Written questions by Members of the European Parliament and their answers given by a European Union institution
Date: 2013-11-06
Institutions: European Parliament
Subjects: Member of the European Parliament, written question








CE2013320EN.01000101.xml










6.11.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


CE 320/1





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 320 E/01)
Contents

E-009960/12 by Renate Weber, Sophia in 't Veld, Sonia Alfano, Cecilia Wikström and Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: France's national Roma integration strategy
Versión española
Versione italiana
Nederlandse versie
Versiunea în limba română
Svensk version
English version

E-009961/12 by Rolandas Paksas to the Council

Subject: Fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone
Tekstas lietuvių kalba
English version

E-009962/12 by Rolandas Paksas to the Commission

Subject: Fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone
Tekstas lietuvių kalba
English version

E-009963/12 by Lorenzo Fontana to the Commission

Subject: EUR 670 million grant to Emilia-Romagna from the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF)
Versione italiana
English version

E-009964/12 by Mario Mauro to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Fresh tensions in relations between Tibet and China
Versione italiana
English version

E-009965/12 by Francesco De Angelis to the Commission

Subject: Fiat restructuring plan and reopening of Fiat plant at Piedimonte San Germano
Versione italiana
English version

E-009966/12 by Derek Roland Clark to the Commission

Subject: Red diesel
English version

E-009967/12 by Georgios Koumoutsakos to the Commission

Subject: Worrying increase in cyberbullying
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-009968/12 by Roberta Angelilli to the Commission

Subject: Information on the use of EU funds for 2007-2013 by the municipality of Massa
Versione italiana
English version

E-009969/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Turkey rejects partnership with EU
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-009970/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: Commissioner Füle wants to see the EU ‘expand considerably’
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-009972/12 by Ingeborg Gräßle to the Council

Subject: Revolving doors: Council Secretariat officials/contract agents taking up positions in the tobacco industry
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-009973/12 by Gaston Franco and Véronique Mathieu to the Commission

Subject: Overpopulation of wild boar in Europe
Version française
English version

P-009974/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Special account for the payment of loan instalments to Greece
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-009976/12 by Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy to the Commission

Subject: Unreported trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-009977/12 by Amelia Andersdotter to the Commission

Subject: The meaning of ‘associated rights’
Svensk version
English version

E-009979/12 by Amelia Andersdotter to the Commission

Subject: Lack of underlying research to establish best practice in child protection
Svensk version
English version

E-009980/12 by Morten Messerschmidt to the Commission

Subject: Fees for entry and residence permits, and revenue from such fees
Dansk udgave
English version

E-009981/12 by Morten Messerschmidt to the Commission

Subject: Apple's abuse of its dominant market position
Dansk udgave
English version

E-010480/12 by Morten Messerschmidt to the Commission

Subject: Abuse by Apple of its monopoly position in connection with an app
Dansk udgave
English version

E-009982/12 by Mara Bizzotto to the Commission

Subject: EU membership of Turkey — respect for the acquis communautaire

Versione italiana
English version

E-010062/12 by William (The Earl of) Dartmouth to the Commission

Subject: Turkish protests
English version

E-010063/12 by William (The Earl of) Dartmouth to the Commission

Subject: Turkey's EU candidacy
English version

E-009983/12 by Reinhard Bütikofer to the Commission

Subject: Glencore-Xstrata merger
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-009984/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Competition and potential conflict of interest in the airport sector
Versión española
English version

E-009985/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: State aid in regions with underemployment
Versión española
English version

E-009986/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Potential state aid
Versión española
English version

E-009987/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Arrest of Greek journalist for breach of privacy
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-009988/12 by Andreas Mölzer to the Commission

Subject: Trade barriers in Africa increase famine
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-009989/12 by Andreas Mölzer to the Council

Subject: Stopping the wave of Roma asylum-seekers
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-009990/12 by Franz Obermayr to the Commission

Subject: Safeguard clause for the reintroduction of the visa requirement for the western Balkans
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-009991/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Spiralling increase in number of unemployed persons in Greece without insurance — urgent need to provide cover for medical care
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-009992/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Proposal in Chechnya to introduce Islamic religious education from nursery school onwards
Versione italiana
English version

E-009993/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Commission scrutiny over Paestum
Versione italiana
English version

E-009994/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Will the Commission monitor speculation damaging to EU government bonds?
Versione italiana
English version

E-009995/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: High-voltage power line between the villages of Foradada and La Pobla de Segur
Versión española
English version

E-009996/12 by Petru Constantin Luhan to the Commission

Subject: EU strategy for the Danube region
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-009997/12 by Petru Constantin Luhan to the Commission

Subject: SMEs: competitiveness and business opportunities
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-009998/12 by Sven Giegold to the Commission

Subject: Commission DG ECFIN staff
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-009999/12 by Sven Giegold to the Commission

Subject:  DG ECFIN staff (II)
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010001/12 by Sir Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — SV Estelle

English version

E-010002/12 by Sir Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: Sales tax and Amazon
English version

E-010003/12 by Catherine Bearder to the Commission

Subject: Ash tree dieback
English version

E-010004/12 by Catherine Bearder to the Commission

Subject: Cobblestones
English version

P-010005/12 by Takis Hadjigeorgiou to the Commission

Subject: Kurdish hunger strikers in Turkey
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010006/12 by Takis Hadjigeorgiou to the Commission

Subject: Environmental destruction of the Niger Delta
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010007/12 by Takis Hadjigeorgiou to the Commission

Subject: The right to verify the fate of missing persons
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010008/12 by Derek Roland Clark to the Commission

Subject: Electronic log — fishing
English version

E-010009/12 by Britta Reimers to the Commission

Subject: Insects as animal feed
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010010/12 by Britta Reimers to the Commission

Subject: Feeding of insects which are kept for the production of feed for farmed animals
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010011/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Combating extensive tax evasion in Greece
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010012/12 by Nikolaos Chountis to the Commission

Subject: Troika proposes reversal of freeze on repossession of primary residences
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

P-010014/12 by Catherine Stihler to the Commission

Subject: Scottish independence — Commission's position
English version

E-010041/12 by David Martin to the Commission

Subject: Honorary Directors-General of the Commission
English version

E-010015/12 by Nikos Chrysogelos to the Commission

Subject: Debt crisis and fiscal multipliers in Greece
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

P-000835/13 by Georgios Papanikolaou to the Commission

Subject: Disclosures by Director of IMF Research Unit regarding calculations behind the austerity measures 
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010016/12 by Marita Ulvskog to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Deteriorating human rights situation in Turkey
Svensk version
English version

E-010017/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Compatibility of pension cuts with the Greek Constitution and protection of fundamental rights of Greek citizens
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010018/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Projects concerning Internet anonymity
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010019/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: Impact of air transport agreements on smaller airlines
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010020/12 by Sir Graham Watson to the Commission

Subject: Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing
English version

E-010021/12 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Possible violation of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 in connection with the use of Category C animal by-products to produce bio-fuels
Versione italiana
English version

P-010025/12 by Eva Ortiz Vilella to the Commission

Subject: Forest fire in the Valencian region and the EU Solidarity Fund
Versión española
English version

E-010026/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: New Greek debt restructuring
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010027/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Fresh influx of refugees from Syria
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010028/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Atmospheric pollution
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010167/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Concentration of Solid Particles in the Air
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010029/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Reform of the banking sector
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010030/12 by Charalampos Angourakis to the Commission

Subject: Thousands of job losses at the Ford car plant in Genk (Belgium)
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010031/12 by Daniel Hannan to the Commission

Subject: EIB loans to the BBC
English version

E-010032/12 by Marta Andreasen to the Commission

Subject: Effects of a financial transaction tax (FTT)
English version

P-010033/12 by Eva Lichtenberger to the Commission

Subject: Nomination by Austria, after the deadline, of the Isel as a Natura 2000 site
Deutsche Fassung
English version

P-010034/12 by Carlos Coelho to the Commission

Subject: The judiciary and human rights in Croatia
Versão portuguesa
English version

P-010035/12 by Brian Simpson to the Commission

Subject: Follow-up to road safety report
English version

E-010036/12 by Nikos Chrysogelos to the Commission

Subject: Public transport fare increases
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010037/12 by Marta Andreasen to the Commission

Subject: Commissioners and ethics when it comes to meeting lobbyists
English version

E-010038/12 by Marta Andreasen to the Commission

Subject: Draft regulations stopped from going into the interservice phase
English version

E-010039/12 by Marta Andreasen to the Commission

Subject: The College of Commissioners following Estonia's example by cutting salaries
English version

E-010040/12 by David Martin to the Commission

Subject: Living wage
English version

E-010042/12 by Dimitrios Droutsas to the Commission

Subject: Greek privatisation programme
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010043/12 by Amelia Andersdotter to the Commission

Subject: Use of Special 301 Reports as a soft law tool with respect to Member States
Svensk version
English version

E-010762/12 by Francesco Enrico Speroni to the Commission

Subject: Referendum on Scottish independence and the emergence of new Member States within the EU
Versione italiana
English version

E-011159/12 by Nicole Sinclaire to the Commission

Subject: Status of an independent Scotland
English version

E-011632/12 by David Martin to the Commission

Subject: Negotiation of EU membership with non-independent states
English version

E-010044/12 by Struan Stevenson to the Commission

Subject: Independent Scotland sharing a regulator and a lender of last resort with the rest of the UK
English version

E-010045/12 by John Stuart Agnew to the Commission

Subject: Use of the word ‘resignation’
English version

E-010046/12 by Struan Stevenson to the Commission

Subject: Commissioners contacted by UK Government
English version

E-010047/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Approval of controversial GM maize MIR 162
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010048/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Information for consumers about genetically modified food
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010049/12 by Julie Girling to the Commission

Subject: Agri-environment schemes beyond 2014
English version

E-010050/12 by Anna Hedh to the Commission

Subject: Revision of data protection legislation
Svensk version
English version

E-010051/12 by Jan Březina to the Commission

Subject: Transit licences on the EU defence equipment market
České znění
English version

E-010052/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Abolition of the death penalty in South Sudan
Versione italiana
English version

E-010053/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Risk of anti-Western attacks in Egypt
Versione italiana
English version

E-010054/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Bomb attacks in Bahrain
Versione italiana
English version

E-010055/12 by Christel Schaldemose to the Commission

Subject: Dangerous and ineffective medicines
Dansk udgave
English version

E-010056/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Journalism witch-hunt in Greece
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

P-010057/12 by Geoffrey Van Orden to the Commission

Subject: Ash dieback
English version

E-010058/12 by Bill Newton Dunn to the Commission

Subject: The most highly paid EU employees
English version

E-010059/12 by Julie Girling to the Commission

Subject: Energy-efficient light bulbs
English version

E-010060/12 by William (The Earl of) Dartmouth to the Commission

Subject: New Commission job scheme
English version

E-010061/12 by William (The Earl of) Dartmouth to the Commission

Subject: EURES job scheme
English version

E-010357/12 by William (The Earl of) Dartmouth to the Commission

Subject: EURES job scheme
English version

E-010064/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Dialogue on Internet censorship and surveillance
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010065/12 by Dimitar Stoyanov to the Commission

Subject: Accession negotiations with Turkey
българска версия
English version

E-010066/12 by Francisco Sosa Wagner to the Commission

Subject: Consequences of the lack of corporate tax harmonisation in the EU
Versión española
English version

E-010067/12 by Marina Yannakoudakis to the Commission

Subject: Number of permanent officials and contract agents on contracts of unlimited duration who are of British nationality
English version

E-010068/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Chinese women's rights activist sentenced to a labour camp
Versione italiana
English version

E-010069/12 by Franziska Katharina Brantner to the Commission

Subject: Allocation of DAPHNE III funding in 2011 and 2012
Deutsche Fassung
English version

P-010070/12 by Kathleen Van Brempt to the Commission

Subject: Effectiveness of EIB financing
Nederlandse versie
English version

P-010100/12 by Ivo Belet to the Commission

Subject: European Investment Bank support for Ford Turkey
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-010134/12 by Laurence J.A.J. Stassen to the Commission

Subject: EUR 100 m for Ford plant in Turkey from the European Investment Bank
Nederlandse versie
English version

P-010071/12 by Tomasz Piotr Poręba to the Commission

Subject: Opinion of the Commission regarding the case of Adam Darski
Wersja polska
English version

E-010072/12 by Barbara Matera to the Council

Subject: Appointment of a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank
Versione italiana
English version

E-010073/12 by Andrea Zanoni, Sonia Alfano, Niccolò Rinaldi, Giommaria Uggias and Gianni Vattimo to the Commission

Subject: Severe breaches of Directives 2009/147/EC and 92/43/EEC in some Natura 2000 sites in Mazara del Vallo (western Sicily)
Versione italiana
English version

E-010074/12 by Mario Mauro to the Commission

Subject: Disability
Versione italiana
English version

E-010075/12 by Auke Zijlstra to the Commission

Subject: Secret German report on money laundering by Russians in Cyprus
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-010076/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Africa — Risk of counterfeit medicines
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010077/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: Restricted choice of browser
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010078/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Guinea-Bissau — climate of fear
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010079/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Instability in Burma
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010080/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — 2012 Sakharov Prize — Nasrin Sotoudeh and Jafar Panahi
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010081/12 by Diogo Feio to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Russia — adoption of the law on treason
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010083/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Clarity on European funds for unaccompanied minors
Versione italiana
English version

E-010084/12 by Geoffrey Van Orden to the Commission

Subject: Directive 2000/29/EC and ash dieback in the United Kingdom
English version

E-010085/12 by Mathieu Grosch to the Commission

Subject: EU funding for Ford
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010086/12 by Mathieu Grosch to the Commission

Subject: Promoting intergenerational projects at EU level
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010087/12 by Jörg Leichtfried to the Commission

Subject: HFO-1234yf liquid coolant
Deutsche Fassung
English version

P-010088/12 by Struan Stevenson to the Commission

Subject: Denial of work permits by Greece to European vets
English version

P-010089/12 by Andrew Duff to the Commission

Subject: Accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights
English version

E-010090/12 by Morten Løkkegaard to the Commission

Subject: Censoring of cultural products
Dansk udgave
English version

E-010091/12 by Christian Engström to the Commission

Subject: Transparency in court cases about complaints against the Commission
Svensk version
English version

E-010092/12 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Walls of Famagusta
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010093/12 by Antigoni Papadopoulou to the Commission

Subject: Turkey and the Republic of Cyprus EEZ
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010094/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: Child malformation in Gela
Versione italiana
English version

E-010095/12 by Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris to the Commission

Subject: The spread of gambling
Versione italiana
English version

E-010096/12 by James Nicholson to the Commission

Subject: Bioethanol contribution to protein deficit within Europe
English version

E-010097/12 by Paul Rübig, Karin Kadenbach and Franz Obermayr to the Commission

Subject:  DG Environment review of a bird reservoir for the Curlew in Wels (Upper Austria)
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010098/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: New Spanish unemployment figures
Versión española
English version

E-010099/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Impunity of the Francisco Franco National Foundation
Versión española
English version

E-010101/12 by Ivo Belet to the Council

Subject: European Investment Bank support for Ford Turkey
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-010102/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Looming drastic budget deficits in Spain
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010103/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: The US deficit exceeds USD 1 trillion
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010104/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: Assessment of Turkey by the rating agency Fitch
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010105/12 by Angelika Werthmann to the Commission

Subject: New debt relief for Greece
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010106/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Slavery practices in Brazil by the Inditex group
Versión española
English version

E-010108/12 by Fiorello Provera to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Exile for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
Versione italiana
English version

E-010109/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: FYROM Greeks
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010110/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: EU-Turkey Customs Union, aquaculture products and unfair competition
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010111/12 by Nikolaos Salavrakos to the Commission

Subject: Movement of vehicles fitted with the number plates of an EU Member State throughout the EU
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

P-010112/12 by Sergio Gaetano Cofferati to the Commission

Subject: Spanish reform of the coastal law and beach concessions
Versione italiana
English version

P-010113/12 by Sven Giegold to the Commission

Subject: Efficiency of the Spanish banking market
Deutsche Fassung
English version

P-010114/12 by Niki Tzavela to the Commission

Subject: New package of measures for Greece
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010115/12 by Marietje Schaake, Doris Pack, Hannu Takkula, Morten Løkkegaard, Marco Scurria, Seán Kelly, Olga Sehnalová, Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu, Santiago Fisas Ayxela, Zoltán Bagó, Bernd Posselt, Malika Benarab-Attou, Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid, Elisabeth Morin-Chartier, Hans-Peter Martin and Marek Henryk Migalski to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Progress made on culture in the EU's external actions
Versión española
České znění
Dansk udgave
Deutsche Fassung
Version française
Versione italiana
Magyar változat
Nederlandse versie
Versiunea în limba română
Suomenkielinen versio
English version

E-010116/12 by Michel Dantin to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1003/2010
Version française
English version

E-010117/12 by Emer Costello to the Commission

Subject: Current status of negotiations on a future PEACE programme
English version

E-010118/12 by Hans-Peter Martin to the Council

Subject: Drones
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010119/12 by Ole Christensen to the Commission

Subject: Temporary employment agencies and taxation in the aviation sector
Dansk udgave
English version

E-010120/12 by Sven Giegold to the Commission

Subject: Market power of companies in the crisis countries
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010121/12 by Syed Kamall to the Commission

Subject: London Metropolitan University journalism funding
English version

E-010122/12 by Syed Kamall to the Commission

Subject: EU visa-free travel regime with the Russian Federation
English version

E-010123/12 by Syed Kamall to the Commission

Subject: EU funding for trips to Rome in connection with the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development
English version

E-010124/12 by Syed Kamall to the Commission

Subject: Differences in life expectancy and the calculation of annuities
English version

E-010125/12 by Syed Kamall to the Commission

Subject: Access to medicines in case of economic breakdown
English version

E-010126/12 by Syed Kamall to the Commission

Subject: Compensation for air passengers affected by the ash cloud in April 2010
English version

E-010127/12 by Ismail Ertug to the Commission

Subject: Cross-border transport by HGV
Deutsche Fassung
English version

P-010128/12 by Françoise Castex to the Commission

Subject: European arrest warrant — political implications — the case of Aurore Martin
Version française
English version

P-010129/12 by Gianluca Susta to the Commission

Subject: Italian Supreme Court decision regarding labelling of origin
Versione italiana
English version

E-010132/12 by Christine De Veyrac to the Commission

Subject: European supervision of sports betting
Version française
English version

P-010133/12 by Emma McClarkin to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of the Industrial Emissions (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) Directive (2010/75/EU)
English version

E-010135/12 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Serious cases of unopposed illegal hunting of rare, very rare and, in some cases, critically endangered mammal and bird species throughout Italy
Versione italiana
English version

E-010136/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Bicycle dumping
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010137/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Passenger rights
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010138/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Integrated ticketing
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010140/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — EU-Russia agreement
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010141/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Flash Consumer Confidence Indicator
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010142/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Erasmus Mundus
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010143/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: Food flavouring
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010144/12 by David Casa to the Commission

Subject: European Electronic Toll Service
Verżjoni Maltija
English version

E-010146/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: The Commission should protect European tobacco-growing
Versione italiana
English version

E-010147/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: The Commission should protect the Catholic community in Bosnia
Versione italiana
English version

E-010148/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: The EU should protect SMEs' interests in the Balkans
Versione italiana
English version

E-010149/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: The Case of Malala Yousafzai
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010150/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Vigilance by the Commission concerning speculation made possible by the guarantee granted to investment banks
Versione italiana
English version

E-010151/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Refugee camp Dadaab
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010152/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Reducing carbon dioxide emissions
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010153/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: The fair resolution of disputes in the EU
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010154/12 by Auke Zijlstra to the Commission

Subject: Integration of Muslims
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-010155/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Development education and active global citizenship
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010156/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Aid for child refugees from Syria
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010157/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Development of civil society in Tunisia
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010158/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Development aid in the EU
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010159/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Support for teachers in the EU
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010160/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Ending food aid for Slovakia 
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010161/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Greater promotion of women's rights worldwide
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010162/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Emergent banking union
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010163/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Biofuel
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010164/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Multiannual Financial Framework
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010165/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Growth in unemployment of young people
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010166/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: EU single market flaws
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010168/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Lack of Data on Human Trafficking in the EU
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010169/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: An invitation to the European Union to take action against the discrimination of the Roma
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010170/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: A seperate Eurozone budget
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010171/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Smart regulation programme
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010172/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010173/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010174/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Common European Asylum System (CEAS)
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010175/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Donation of tissues and cells
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010176/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: The rights of victims of crime
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010177/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: European Social Entrepreneurship Funds
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010178/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: The problem of orphan works
Slovenské znenie
English version

E-010179/12 by Monika Flašíková Beňová to the Commission

Subject: Better legislation
Slovenské znenie
English version

P-010180/12 by Antonio Cancian to the Commission

Subject: Clarification on the traffic rules in the Land of Tyrol 
Versione italiana
English version

E-010181/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda to the Commission

Subject: Telecommunications Market Commission
Versión española
English version

P-010182/12 by Justas Vincas Paleckis to the Commission

Subject: Brain drain
Tekstas lietuvių kalba
English version

E-010183/12 by Marianne Thyssen and Ivo Belet to the Commission

Subject: Increase in beer duty in France
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-010184/12 by Auke Zijlstra to the Commission

Subject: Privileged Spanish banks
Nederlandse versie
English version

E-010185/12 by Kriton Arsenis to the Commission

Subject: Seafood sourced by companies or industries involved in the commercial killing of seals
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010186/12 by Phil Bennion to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Assistance to Yemen in the fight against piracy
English version

E-010187/12 by Matteo Salvini to the Commission

Subject: Contradiction in legislative decree for Directive 2011/7/EU
Versione italiana
English version

E-010188/12 by Matteo Salvini to the Commission

Subject: EU measures to prevent road accidents and funds set aside to support road accident victims
Versione italiana
English version

E-010190/12 by Philippe Boulland to the Commission

Subject: Impossibility of roadworthiness tests on all two-wheeled vehicles
Version française
English version

E-010191/12 by Eider Gardiazábal Rubial to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of budget line 05 03 02 08: Beef special premium
Versión española
English version

E-010192/12 by Eider Gardiazábal Rubial to the Commission

Subject: Implementation of budget line 05 03 02 22: Tobacco aid
Versión española
English version

E-010193/12 by Philippe Boulland to the Commission

Subject: New Commission communication on biofuels
Version française
English version

E-010194/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: The practices of Spanish textile companies in India
Versión española
English version

E-010195/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Research cooperation agreement between the EU and Israel
Versión española
English version

E-010196/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: Authorisation for a financial transaction tax
Versión española
English version

E-010197/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — US harassment of Spanish firms that maintain relations with Cuba
Versión española
English version

E-010198/12 by Willy Meyer to the Commission

Subject: European legislation on vegetable seeds
Versión española
English version

E-010199/12 by João Ferreira and Inês Cristina Zuber to the Commission

Subject: Violent storms in the Autonomous Region of Madeira
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010200/12 by Nuno Melo to the Commission

Subject: Catastrophe in Madeira
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010201/12 by Dolores García-Hierro Caraballo to the Commission

Subject: Carbon emissions
Versión española
English version

E-010202/12 by Robert Sturdy to the Commission

Subject: Galgos and the strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015
English version

E-010203/12 by Konstantinos Poupakis to the Commission

Subject: Dramatic impoverishment of European citizens
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010204/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Tax regimes in the European Union
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010589/12 by Raül Romeva i Rueda to the Commission

Subject: Bullfighting and European subsidies
Versión española
English version

E-010205/12 by Dan Jørgensen to the Commission

Subject: Subsidies for bullfighting are incompatible with Lisbon Treaty
Dansk udgave
English version

E-010206/12 by Andrea Zanoni to the Commission

Subject: Flourishing illegal trade in wild birds in Italy, in breach of Directive 2009/147/EC and Regulation (EC) No 865/2006
Versione italiana
English version

E-010208/12 by Ana Miranda to the Commission

Subject: Novacaixagalicia's social work
Versión española
English version

E-010209/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Investment in the trans-European transport network: 2007-2013
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010210/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Blue Growth — aquaculture
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010211/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Blue Growth — marine renewable energy sources and industrial policy
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010212/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Blue Growth — prospection for, and extraction of, marine minerals
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010213/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Blue Growth — tourism
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010214/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Consequences of deindustrialisation in the European Union
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010215/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Difference between commitment rate and implementation rate in 2007-2013 NSRF
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010216/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Eligibility of island regions for specific additional allocation
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010217/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Major projects notified to the Commission
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010218/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Major projects in the Autonomous Region of Madeira notified to the Commission
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010219/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Importance of energy costs for greater business competitiveness
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010220/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Contribution of industrial policy to economic recovery
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010221/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Industrial policy: support for some sectors only
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010222/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Spillover effect mechanism
Versão portuguesa
English version

E-010223/12 by Nuno Teixeira to the Commission

Subject: Importance of energy for the new European industrial policy
Versão portuguesa
English version

P-010224/12 by Tiziano Motti to the Commission

Subject: Air passenger rights in the event of denied boarding due to overbooking
Versione italiana
English version

P-010225/12 by Ashley Fox to the Commission

Subject: Access to EU documents for visually impaired people
English version

P-010226/12 by Ramon Tremosa i Balcells to the Commission

Subject: Takeover bid for Vueling by the International Airlines Group (IAG)
Versión española
English version

P-010227/12 by Frédéric Daerden to the Commission

Subject: Redistribution by supermarkets of unsold foodstuffs which are still edible
Version française
English version

E-010228/12 by María Irigoyen Pérez to the Council

Subject: Creation of a council for cohesion policy
Versión española
English version

E-010229/12 by Rareş-Lucian Niculescu to the Commission

Subject: Farmland in Hungary
Versiunea în limba română
English version

E-010230/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Trafficking of women in Bosnia-Herzegovina: call for EU intervention
Versione italiana
English version

E-010231/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Economic situation in the western Balkans
Versione italiana
English version

E-010232/12 by Mario Borghezio to the Commission

Subject: Intervention by the EU in defence of places of Christian worship in Northern Cyprus
Versione italiana
English version

E-010233/12 by Ryszard Czarnecki to the Commission

Subject: Violation of free speech in Poland
Wersja polska
English version

E-010234/12 by Renate Sommer to the Commission

Subject: Horticulture and landscaping in the new Horizon 2020 framework programme for research and innovation
Deutsche Fassung
English version

E-010235/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: Urgent and precautionary recall of hexavalent vaccine: what action is being taken in implementation of the precautionary principle under Article 191 TFEU?
Versione italiana
English version

E-010236/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: Influenza vaccination campaign in jeopardy in Italy: what are the safeguards for citizens?
Versione italiana
English version

E-010237/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: EU action on psoriasis
Versione italiana
English version

E-010238/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: The concept of non-compliance in terms of health and hygiene: what are the prospects of harmonisation of criminal law on food?
Versione italiana
English version

E-010239/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: Blood glucose meters: towards full standardisation and unification of safety parameters?
Versione italiana
English version

E-010240/12 by Oreste Rossi to the Commission

Subject: Myelomeningocele prevention: new prospects for vitamin B9 and B12 combination therapy?
Versione italiana
English version

P-010242/12 by Jürgen Klute to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Kurdish hunger strike
Deutsche Fassung
English version

P-010241/12 by Cornelis de Jong to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Kurdish hunger strike
Nederlandse versie
English version

P-010243/12 by George Lyon to the Commission

Subject: Scottish Government and Commission legal advice
English version

P-010244/12 by Marietta Giannakou to the Commission

Subject: Human rights violations in Tibet
Ελληνική έκδοση
English version

E-010245/12 by Willy Meyer, João Ferreira, Inês Cristina Zuber, Pino Arlacchi, Bart Staes, Helmut Scholz, Mikael Gustafsson, Patrick Le Hyaric, Marisa Matias, Alda Sousa, Nikolaos Chountis, Sabine Lösing, Paul Murphy, Ivo Vajgl, Ana Miranda, Raül Romeva i Rueda, Jill Evans, Norbert Neuser, Nicole Kiil-Nielsen, Andres Perello Rodriguez, Antonio Masip Hidalgo, Rui Tavares, Åsa Westlund, Michèle Rivasi, Ana Gomes, Marco Scurria and Jean Lambert to the Commission

Subject: VP/HR — Violence in Laayoune (occupied Western Sahara): repression of Sahrawi demonstrators and expulsion of Spanish and Norwegian observers
Versión española
Deutsche Fassung
Ελληνική έκδοση
Version française
Versione italiana
Nederlandse versie
Versão portuguesa
Slovenska različica
Svensk version
English version

P-010246/12 by Janusz Władysław Zemke to the Commission

Subject: Securing the Włocławek stage of fall on the Vistula River on a long-term basis
Wersja polska
English version

P-010247/12 by Victor Boştinaru to the Commission

Subject: Pre-suspension and financial corrections concerning four operational programmes in Romania
Versiunea în limba română
English version
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009960/12
a la Comisión
Renate Weber (ALDE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Cecilia Wikström (ALDE) y Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 de octubre de 2012)

Asunto: Estrategia nacional de Francia para la integración de la población romaní
El anterior gobierno de Francia se había comprometido a aplicar una estrategia nacional para la integración romaní. Recientemente, el nuevo gobierno decidió revisar la estrategia nacional de integración de la población romaní para tener en cuenta las observaciones formuladas por la Comisión en la Comunicación de 2012 sobre la población romaní.






1.


¿Sabe la Comisión si Francia tiene planes de revisar su estrategia de integración de la población romaní?










2.


¿Está prestando apoyo la Comisión a las autoridades francesas para la revisión de la estrategia nacional de integración de la población romaní, y, en caso afirmativo, en qué forma?










3.


¿Cómo piensa la Comisión garantizar una verdadera participación de la población romaní en la revisión de la estrategia?










4.


¿Sabe la Comisión si la estrategia revisada de integración de la población romaní incluiráel reconocimiento de las caravanas como una forma legal de vivienda, lo que permitiráque los romaníes que viven en caravanas en terrenos de su propiedad sean conectados alagua corriente y a la electricidad y reciban asistencia social relacionada con la vivienda?




Respuesta de la Sra. Redingon  en nombre de la Comisión 
(18 de diciembre de 2012)
Se espera que los Estados miembros tengan en cuenta, en la aplicación de las medidas, los resultados de la evaluación de la Comisión (1) . 
El 22 de agosto de 2012, el Primer Ministro de Francia celebró una reunión interministerial, al final de la cual se hizo pública una serie de compromisos sobre la integración de la población romaní (2). Una de ellas es revisar la Estrategia nacional para la integración de la población romaní. 
A fin de apoyar esta revisión, se celebraron reuniones bilaterales entre la Comisión y los responsables de la toma de decisiones de Francia el 31 de agosto en Bruselas y el 20 de septiembre en París con el fin de debatir los resultados detallados de la evaluación de la Estrategia (3) francesa llevada a cabo por la Comisión y extraer lecciones de las prácticas existentes. El grupo piloto y la red de puntos de contacto nacionales de integración de la población romaní, que aspira a apoyar el aprendizaje mutuo entre los Estados miembros, ofrece un apoyo adicional a este ejercicio.
En estas ocasiones, la Comisión ha subrayado la importancia de la participación de las organizaciones de la sociedad civil y los propios romaníes en la revisión y aplicación de la estrategia. Todos los Estados miembros han sido formalmente invitados a presentar, antes de finales de año, la información pertinente sobre este proceso.
Además, en su diálogo bilateral con Francia, la Comisión ha subrayado la necesidad de incluir en la Estrategia nacional de Francia, las medidas adecuadas para hacer frente a todos los desafíos relacionados con la integración de los nómadas, incluido su acceso a la vivienda y los servicios públicos. La Comisión no ha recibido aún ninguna información sobre los planes actualizados de Francia a este respecto.
La Comisión informará sobre los avances registrados en la aplicación de las estrategias nacionales en la primavera de 2013.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009960/12
alla Commissione
Renate Weber (ALDE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Cecilia Wikström (ALDE) e Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 ottobre 2012)

Oggetto: Strategia nazionale della Francia per l'integrazione dei rom
Il precedente governo francese si è impegnato ad attuare una strategia nazionale di integrazione dei rom. Recentemente, il nuovo governo ha deciso di rivedere la strategia nazionale di integrazione dei rom per tener conto delle osservazioni formulate dalla Commissione nella comunicazione sui rom del 2012.






1.


La Commissione ha notizia che la Francia abbia in programma di rivedere la propria strategia di integrazione dei rom?










2.


La Commissione sta dando sostegno alle autorità francesi per la revisione della strategia nazionale di integrazione dei rom, e, in caso affermativo, in quale forma?










3.


Come intende la Commissione garantire la partecipazione effettiva dei rom alla revisione della strategia?










4.


La Commissione ha notizia che la strategia rivista di integrazione dei rom contempli il riconoscimento delle roulotte come forma legale di abitazione, rendendo con ciò possibile per i rom che vivono in roulotte su terreni di loro proprietà collegarsi all'acqua corrente e all'elettricità e beneficiare dell'assistenza sociale per l'alloggio?




Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione
(18 dicembre 2012)
Gli Stati membri sono tenuti a prendere in considerazione i risultati della valutazione della Commissione (4) nel mettere in atto le misure previste.
Il 22 agosto 2012 il primo ministro francese ha convocato una riunione interministeriale, al termine della quale sono stati comunicati pubblicamente diversi impegni riguardanti l’integrazione dei Rom (5), tra cui quello di rivedere la strategia nazionale in materia.
Per dare impulso alla revisione la Commissione e le autorità francesi hanno tenuto incontri bilaterali, il 31 agosto a Bruxelles e il 20 settembre a Parigi, al fine di discutere i risultati dettagliati della valutazione della Commissione sulla strategia della Francia (6) e trarre insegnamenti dalle pratiche esistenti. Il gruppo pilota e la rete di punti di contatto nazionali per i Rom, che mirano a sostenere l'apprendimento reciproco tra gli Stati membri, apportano un ulteriore contributo a tale esercizio.
Durante gli incontri la Commissione ha ricordato quanto sia importante coinvolgere le organizzazioni della società civile e gli stessi Rom nella revisione e nell’attuazione della strategia e ha formalmente invitato tutti gli Stati membri a trasmettere le informazioni pertinenti su questo processo entro la fine dell'anno.
Inoltre, nel dialogo bilaterale con la Francia, la Commissione ha sottolineato la necessità di includere nella strategia nazionale francese misure adeguate che permettano di affrontare tutte le questioni connesse all'integrazione delle comunità nomadi, ivi compreso l'accesso all'alloggio e alle strutture pubbliche. La Commissione non è ancora stata informata di piani aggiornati della Francia a tal riguardo.
La Commissione comunicherà i progressi compiuti nell'attuazione delle strategie nazionali nella primavera del 2013.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009960/12
aan de Commissie
Renate Weber (ALDE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Cecilia Wikström (ALDE) en Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 oktober 2012)

Betreft: De nationale strategie van Frankrijk voor de integratie van de Roma
De vorige regering van Frankrijk heeft zich ertoe gebonden een nationale strategie voor de integratie van de Roma ten uitvoer te leggen. Onlangs heeft de nieuwe regering besloten om de strategie inzake de integratie van de Roma te herzien naar aanleiding van opmerkingen van de Commissie in de mededeling over de Roma van 2012.






1.


Weet de Commissie of Frankrijk voornemens is zijn strategie voor de integratie van de Roma te herzien?










2.


Biedt de Commissie de Franse autoriteiten ondersteuning voor de herziening van de nationale strategie voor de integratie van de Roma en zo ja, in welke vorm?










3.


Hoe zal de Commissie kunnen garanderen dat de Roma daadwerkelijk betrokken worden bij de herziening van de strategie?










4.


Weet de Commissie of in de herziene strategie voor de integratie van de Roma eveneens de erkenning van woonwagens als een legale vorm van huisvesting opgenomen is, zodat het mogelijk is voor Roma die in woonwagens op hun eigen land wonen om aangesloten te worden op stromend water en elektriciteit en aan huisvesting gerelateerde sociale bijstand te ontvangen?




Antwoord van mevrouw Reding namens de Commissie
(18 december 2012)
De lidstaten worden bij de uitvoering van maatregelen geacht rekening te houden met de uitkomst van de beoordeling door de Commissie (7). 
Op 22 augustus 2012 heeft de Franse premier een interministeriële vergadering belegd die werd afgesloten met de bekendmaking van een aantal toezeggingen met betrekking tot de integratie van de Roma (8). Een van die toezeggingen is om de Franse nationale strategie inzake de integratie van de Roma te herzien. 
Om deze herziening te ondersteunen, vonden op 31 augustus in Brussel en op 20 september in Parijs bilaterale bijeenkomsten tussen de Commissie en de Franse beleidsmakers plaats, teneinde de gedetailleerde resultaten van de beoordeling door de Commissie van de Franse strategie te bespreken (9) en lering te trekken uit bestaande praktijken. De pilotgroep en het netwerk van nationale Roma-contactpunten, die willen bevorderen dat lidstaten van elkaar leren, leveren hierbij aanvullende ondersteuning.
Bij deze gelegenheden heeft de Commissie beklemtoond hoe belangrijk het is dat maatschappelijke organisaties en de Roma zelf bij de herziening en uitvoering van de strategie betrokken worden. Alle lidstaten zijn formeel uitgenodigd om voor het einde van het jaar de relevante informatie over dit proces te verstrekken.
Bovendien heeft de Commissie in haar bilaterale dialoog met Frankrijk onderstreept dat er afdoende maatregelen in de Franse nationale strategie moeten worden opgenomen om iets te doen aan de problemen met betrekking tot de integratie van travellers, zoals hun toegang tot huisvesting en openbare nutsvoorzieningen. De Commissie heeft nog geen informatie ontvangen over de geactualiseerde plannen van Frankrijk.
De Commissie zal in de lente van 2013 verslag uitbrengen over de vooruitgang bij de uitvoering van de nationale strategieën.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-009960/12
adresată Comisiei
Renate Weber (ALDE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Cecilia Wikström (ALDE) şi Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 octombrie 2012)

Subiect: Strategia națională a Franței în materie de integrare a romilor
Guvernul anterior al Franței s-a angajat să pună în aplicare o strategie națională de integrare a romilor. Recent, noul guvern a luat decizia de a revizui strategia națională de integrare a romilor pentru a lua în considerare comentariile formulate de către Comisie în cadrul comunicării privind romii din 2012.






1.


Are cunoștință Comisia de eventualele planuri ale Franței de a revizui strategia națională de integrare a romilor?










2.


Acordă Comisia sprijin autorităților franceze în vederea revizuirii strategiei naționale de integrare a romilor și, în acest caz, sub ce formă?










3.


Cum va asigura Comisia o reală participare a romilor la revizuirea strategiei?










4.


Are cunoștință Comisia de eventuala includere, în cadrul strategiei revizuite de integrare a romilor, a recunoașterii caravanelor drept locuință legală, măsură care le-ar permite romilor care trăiesc în caravane pe propriile lor terenuri să se conecteze la rețelele de apă curentă și de electricitate și să beneficieze de asistența socială destinată asigurării unei locuințe? 




Răspuns dat de dna Reding în numele Comisiei
(18 decembrie 2012)
În privința punerii în aplicare a măsurilor, se așteaptă ca statele membre să țină cont de rezultatele evaluării (10) Comisiei. 
La 22 august 2012, prim-ministrul francez a convocat o reuniune interministerială, la sfârșitul căreia au fost făcute publice (11) o serie de angajamente privind integrarea romilor. Unul dintre acestea este de a revizui strategia națională a Franței privind integrarea romilor. 
Pentru a sprijini această revizuire, la 31 august la Bruxelles și la 20 septembrie la Paris, au avut loc reuniuni bilaterale între Comisie și factorii de decizie din Franța pentru a discuta rezultatