitoring the steps taken and a bilateral meeting with Germany took place in January 2012 to discuss progress.
According to the Europe 2020 strategy, the employment rate for the 20 to 64 age range should reach 75 % in the EU by 2020. In its 2011 NRP Germany has set a national employment target of 77 % for all and 73 % for women. Given that the 2010 female employment rate was 69.6 % and the expected demographic developments, Germany needs to make additional efforts.
Independently of any judgment on the contribution spouses staying at home to raise their children may make to society, each individual should be given the opportunity to avoid dropping out from the labour market. Therefore, the Commission is strongly promoting work-life reconciliation. Furthermore, in light of the above commitments taken by Germany, potential obstacles to the employment of women, including those in full-time work need to be tackled.
The Commission considers unpaid volunteer work as a possible way of gaining work experience for young people and career starters. Nevertheless, for prime age individuals, the Commission would like to enhance participation in decently paid quality jobs, in line with the Europe 2020 strategy. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-001946/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (NI)
(20. Februar 2012)

Betrifft: EU-Sportförderung 2012-2013
Mit dem Lissabon-Vertrag hat die EU eine neue Kompetenz im Bereich Sport erhalten, was unter anderem die Schaffung eines EU-Sportförderprogramms ermöglicht.
Für den Zeitraum 2009 bis 2011 hat die Kommission bereits die sogenannten „vorbereitenden Maßnahmen“ ergriffen, mit dem Ziel, transnationale Sportprojekte zur Gewaltbekämpfung im Sport sowie zur Verbesserung der Sportorganisation finanziell zu unterstützen. Ein umfassendes Sportförderungsprogramm ist jedoch erst im Rahmen des Programms „Erasmus für alle“ für den mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen 2014 bis 2020 vorgesehen.
Da die „vorbereitenden Maßnahmen“ 2011 auslaufen, hat die Kommission ursprünglich ein finanziell begrenztes Sportförderprogramm vorgesehen, um die „Lücke“ zwischen dem Auslaufen der vorbereitenden Maßnahmen und dem Start des neuen Sportförderprogramms 2014 zu schließen.
Medienberichten zufolge gilt diese Überbrückungsmaßnahme jedoch als gescheitert, was bedeuten würde, dass es 2012 und 2013 keine Sportförderung vonseiten der EU geben wird.
1. Wie sieht die EU-Förderpolitik und die dafür notwendige Mittelausstattung im Bereich Sport nun konkret für den Zeitraum 2012 bis Ende 2013 aus?
2. Die neue Kompetenzgrundlage aus dem Lissabon-Vertrag bietet auch einen verbesserten Spielraum für die Einbeziehung des Sports in bestehende EU-Förderprogramme in anderen Politikbereichen („Mainstreaming“). In welchen Programmen wird aktuell der Bereich Sportförderung berücksichtigt?
Antwort von Frau Vassiliou im Namen der Kommission
(26. April 2012)
1. Die Kommission freut sich, der Frau Abgeordneten mitteilen zu können, dass im Arbeitsprogramm für das Jahr 2012 (Durchführungsbeschluss der Kommission C(2012)1979) die neue vorbereitende Maßnahme „Europäische Partnerschaften im Bereich des Sports“ vorgesehen ist. Die entsprechende Aufforderung zur Einreichung von Vorschlägen wurde am 17. April 2012 veröffentlicht. Insgesamt stehen Mittel in Höhe von 3 500 000 EUR für die Kofinanzierung transnationaler Projekte in den folgenden vier Bereichen zur Verfügung: 
1) Bekämpfung von Spielabsprachen
2) Förderung der körperlichen Betätigung zur Unterstützung des aktiven Alterns
3) Sensibilisierungsmaßnahmen für wirksame Methoden der Sportförderung auf lokaler Ebene
4) Grenzüberschreitende Breitensportwettkämpfe in benachbarten Regionen und Mitgliedstaaten
2. Die Kommission möchte die Frau Abgeordnete auf die im Weißbuch „Sport“ aus dem Jahr 2007 aufgeführten EU-Programme und —Fördermittel hinweisen. Für den Sport kommt derzeit eine Reihe bestehender EU-Fördermöglichkeiten aus anderen Politikbereichen in Betracht wie zum Beispiel Bildung, Jugend, Gesundheit, Forschung und Kohäsionspolitik. In den vergangenen Jahren wurden Projekte mit Schwerpunkt Sport und körperliche Betätigung unter anderem im Rahmen der Programme „Lebenslanges Lernen“ und „Jugend in Aktion“ sowie der EU-Gesundheitsprogramme kofinanziert. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001946/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (NI)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: EU sport funding 2012-2013
The Treaty of Lisbon has given the EU new competences in the area of sport, including the establishment of an EU sport funding programme.
The Commission has already implemented the so-called ‘preparatory measures’ for the period 2009 to 2011, aiming to provide financial support for transnational sports projects to combat violence in sport and to improve the way in which sport is organised. However, an extensive sport funding programme is only planned as part of the ‘Erasmus for All’ programme for the multiannual financial framework for 2014 to 2020.
Because the ‘preparatory measures’ came to a close in 2011, the Commission originally provided for a sport funding programme with limited funds to bridge the ‘gap’ between the end of the preparatory measures and the start of the new sports promotion programme in 2014.
According to reports in the media, this bridging measure has fallen through, so that the EU will not be funding sport at all in 2012 and 2013.
1. What are the specific elements of EU sport funding policy for the period 2012 to the end of 2013 and the necessary funding for the sport sector?
2. The new competences set down in the Treaty of Lisbon also offer better scope for the inclusion of sport in existing EU funding programmes in other policy areas (‘mainstreaming’). In which programmes is the area of sport funding being considered at present?
Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission
(26 April 2012)
1. The Commission is glad to inform the Honourable Member that the work programme for 2012 (Commission implementing decision C (2012) 1979) provides for a new Preparatory Action ‘European Partnership on Sports’. The corresponding call for proposals is set to be published on 17 April 2012. The total available budget is EUR 3 500 000 and will allow for the co-financing of transnational projects in the following four subject areas: 
(1) The fight against match-fixing
(2) The promotion of physical activity supporting active ageing
(3) Awareness-raising about effective ways of promoting sport at municipal level
(4) Trans-frontier joint grassroots sport competitions in neighbouring regions and Member States
2. The Commission wishes to draw the Honourable Member's attention to the European Union (EU) programmes and funds listed in the 2007 White Paper on Sport. Sport can at present benefit from a number of existing EU funding opportunities in other policy areas, including education, youth, health, research and cohesion policy. In recent years, co-funding for projects focusing on sport and physical activity was provided, for instance, from the Lifelong Learning, the Youth in Action and the EU Health Programmes. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001947/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Διεύρυνση φορολογικής βάσης στην Ελλάδα
Στο κείμενο του νέου μνημονίου (σελ. 5) που ψηφίστηκε στην ελληνική Βουλή στις 12 Φεβρουαρίου 2012 αναγράφεται ότι «η Κυβέρνηση θα προετοιμάσει μία φορολογική μεταρρύθμιση η οποία αποσκοπεί στην απλοποίηση του φορολογικού συστήματος, στην εξάλειψη των απαλλαγών και των προνομιακών καθεστώτων, συμπεριλαμβανομένης και της διευρύνσεως των (φορολογικών) βάσεων …». Με δεδομένο ότι στην Ελλάδα έχουν θεσπιστεί εδώ και δεκαετίες, αρκετοί νόμοι οι οποίοι παρέχουν φορολογικά προνόμια προκειμένου για την προσέλκυση επενδύσεων από τρίτες χώρες όπως π.χ. ο 89/67 ο οποίος προβλέπει ειδικό καθεστώς φορολόγησης για αλλοδαπές εταιρείες, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Μπορεί να διερευνήσει το νομικό πλαίσιο που ισχύει στην Ελλάδα και θεσμοθετεί σκανδαλώδεις φοροαπαλλαγές και προνομιακά καθεστώτα φορολόγησης για εταιρείες τρίτων χώρων που εγκαθίστανται στη χώρα;











Τίθεται θέμα ανταγωνισμού εις βάρος εγχώριων η εταιρειών που προέρχονται από χώρες της ΕΕ από την ύπαρξη των διαφορετικών καθεστώτων φορολόγησης;











Tι μέτρα πρόκειται να λάβει η Επιτροπή για την κατάργηση των προνομιακών καθεστώτων και των φοροαπαλλαγών που υπάρχουν γι’ αυτές τις εταιρείες;




Απάντηση του κ. Šemeta εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(11 Απριλίου 2012)






1.


Καταρχήν, τα κράτη μέλη είναι ελεύθερα να διαμορφώνουν τα φορολογικά τους συστήματα όπως επιθυμούν, και αυτό ισχύει και για τις φοροαπαλλαγές και τα προτιμησιακά καθεστώτα, με την προϋπόθεση ότι δεν θα αντιβαίνουν στο ενωσιακό δίκαιο. Όσον αφορά την άμεση φορολογία, αυτό σημαίνει κυρίως ότι τα κράτη μέλη οφείλουν να τηρούν τις ελευθερίες της Συνθήκης, τις διατάξεις της ΕΕ για τις κρατικές ενισχύσεις και τον κώδικα δεοντολογίας (φορολογία των επιχειρήσεων). Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή μπορεί να εξετάζει τη φορολογική νομοθεσία όλων των κρατών μελών της ΕΕ και επομένως και της Ελλάδας, προκειμένου να διασφαλιστεί ότι τηρούνται οι γενικές ελευθερίες της Συνθήκης και οι διατάξεις της ΕΕ για τις κρατικές ενισχύσεις. Μπορεί επίσης, οσάκις κρίνει αναγκαίο, να κινεί διαδικασία κατά του οικείου κράτους μέλους, και συγκεκριμένα διαδικασία επί παραβάσει. Επιπλέον, η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή μπορεί να επισημαίνει στην Ομάδα 




«Κώδικας Δεοντολογίας», υψηλού επιπέδου ομάδα εργασίας του Συμβουλίου η οποία παρακολουθεί τη συμμόρφωση των κρατών μελών με τον Κώδικα Δεοντολογίας (φορολογία των επιχειρήσεων), τον κίνδυνο να είναι επιβλαβή ορισμένα φορολογικά καθεστώτα, όπως οι ειδικές φοροαπαλλαγές και άλλα προτιμησιακά καθεστώτα. 






2.


Πρέπει να γίνεται διάκριση μεταξύ του θεμιτού και διαφανούς φορολογικού ανταγωνισμού, αφενός, και του επιβλαβούς φορολογικού ανταγωνισμού, αφετέρου. Ο κώδικας δεοντολογίας για τη φορολογία των επιχειρήσεων, ο οποίος θεσπίστηκε στο πλαίσιο του Συμβουλίου ECOFIN την 1η Δεκεμβρίου 1997, περιλαμβάνει κριτήρια που επιτρέπουν να γίνεται διάκριση μεταξύ του θεμιτού και διαφανούς φορολογικού ανταγωνισμού, αφενός και των επιβλαβών φορολογικών μέτρων, αφετέρου. 










3.


Ο φορολογικός νόμος 89/67, στον οποίο αναφέρεται το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου, εξετάστηκε από την Ομάδα 




«Κώδικας Δεοντολογίας» το 1999 και κρίθηκε επιβλαβής. Σύμφωνα με τα στοιχεία που διαβίβασαν οι ελληνικές αρχές το μέτρο καταργήθηκε στις 20 Μαρτίου 2002 με τον νόμο 2292/02, σύμφωνα με τον κώδικα δεοντολογίας (φορολογία των επιχειρήσεων). Στους δικαιούχους δόθηκε η δυνατότητα να εξακολουθήσουν να επωφελούνται από τις διατάξεις του μέτρου αυτού μέχρι τις 31 Δεκεμβρίου 2005. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή θα εισηγηθεί στην Ομάδα «Κώδικας Δεοντολογίας» να επανεξετάσει τα στοιχεία αυτά. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001947/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: Broadening of the tax base in Greece
In the text of the new memorandum (page 5), enacted in the Greek Parliament on 12 February 2012, it is stated that ‘the Government will prepare a tax reform aimed at simplifying the tax system, eliminating tax exemptions and preferential regimes, including the broadening of the (tax) base…’. Given that Greece adopted several laws, decades ago, which provide tax-related privileges in order to attract investments from third countries, such as L.89/67, which grants a special taxation regime for foreign companies.






1.


Can the Commission investigate the legal framework in force in Greece and adopt legislation regarding the scandalous tax exemptions and preferential taxation regimes for third country companies established in Greece?










2.


Is there a competition issue regarding local companies or companies from EU countries due to the existence of different taxation regimes?










3.


What measures does it intend to take in order to abolish the preferential regimes and the tax exemptions that currently exist for these companies?




Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(11 April 2012)






1.


As a matter of principle, Member States are free to design their tax systems as they choose, including tax exemptions and preferential regimes, provided that they comply with EC law. Concerning direct taxation, this means notably that Member States have to comply with the treaty freedoms, EU state aid provisions and the Code of Conduct (business taxation). The European Commission can investigate the tax legislation of all EU Member States, including Greece, to ensure that they comply with the general treaty freedoms and EU state aid provisions and, when considered necessary, initiate action against the Member State concerned, in particular infringement procedures. In addition the European Commission can notify potentially harmful tax regimes, such as specific tax exemptions and other preferential regimes, to the Code of Conduct Group, a high level Council Working Party that monitors Member States' compliance with the Code of Conduct (business taxation). 










2.


Fair and transparent tax competition must be distinguished from harmful tax competition. The Code of Conduct (business taxation), agreed by the Ecofin Council on 1 December 1997, contains criteria to identify harmful tax measures and distinguish them from fair and transparent tax competition. 










3.


Tax law L.89/67, referred to by the Honourable Member, was reviewed by the Code of Conduct Group in 1999 and was assessed as harmful. According to information provided by the Greek authorities, the measure was repealed on 20 March 2002 by Law 2292/02 in compliance with the Code of Conduct (business taxation). Existing beneficiaries were allowed to continue enjoying the benefits of the measure till 31 December 2005. The European Commission will suggest to the Code of Conduct Group to review this information.




(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001948/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Πρόταση για επιβολή ειδικού φόρου κατανάλωσης στα ελληνικά κρασιά
Σύμφωνα με πληροφορίες, υπάρχουν σκέψεις, για την εξεύρεση νέων φορολογικών εσόδων στην Ελλάδα, να επιβληθεί ειδικός φόρος κατανάλωσης στα οινικά προϊόντα. Πολλοί παραγωγοί και παράγοντες της αγοράς εξέφρασαν την αντίθεσή τους απέναντι σε αυτό το μέτρο, το οποίο θα πλήξει ανεπανόρθωτα ένα εξαγώγιμο ελληνικό προϊόν που δέχεται τεράστιες πιέσεις από την οικονομική κρίση, από τις τιμές των πρώτων υλών, τις αυξήσεις των άμεσων φόρων και του ΦΠΑ. Με δεδομένο ότι οποιαδήποτε προσπάθεια για τη βελτίωση της ελληνικής οικονομίας περνά μέσα από μέτρα ουσιαστικής στήριξης των πιο ανταγωνιστικών και ποιοτικών τομέων της, αλλά και με δεδομένο ότι οι υπόλοιπες χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης στηρίζουν έμπρακτα τους οινοπαραγωγούς τους και επομένως μια επιβολή ενός επιπλέον φόρου στο ελληνικό κρασί θα πλήξει τους έλληνες οινοπαραγωγούς, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Προτίθεται να αποθαρρύνει την ελληνική κυβέρνηση στην υιοθέτηση του μέτρου της επιβολής ειδικού φόρου κατανάλωσης στα οινικά προϊόντα;











Μπορεί να με πληροφορήσει ποιες χώρες της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, τόσο οινοπαραγωγές όσο και άλλες, έχουν επιβάλει αντίστοιχους φόρους σε οινικά προϊόντα; Διαθέτει συγκεκριμένα στοιχεία με το ύψος των εν λόγω ειδικών φόρων κατανάλωσης στα οινικά προϊόντα;




Απάντηση του κ. Šemeta εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(26 Μαρτίου 2012)
H oδηγία 92/84/ΕΟΚ του Συμβουλίου, της 19ης Οκτωβρίου 1992 για την προσέγγιση των συντελεστών των ειδικών φόρων κατανάλωσης για τα αλκοολούχα ποτά και την αλκοόλη (272) καθορίζει ελάχιστες τιμές. O τρέχων ελάχιστος συντελεστής για το κρασί είναι 0 ευρώ ανά εκατόλιτρο. Τα κράτη μέλη είναι ελεύθερα να εφαρμόσουν θετικούς συντελεστές του ειδικού φόρου κατανάλωσης για το κρασί με την προϋπόθεση ότι το ελάχιστο επιτόκιο τηρείται και εφαρμόζεται σύμφωνα με το ενωσιακό δίκαιο. Κατ’ αναλογίαν, οι συντελεστές που εφαρμόζονται δεν μπορούν να εισάγουν διακρίσεις έναντι ξένων προϊόντων υπέρ των εγχώριων προϊόντων.
Οι υπηρεσίες της Επιτροπής έχουν, σε συνεργασία με τα κράτη μέλη, θεσπίσει τους λεγόμενους «πίνακες ειδικών φόρων κατανάλωσης». Στους πίνακες αυτούς εμφαίνονται οι συντελεστές του ειδικού φόρου κατανάλωσης που εφαρμόζονται σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη. Οι πίνακες ενημερώνονται σε εξαμηνιαία βάση και διατίθενται στον ιστότοπο της Επιτροπής (273).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001948/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: Motion to impose a special consumption tax on Greek wines
According to reports, new forms of tax revenue are being considered in Greece, for example a special consumption tax on wine products. Many producers and market players have expressed their objection to this policy, which will irreversibly harm an exportable Greek product which is under immense pressure from the economic crisis, the price of raw materials and the increase of direct taxes and VAT. Given that any effort to improve the Greek economy receives substantial support for its most competitive and qualitative sectors, but also given that the rest of the EU Member States actively support their wine producers and that consequently the imposition of an additional tax on Greek wines will harm Greek wine producers:







Does the Commission intend to discourage the Greek Government from imposing a special consumption tax on wine products?











Can it say which EU Member States, whether or not wine producers, have imposed similar taxes on wine products? Does the Commission have specific data on the level of these special consumption taxes on wine products? 




Answer given by Mr Šemeta  on behalf of the Commission
(26 March 2012)
Council Directive 92/84/EEC of 19 October 1992 on the approximation of the rates of excise duty on alcohol and alcoholic beverages (274) sets minimum rates. The current minimum rate for wine is EUR 0 per hectolitre. Member States are free to apply positive excise duty rates on wine provided that the minimum rate is respected and applied in accordance with EC law. Accordingly, the rates applied may not discriminate against foreign products in favour of domestic products.
The Commission Services have in cooperation with the Member States established the so-called ‘Excise Duty Tables’. The tables show the rates of excise duty applicable in all Member States. The tables are updated on a bi-annual basis and made available on the Commission's website (275).
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001949/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Νέο ελληνικό μνημόνιο — προβλέψεις για περικοπή επικουρικών συντάξεων
Στο νέο μνημόνιο μεταξύ Ελλάδας και τρόικας (Ευρωπαϊκής Επιτροπής, ΕΚΤ και ΔΝΤ) προβλέπεται, μεταξύ άλλων, στη σελίδα 2 δέσμευση για «αλλαγές σε συνταξιοδοτικά ταμεία με κατά μέσο όρο υψηλές συντάξεις ή που λαμβάνουν υψηλές επιχορηγήσεις από τον προϋπολογισμό, με σκοπό την εξοικονόμηση τουλάχιστον 300 εκατομμυρίων ευρώ (καθαρό ποσόν αφού λάβουμε υπόψη την επίπτωση επί των φόρων και των εισφορών κοινωνικής ασφάλισης)».
Παρακάτω, στη σελίδα 11, προβλέπεται ότι «η κυβέρνηση θα μειώσει τις ονομαστικές επικουρικές συντάξεις από τον Ιανουάριο του 2012, με σκοπό την εξάλειψη των ελλειμμάτων». Με δεδομένα τα ανωτέρω και ότι το Ευρωπαϊκό Δικαστήριο Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου, με τη νομολογία του, έχει συμπεριλάβει τις ασφαλιστικές παροχές στα περιουσιακά δικαιώματα τα οποία και ρητά προστατεύονται τόσο από το πρώτο άρθρο του Πρώτου Πρόσθετου Πρωτοκόλλου της Ευρωπαϊκής Σύμβασης των Δικαιωμάτων του Ανθρώπου όσο και από το άρθρο 17 του Χάρτη Θεμελιωδών Δικαιωμάτων της ΕΕ, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Τι ορίζεται ως υψηλή σύνταξή; Ποιος είναι ο μέσος όρος των συντάξεων στο χώρο της ευρωζώνης; Ποια είναι τα ελληνικά συγκεκριμένα ταμεία, κατά την άποψη της Ελλάδας και της Επιτροπής, που προσφέρουν «υψηλές συντάξεις»;











Έχουν δικαίωμα τα κράτη μέλη να αποφασίζουν οριζόντιες μειώσεις σε επικουρικές ή και κύριες συντάξεις, και ιδίως σε περιπτώσεις ασφαλιστικών ταμείων οι πόροι των οποίων προέρχονται μόνο από τις εισφορές εργαζομένων και εργοδοτών, χωρίς τη συμβολή του κράτους και άλλων κοινωνικών πόρων;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(28 Μαρτίου 2012)
Οι στόχοι του νέου οικονομικού προγράμματος προσαρμογής το οποίο έγινε αντικείμενο διαπραγμάτευσης μεταξύ της Ελλάδας και της Επιτροπής (εξ ονόματος των κρατών μελών της ευρωζώνης), της Ευρωπαϊκής Κεντρικής Τράπεζας και του Διεθνούς Νομισματικού Ταμείου, είναι η διασφάλιση της δημοσιονομικής βιωσιμότητας, η αποκατάσταση της ανταγωνιστικότητας και η διασφάλιση της χρηματοπιστωτικής σταθερότητας.
Λόγω της ανάγκης να συνεχιστεί η μείωση του δημοσιονομικού ελλείμματος, το ελληνικό Κοινοβούλιο αποφάσισε να μειώσει τις υψηλότερες συντάξεις, και να αντιμετωπίσει τη μη βιώσιμη κατάσταση των προγραμμάτων συμπληρωματικής συνταξιοδότησης. Ο νόμος που εγκρίθηκε στις 28 Φεβρουαρίου 2012 προβλέπει (άρθρα 1 και 6) την κατά 12 τοις εκατό περικοπή των συντάξεων ύψους άνω των 1 300/μήνα· επίσης, τη μείωση των επικουρικών συντάξεων μεταξύ 200-250 ευρώ κατά 10 τοις εκατό, μεταξύ 250-300 ευρώ κατά 15 τοις εκατό και των μεγαλύτερων των 300 ευρώ συντάξεων κατά 20 τοις εκατό.
Η Επιτροπή δεν έχει την αρμοδιότητα να εκτιμήσει κατά πόσον το ελληνικό δίκαιο επιτρέπει στο κράτος να αποφασίσει μονομερώς περικοπές στις κύριες ή τις επικουρικές συντάξεις. Ωστόσο, είναι χρήσιμο να επισημανθεί ότι οι πόροι για αρκετά συνταξιοδοτικά συστήματα στην Ελλάδα προέρχονται όχι μόνο από τους εργαζόμενους και τις εργοδοτικές εισφορές, αλλά κι από κρατικές επιχορηγήσεις.
Όσον αφορά το επίπεδο των συντάξεων στην Ελλάδα και σε άλλες ευρωπαϊκές χώρες, καθώς και τις εισφορές του κράτους στα ταμεία, η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου στους δείκτες του ΟΟΣΑ για τις συντάξεις, οι οποίοι δημοσιεύθηκαν διαδικτυακά (276), καθώς και στον ιστότοπο της Επιτροπής (277). 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001949/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: New Greek memorandum — provisions for cuts to supplementary pensions 
The new memorandum between Greece and the Troika (European Commission, ECB and IMF) contains, inter alia, on page 2, a commitment for ‘changes in pension funds with higher than average pension benefits or which receive higher subsidies from the budget, aiming to save at least EUR 300 million (net amount after taking into consideration the impact of taxes and social security contributions)’.
Further on, on page 11, it is planned that ‘the Government will reduce nominal supplementary pensions starting from January 2012, in order to eliminate the deficits’. Given the above and the fact that the case law established by the European Court of Human Rights includes social security benefits under property rights, which are explicitly protected both by the first article of the First Additional Protocol of the European Convention on Human Rights and Article 17 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, will the Commission answer the following:







What is the definition of a higher level pension? What is the average pension in the euro area? What are the specific Greek funds which, according to Greece and the Commission, offer ‘higher pensions’?











Do Member States have the right to decide upon horizontal cuts in not only supplementary but also primary pensions, especially for social security funds which are funded through employee and employer contributions alone, without the input of the State or any other social resources?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(28 March 2012)
The objectives of the new economic adjustment programme that has been negotiated between Greece, and the Commission (on behalf of the euro-area Member States), the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund are to ensure fiscal sustainability, restore competitiveness and guarantee financial stability.
Given the need to continue reducing the government deficit, the Greek Parliament has decided to reduce the highest pensions, and to address the unsustainable situation of the supplementary pension schemes. The Law adopted on 28 February 2012 indicates (Articles 1 and 6) a cut by 12 % in pensions above EUR 1300/month; and a cut in supplementary pensions between EUR 200-250 by 10 %, between EUR 250-300 by 15 %, and above EUR 300 by 20 %.
The Commission has no competence in assessing whether the Greek Laws allow the State to unilaterally decide cuts in main pension or supplementary pensions. However, it is useful to indicate that the resources for several pension schemes in Greece derive not only from employees' and employers' contributions but also from state subsidies.
Regarding the level of pensions in Greece and in other European Countries, as well as the contributions of the state in the funds the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the OECD pensions indicators published online (278) as well as the Commission website (279). 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-001950/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 Φεβρουαρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Ελληνικό μνημόνιο και κρίσιμες δικτυακές υποδομές
Στο κείμενο του ελληνικού μνημονίου που ακολουθεί τη νέα χρηματοδοτική βοήθεια ΔΝΤ-ΕΕ, αναφέρεται, στη σελίδα 3, ότι «η κυβέρνηση δηλώνει την ετοιμότητά της να προσφέρει προς πώληση τα εναπομείναντα μερίδιά της στις κρατικές επιχειρήσεις, εάν παραστεί ανάγκη, έτσι ώστε να επιτευχθούν οι στόχοι αποκρατικοποιήσεων», ενώ καταλήγει ότι «ο έλεγχος του δημοσίου θα πρέπει να περιορισθεί μόνον σε περιπτώσεις κρισίμων δικτυακών υποδομών».
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Για ποιες κρατικές επιχειρήσεις γίνεται λόγος; Ποιος θα διαπιστώνει την ύπαρξη κατάστασης ανάγκης;











Μπορεί να διελευκάνει τον όρο «κρίσιμες δικτυακές υποδομές»; Ποιες είναι συγκεκριμένα οι υποδομές αυτές;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(26 Απριλίου 2012)
Το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου μπορεί να ανατρέξει στην απάντηση που δόθηκε στην ερώτηση E-011415/2011 (280).
Το Μνημόνιο Συνεννόησης δεν ορίζει ρητά τον όρο «κρίσιμες δικτυακές υποδομές». 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-001950/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(20 February 2012)

Subject: Greek memorandum and critical network infrastructures
In the text of the Greek memorandum that follows the lateral instalment of IMF-EU financial assistance, it is stated on page 3 that ‘the government declares its readiness to offer for sale its remaining shares in public enterprises, if deemed necessary, in order to achieve the privatisation objectives’, and concludes that ‘government control should be limited only in cases of critical network infrastructures’.






1.


Can the Commission say which public enterprises are referred to? Who will determine the state of need?










2.


Can it clarify the term 




‘critical network infrastructures’? What are these specific infrastructures?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(26 April 2012)
The Honourable Member can refer to the reply provided to Question E‐011415/2011 (281).
The MoU does not explicitly define the term of ‘critical network infrastructures’. 


(1)  Sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de 24 de noviembre de 2011 en el asunto C-404/09.

(2)  Véase el punto 3 de la Comunicación COM(2007) 502 final, «Una Europa de resultados — la aplicación del Derecho comunitario».

(3)  Estas circunstancias específicas pueden incluir, en particular, casos en que la ejecución de una sentencia anterior implique medidas tendentes a desarrollar o reforzar ciertas infraestructuras sobre el terreno o a ajustarse a obligaciones de resultados.

(4)  Judgment of the Court of 24 November 2011 in Case C‐404/09.

(5)  Cf. point 3 of Communication COM(2007) 502 final , ‘A Europe of Results — Applying Community Law’.

(6)  Specific circumstances may include cases in which the enforcement of an earlier judgment involves measures to develop or reinforce infrastructure on the ground or meet obligations as to results.

(7)  OJ L 281, 23.11.1995.

(8)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/data-protection/news/120125_en.htm

(9)  «Révision de la directive sur le temps du travail», COM(2010)801 final du 21 décembre 2010, point 5.2 v).

(10)  Directive 2003/88/CE du Parlement européen et du Conseil du 4 novembre 2003 concernant certains aspects de l'aménagement du temps de travail, JO L 299 du 18.11.2003.

(11)  ‘Reviewing the Working Time Directive’ (COM(2010)801 final of 21 December 2010), at Section 5.2(v).

(12)  Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time, OJ L 299, 18.11.2003.

(13)  Directiva 92/43/CEE del Consejo, de 21 de mayo de 1992, relativa a la conservación de los hábitats naturales y de la fauna y flora silvestres, DO L 206 de 22.7.1992.

(14)  «Financiación de Natura 2000» http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/financing/docs/financing_natura2000.pdf

(15)  Council Directive 92/43/EEC, of 21 May 1992, on the protection of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(16)  ‘Financing Natura 2000’, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/financing/docs/financing_natura2000.pdf

(17)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/foodprices/index_en.htm

(18)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/index_en.htm

(19)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/index_en.htm

(20)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cereals/balance-sheets/index_en.htm

(21)  E-7900/2011, E-6879/2011, E-6271/2011, E-6238/2011, E-6138/2011, E-6137/2011,.E-4242/2011 și E-10973/2011 accesibile la http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp

(22)  http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/analysis/commitments-09-pittsburgh.html

(23)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/foodprices/index_en.htm

(24)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/index_en.htm

(25)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/index_en.htm

(26)  http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cereals/balance-sheets/index_en.htm

(27)  E‐7900/2011, E‐6879/2011, E‐6271/2011, E‐6238/2011, E‐6138/2011, E‐6137/2011, E‐4242/2011 and E‐10973/2011 accessible via http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp

(28)  http://www.g20.utoronto.ca/analysis/commitments-09-pittsburgh.html

(29)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2010-8752&language=EN

(30)  JO L 17, 20.1.2012.

(31)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E‐2010-8752&language=EN

(32)  OJ L 17, 20.1.2012.

(33)  KOM(2011)942.

(34)  Urteil des Gerichtshofes vom 24.11.2011, Rechtssache C-70/10, Scarlet Extended SA gegen Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM).

(35)  Order of the Court of 19 February 2009, Case C557/07, ECR [2009] I-01227.

(36)  Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property rights, OJ L 157, 30.4.2004, p. 45 (Article 11, p. 76).

(37)  Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (Chapter IV, Article 8(3).

(38)  COM(2011)942.

(39)  Arrêt de la Cour de Justice du 24/11/11, affaire C-70/10, Scarlet Extended SA/Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeurs SCRL (SABAM).

(40)  Европейски инструмент за демокрация и права на човека (ЕИДПЧ).

(41)  IEDDH = Instrumento Europeo para la Democracia y los Derechos Humanos.

(42)  EIDHR = Det europæiske instrument for demokrati og menneskerettigheder.

(43)  EIDHR = European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (Europäisches Instrument für Demokratie und Menschenrechte).

(44)  Demokraatia ja inimõiguste Euroopa rahastamisvahend (EIDHR).

(45)  IEDDH = Initiative européenne pour la démocratie et les Droits de l'homme.

(46)  EIDHR = European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (Strumento europeo per la democrazia e i diritti umani).

(47)  Europos demokratijos ir žmogaus teisių rėmimo priemonė (EDŽTRP).

(48)  EIDHR = European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (A demokrácia és az emberi jogok európai eszköze).

(49)  EIDHR = European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.

(50)  EIDHR = European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.

(51)  IEDDH = Instrumento Europeu para a Democracia e os Direitos Humanos.

(52)  IEDDO = Instrumentul european pentru democrație și drepturile omului.

(53)  ENDĽP – Európsky nástroj pre demokraciu a ľudské práva.

(54)  EIDHR = European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.

(55)  EIDHR = European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.

(56)  Einzelheiten dazu finden sich im Dokument „Questions and Answers on the Batteries Directive 2006/66/EC“ (Fragen und Antworten zur Batterierichtlinie 2006/66/EG) unter: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/batteries/pdf/qa.pdf

(57)  Richtlinie 98/34/EG des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 22. Juni 1998 über ein Informationsverfahren auf dem Gebiet der Normen und technischen Vorschriften und der Vorschriften für die Dienste der Informationsgesellschaft (ABl. L 204 vom 21.7.1998), geändert durch die Richtlinie 98/48/EG des Rates (ABl. L 217 vom 5.8.1998).

(58)  Mer information finns i dokumentet Questions and Answers on the Batteries Directive (2006/66/EC) som finns på: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/batteries/pdf/qa.pdf

(59)  Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv 98/34/EG av den 22 juni 1998 om ett informationsförfarande beträffande tekniska standarder och föreskrifter och beträffande föreskrifter för informationssamhällets tjänster (EGT L 204, 21.7.1998), ändrat genom direktiv 98/48/EG (EGT L 217, 5.8.1998).

(60)  Clarification provided in ‘Questions and Answers’ document on the Batteries Directive 2006/66/EC, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/batteries/pdf/qa.pdf

(61)  Directive 98/34/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 22 June 1998, laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations and of rules on Information Society services, OJ L 204, 21.7.1998, as amended by Directive 98/48/EC, OJ L 217, 5.8.1998.

(62)  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing rules for direct payments to farmers under support schemes within the framework of the common agricultural policy (COM(2011) 625 final/2).

(63)  Beschikbaar op http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/search.do.

(64)  Available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/search.do.

(65)  JO L 277, 21.10.2005, p. 1.

(66)  JO L 337, 21.12.2007, p. 35.

(67)  JO L 277 du 21.10.2005, p. 1.

(68)  JO L 337 du 21.12.2007, p. 35.

(69)  Például Szlovákia esetében 2009-ben.

(70)  e.g. for Slovakia in 2009.

(71)  KOM(2011)0933 af 20. december 2011.

(72)  ES, PT, GR, IT, IE, SK, LT og LV.

(73)  BG, FR, HU, PL, RO, SE og CY.

(74)  COM(2011) 933 of 20 December 2011.

(75)  ES, PT, GR, IT, IE, SK, LT, LV.

(76)  BG, FR, HU, PL, RO, SE and CY.

(77)  GU L 63 del 3.3.2001.

(78)  JO L 63 du 3.3.2001.

(79)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/human-use/good_distribution_practice/developments/2011_pc_gdp_en.htm

(80)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/preparedness_response/hsc/index_el.htm

(81)  Οδηγία 2005/94/ΕΚ του Συμβουλίου, της 20ής Δεκεμβρίου 2005, σχετικά με κοινοτικά μέτρα για την καταπολέμηση της γρίπης των πτηνών και την κατάργηση της οδηγίας 92/40/ΕΟΚ, ΕΕ L 10 της 14.1.2006.

(82)  Οδηγία 2000/54/ΕΚ του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου, της 18ης Σεπτεμβρίου 2000, για την προστασία των εργαζομένων από κινδύνους που διατρέχουν λόγω έκθεσής τους σε βιολογικούς παράγοντες κατά την εργασία (έβδομη ειδική οδηγία κατά την έννοια του άρθρου 16 παράγραφος 1 της οδηγίας 89/391/ΕΟΚ), ΕΕ L 262 της 17.10.2000.

(83)  http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/controlmeasures/avian/index_en.htm

(84)  Πρόταση απόφασης του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου και του Συμβουλίου σχετικά με σοβαρές διασυνοριακές απειλές κατά της υγείας, COM(2011)866 τελικό. http://ec.europa.eu/health/preparedness_response/policy/hsi/index_en.htm

(85)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/preparedness_response/hsc/index_en.htm

(86)  Council Directive 2005/94/EC of 20 December 2005 on Community measures for the control of avian influenza and repealing Directive 92/40/EC, OJ L 10, 14.1.2006.

(87)  Directive 2000/54/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on the protection of workers from risks related to exposure to biological agents at work (seventh individual directive within the meaning of Article 16(1) of Directive 89/391/EEC), OJ L 262, 17.10.2000.

(88)  http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/controlmeasures/avian/index_en.htm

(89)  Proposal for a decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on serious cross-border threats to health, COM(2011) 866 final. http://ec.europa.eu/health/preparedness_response/policy/hsi/index_en.htm

(90)  Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 on orphan medicinal products, OJ L 18/1, 22.1.2000.

(91)  See in particular Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use, OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67.

(92)  See Article 5 of Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use, OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67.

(93)  http://www.euractiv.com/climate-environment/biodiesels-pollute-crude-oil-leaked-data-show-news-510437.

(94)  COM(2010)811 finali, Rapport dwar bidla indiretta fl-użu tal-art relatata mal-bijofjuwils u mal-bijolikwidi.

(95)  KOM(2010) 811 v konečnom znení, správa o nepriamej zmene využívania pôdy súvisiacej s biopalivami a biokvapalinami.

(96)  http://www.euractiv.com/climate-environment/biodiesels-pollute-crude-oil-leaked-data-show-news-510437

(97)  COM(2010) 811 final, Report on indirect land-use change related to biofuels and bioliquids.

(98)  Aankondiging van een initiatief op het gebied van de meldings‐ en actieprocedures in de mededeling over elektronische handel en onlinediensten (COM(2011) 942).

(99)  Toetsing van Richtlijn 2004/48/EG.

(100)  Met name het recht op privacy, op bescherming van persoonsgegevens, op vrijheid van meningsuiting en informatie en op een effectief beroep, zoals aangegeven in COM(2011) 287.

(101)  Annonce d'une initiative sur les procédures de notification et action dans la communication sur le commerce électronique et les services en ligne (COM(2012)942).

(102)  Réexamen de la Directive 2004/48/CE.

(103)  Notamment le droit au respect de la vie privée, à la protection des données à caractère personnel, à la liberté d'expression et d'information et au droit à un recours effectif, comme indiqué dans COM(2011)287.

(104)  Mededeling van de Commissie aan het Europees Parlement en de Raad: Actieplan tegen het toenemende gevaar van antimicrobiële resistentie, COM(2011) 748 van 15.11. 2011.

(105)  Scientific Opinion on the public health risks of bacterial strains producing extended-spectrum β-lactamases and/or AmpC β-lactamases in food and food-producing animals (EFSA Journal 2011;9(8):2322 [95 blz.]).

(106)  Verordening (EG) nr. 2160/2003 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 17 november 2003 inzake de bestrijding van salmonella en andere specifieke door voedsel overgedragen zoönoseverwekkers (PB L 325 van 12.12.2003, blz. 1).

(107)  Verordening (EG) nr. 852/2004 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 29 april 2004 inzake levensmiddelenhygiëne (PB L 139 van 30.4.2004, blz. 1); Verordening (EG) nr. 853/2004 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 29 april 2004 houdende vaststelling van specifieke hygiënevoorschriften voor levensmiddelen van dierlijke oorsprong (PB L 139 van 30.4.2004, blz. 55); Verordening (EG) nr. 854/2004 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 29 april 2004 houdende vaststelling van specifieke voorschriften voor de organisatie van de officiële controles van voor menselijke consumptie bestemde producten van dierlijke oorsprong (PB L 139 van 30.4.2004, blz. 206).

(108)  Verordening (EG) nr. 2073/2005 van de Commissie van 15 november 2005 inzake microbiologische criteria voor levensmiddelen (PB L 338 van 22.12.2005, blz. 1).

(109)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(110)  Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council. Action plan against the rising threats from Antimicrobial Resistance (COM(2011) 748 of 15.11.2011.

(111)  Scientific opinion on the public health risks of bacterial strains producing extended-spectrum β-lactamases and/or AmpC β-lactamases in food and food-producing animals (EFSA Journal 2011;9(8):2322 [95 pp.]).

(112)  Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November on the control of Salmonella and other specified food-borne zoonotic agents (OJ L, 12.12.2003, p. 1).

(113)  Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs (OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, p. 1); Regulation (EC) 853/2004 of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin (OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, p. 55); Regulation (EC) 854/2004 of the European Parliament and the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific rules for the organisation of official controls on products of animal origin intended for human consumption (OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, p. 206).

(114)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological criteria for foodstuffs (OJ L 338, 22.12.2005, p. 1).

(115)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(116)  PB L 286 van 4.11.2010.

(117)  JO L 286, 4.11.2010.

(118)  COM(2011)211 final, „Către un management fiabil al calității pentru statisticile europene”, disponibil la:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0211:FIN:RO:PDF

(119)  Rapoartele calitative conţin inventare de surse şi metode, precum şi tabele cu date sinoptice compilate după industrie, ceea ce permite emiterea de concluzii asupra calităţii surselor folosite şi a acurateţei datelor oferite.

(120)  COM(2011)903 final, disponibil la:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52011PC0903:RO:NOT

(121)  COM(2011) 211 final, ‘Towards robust quality management for European Statistics’, available at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/quality/documents/COM-2011-211_Communication_Quality_Management_EN.pdf

(122)  The quality reports consist of inventories of sources and methods as well as synoptic data compilation tables by industry which allow for conclusions on the quality of the sources used and the accuracy of the data provided.

(123)  COM(2011) 903 final, available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:52011PC0903:EN:NOT

(124)  Οδηγία 1999/70/ΕΚ του Συμβουλίου, της 28ης Ιουνίου 1999, σχετικά με τη συμφωνία πλαίσιο για την εργασία ορισμένου χρόνου που συνήφθη από τη CES, την UNICE και το CEEP, EE L 175 της 10.7.1999.

(125)  Οδηγία 2000/78/ΕΚ του Συμβουλίου, της 27ης Νοεμβρίου 2000, για τη διαμόρφωση γενικού πλαισίου για την ίση μεταχείριση στην απασχόληση και την εργασία, ΕΕ L 303 της 2.12.2000.

(126)  Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, OJ L 175, 10.7.1999.

(127)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, OJ L 303, 2.12.2000.

(128)  JO L 30, 31.1.2009, p. 16.

(129)  OJ L 30, 31.1.2009, p. 16.

(130)  GU L 46 del 17.2.2004, pagg. 1-8.

(131)  Disponibile sul sito http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/search.do.

(132)  OJ L 46, 17.2.2004, p. 1-8.

(133)  Available at http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/search.do.

(134)  DO L 166 de 30.4.2004.

(135)  OJ L 166, 30.4.2004.

(136)  Úř. věst. L 65, 13.3.2010.

(137)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB

(138)  ABl. L 65 vom 13.3.2010.

(139)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB

(140)  ΕΕ L 65 της 13.3.2010.

(141)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB

(142)  GU L 65 del 13.03.2010.

(143)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(144)  HL L 65., 2010.03.13.

(145)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=HU

(146)  PB L 65 van 13.3.2010.

(147)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(148)  Dz.U. L 65 z 13.3.2010.

(149)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB

(150)  JO L 65 de 13.3.2010.

(151)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=PT

(152)  UL L 65, 13.3.2010.

(153)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB

(154)  OJ L 65, 13.3.2010.

(155)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(156)  Siehe: http://www.igdtp.eu/Documents/VisionDoc_Final_Oct24.pdf

(157)  Siehe: http://www.igdtp.eu/Documents/SRA%20Complete%20web-version_July%2014_2011.pdf

(158)  Siehe: http://www.igdtp.eu/Documents/Draft%20Deployment%20Plan_Dec2011.pdf

(159)  See at http://www.igdtp.eu/Documents/VisionDoc_Final_Oct24.pdf

(160)  See at http://www.igdtp.eu/Documents/SRA%20Complete%20web-version_July%2014_2011.pdf

(161)  See at http://www.igdtp.eu/Documents/Draft%20Deployment%20Plan_Dec2011.pdf

(162)  Κανονισμός αριθ. 422/67/EOK, αριθ. 5/67/Ευρατόμ του Συμβουλίου της 25ης Ιουλίου 1967 περί του καθορισμού του καθεστώτος χρηματικών απολαβών του Προέδρου και των μελών της Επιτροπής, του Προέδρου, των Δικαστών, των Γενικών Εισαγγελέων και του Γραμματέως του Δικαστηρίου ΕΕ L 187 της 8.8.1967.

(163)  Regulation No 422/67/EEC, 5/67/Euratom of the Council of 25 July 1967 determining the emoluments of the President and members of the Commission and of the President, Judges, Advocates-General and Registrar of the Court of Justice, OJ L 187, 8.8.1967.

(164)  Directiva 2000/78/CE del Consejo, de 27 de noviembre de 2000, relativa al establecimiento de un marco general para la igualdad de trato en el empleo y la ocupación (DO L 303 de 2.12.2000, p. 16).

(165)  Richtlinie 2000/78/EG des Rates vom 27. November 2000 zur Festlegung eines allgemeinen Rahmens für die Verwirklichung der Gleichbehandlung in Beschäftigung und Beruf, ABl. L 303 vom 2.12.2000, S. 16.

(166)  A Tanács 2000/78/EK irányelve (2000. november 27.) a foglalkoztatás és a munkavégzés során alkalmazott egyenlő bánásmód általános kereteinek létrehozásáról (HL L 303., 2000.12.2., 16. o.).

(167)  Richtlijn 2000/78/EG van de Raad van 27 november 2000 tot instelling van een algemeen kader voor gelijke behandeling in arbeid en beroep, PB L 303 van 2.12.2000, blz. 16.

(168)  Neuvoston direktiivi 2000/78/EY, annettu 27. marraskuuta 2000, yhdenvertaista kohtelua työssä ja ammatissa koskevista yleisistä puitteista, EYVL L 303, 2.12.2000, s. 16.

(169)  Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, OJ L 303, 2.12.2000, p.16.

(170)  EFT L 169 af 12.7.1993.

(171)  OJ L 169, 12.7.1993.

(172)  http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/.

(173)  http://www.welingelichtekringen.nl/17445-in-griekenland-kun-je-een-europees-paspoort-huren-om-de-eu-in-de-komen.html

(174)  http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/.

(175)  http://www.welingelichtekringen.nl/17445-in-griekenland-kun-je-een-europees-paspoort-huren-om-de-eu-in-de-komen.html

(176)  JO L 328 de 24.11.2006.

(177)  OJ L 328, 24.11.2006.

(178)  Javaslat A Tanács rendelete a bulgáriai, litvániai és szlovákiai atomerőművek leszerelését segítő támogatási programokhoz nyújtott uniós támogatásról (COM(2011)0783 végleges).

(179)  Proposal for a Council Regulation on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia (COM(2011)0783 final).

(180)  Komisijas paziņojums “Labāka pārtikas apgādes ķēdes darbība Eiropā” (2009. gada oktobris).

(181)  Komisijas paziņojums “Vienota sistēma uzticēšanās pastiprināšanai vienotajam digitālajam e-tirdzniecības un tiešsaistes pakalpojumu tirgum” (2012. gada janvāris).

(182)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB

(183)  Commission communication on a better functioning food supply chain in Europe (October 2009).

(184)  Commission communication on a coherent framework for building trust in the Digital Single Market for e-commerce and online services (January 2012).

(185)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(186)  (http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/reports/doc/sec_2011_0130.pdf).

(187)   http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/reports/doc/sec_2011_0130.pdf

(188)  JO L 201 de 31.7.2002, p. 37, com a última redação que lhe foi dada pela Diretiva 2009/136/CE. JO L 337 de 18.12.2009, p. 11.

(189)  JO L 201 du 31.7.2002, p 37, amendée en dernier lieu par la directive 2009/136/CE. JO L 337 du 18.12.2009, p. 11.

(190)  P-TE 140/2004-s.

(191)  Bíróság, C-19/22, 28. pont.

(192)  Bíróság, C-31/00, 25. pont.

(193)  Bíróság, C-19/92, 19-21. pont és 390/2011.

(194)  Bíróság, C-281/98, 39‐41. pontok.

(195)  P-TE 140/2004-s.

(196)  Court of Justice, C-19/22, Section 28.

(197)  Court of Justice, C-31/00, Section 25.

(198)  Court of Justice, C-19/92, Sections 19-21 and 390/2011.

(199)  Court of Justice, C-281/98, Sections 39-41.

(200)  (http://ec.europa.eu/egf).

(201)  COM(2012)7 final. Ver: (http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=699&consultId=9&furtherConsult=yes).

(202)  http://ec.europa.eu/egf

(203)  COM(2012) 7 final. See: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=699&consultId=9&furtherConsult=yes

(204)  DO L 26 de 28.1.2012.

(205)  E-446/10 del Sr. Romeva i Rueda, E-644/10 del Sr. Junqueras Vies y E-1351/11 de Su Señoría, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(206)  Directiva 2011/92/UE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 13 de diciembre de  2011, relativa a la evaluación de las repercusiones de determinados proyectos públicos y privados sobre el medio ambiente, modificada por las Directivas 97/11/CE, 2003/35/CE y 2009/31/CE (DO L 26 de 28.1.2012).

(207)  OJ L 26, 28.1.2012.

(208)   E-446/10 de M. Romeva i Rueda, E-644/10 de M. Junqueras Vies et E-1351/11 de l'Honorable Parlementaire:
 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(209)   Directive 2011/92/UE du Parlement et du Conseil du 13 décembre 2011, texte codifié de la directive 85/337/CEE, concernant l'évaluation des incidences de certains projets publics et privés sur l'environnement, telle que modifiée par les directives 97/11/CE, 2003/35/CE et 2009/31/CE, JO L 26, 28.1.2012.

(210)  The annex is sent directly to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

(211)  Directiva 2011/36/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 5 aprilie 2011 privind prevenirea și combaterea traficului de persoane și protejarea victimelor acestuia, precum și de înlocuire a Deciziei-cadru 2002/629/JAI a Consiliului, JO L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1‐11.

(212)  Directiva 2011/93/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 13 decembrie 2011 privind combaterea abuzului sexual asupra copiilor, a exploatării sexuale a copiilor și a pornografiei infantile și de înlocuire a Deciziei-cadru 2004/68/JAI a Consiliului, JO L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1‐14.

(213)  COM(2011) 275 final;.document disponibil la adresa:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/criminal/victims/docs/com_2011_275_en.pdf

(214)  Directive 2011/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA, OJ L 101, 15.4.2011, p. 1‐11.

(215)  Directive 2011/92/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on combating the sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA, OJ L 335, 17.12.2011, p. 1‐14.

(216)  COM(2011) 275 final; available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/criminal/victims/docs/com_2011_275_en.pdf.

(217)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=NL.

(218)  http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/interests/pdf/de_gucht_interests_en.pdf

(219)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/.

(220)  http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/interests/pdf/de_gucht_interests_en.pdf

(221)  GU L 93 del 31.3.2006, pag. 12.

(222)  GU L 157 del 15.6.2011, pag. 1.

(223)  GU L 299 del 16.11.2007, pag. 1.

(224)  JO L 93 du 31.03.2006, p. 12.

(225)  JO L 157 du 15.6.2011, p. 1.

(226)  JO L 299 du 16.11.2007, p. 1.

(227)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A7-2010-0223+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EL

(228)  http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/about-the-europe-for-citizens-programme/index_en.htm

(229)  http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/news-events/news/20111220_en.htm

(230)  http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/news-events/news/20111221_en.htm

(231)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+REPORT+A7-2010-0223+0+DOC+PDF+V0//EN.

(232)  http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/about-the-europe-for-citizens-programme/index_en.htm

(233)  http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/news-events/news/20111220_en.htm

(234)  http://ec.europa.eu/citizenship/news-events/news/20111221_en.htm

(235)  http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/schmallenberg_virus/docs/guidance_document_07022012_en.pdf

(236)  http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/schmallenberg_virus/index_en.htm

(237)  http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/schmallenberg_virus/docs/guidance_document_07022012_en.pdf

(238)  http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/schmallenberg_virus/index_en.htm

(239)  ‘Loi n° 2011-835 du 13 juillet 2011 visant à interdire l’exploration et l’exploitation des mines d’hydrocarbures liquides ou gazeux par fracturation hydraulique et à abroger les permis exclusifs de recherches comportant des projets ayant recours à cette technique’, JORF n° 162 of 14 July 2011, consolidated on 28 February 2012.

(240)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/

(241)  Note sent by Commissioner Potočnik on 26 January 2012 to the Chair of the Environment, Public Health and Food safety in the European Parliament.

(242)  Directive 2011/92/EU on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment (codification) (OJ L 26/1, 28.1.2012).

(243)  Available on the website of the Directorate-General for Environment of the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/home.htm

(244)  OJ L 183, 29.6.1989, p. 1. Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work.

(245)  OJ L 348/9, 28.11.1992. Directive 92/91/EEC concerning the minimum requirements for improving the safety and health protection of workers in the mineral-extracting industries through drilling.

(246)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0673:FIN:SK:PDF#page=2

(247)  Európska komisia – Tlačová správa IP/12/182 a MEMO/12/135.

(248)  Nariadenie Európskeho parlamentu a Rady (ES) č. 648/2005, ktorým sa mení a dopĺňa nariadenie Rady (EHS) č. 2913/92, ktorým sa ustanovuje Colný kódex Spoločenstva a nariadenie Komisie (ES) č. 1875/2006, ktorým sa vykonáva nariadenie Rady (EHS) č. 2913/92, ktorým sa ustanovuje Colný kódex Spoločenstva.

(249)  Rozhodnutie Komisie K(2009) 2601.

(250)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2010:0673:FIN:EN:PDF#page=2

(251)  European Commission — Press Release IP/12/182 and MEMO/12/135.

(252)  Regulation (EC) No 648/2005 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code and Commission Regulation (EC) No 1875/2006 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code.

(253)  Commission Decision C (2009) 2601.

(254)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=20120313&secondRef=ITEM-012&language=EN

(255)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2012-0087+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN

(256)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=20120313&secondRef=ITEM-012&language=EN.

(257)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2012-0087+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN.

(258)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=20120313&secondRef=ITEM-012&language=PL.

(259)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2012-0087+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=PL.

(260)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=CRE&reference=20120313&secondRef=ITEM-012&language=EN.

(261)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2012-0087+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN&language=EN.

(262)  http://www.eib.org/attachments/country/factsheet_spain_2010_es.pdf

(263)  http://www.vozpopuli.com/empresas/bei-andalucia.

(264)  http://www.eib.org/attachments/country/factsheet_spain_2010_es.pdf

(265)  http://www.vozpopuli.com/empresas/bei-andalucia.

(266)  http://www.salamanca24horas.com/campo/52415-upa-y-coag-denuncian-que-el-precio-de-los-fertilizantes-se-esta-incrementando-hasta-un-58-respecto-al-ano-pasado.

(267)  Véase la Comunicación de la Comisión sobre la aplicación del artículo 82, DO C 45 de 24.2.2009.

(268)  http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/pdf/speech_original.pdf

(269)  http://www.salamanca24horas.com/campo/52415-upa-y-coag-denuncian-que-el-precio-de-los-fertilisantes-se-esta-incrementando-hasta-un-58-respecto-al-ano-pasado.

(270)  See Commission communication on Article 82 enforcement, OJ C 45, 24.2.2009.

(271)  http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/president/pdf/speech_original.pdf

(272)  ΕΕ L 316 της 31.10.1992, σ. 29.

(273)  http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxation/excise_duties/alcoholic_beverages/rates/index_en.htm

(274)  OJ L 316, 31.10.1992, p. 29. .

(275)  http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxation/excise_duties/alcoholic_beverages/rates/index_en.htm

(276)  http://www.oecd.org/document/16/0,3746,en_2649_34757_45558288_1_1_1_1,00.html

(277)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2010/op71_en.htm και
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication_summary16032_en.htm.

(278)  http://www.oecd.org/document/16/0,3746,en_2649_34757_45558288_1_1_1_1,00.html

(279)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2010/op71_en.htm and http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication_summary16032_en.htm

(280)   http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp

(281)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp .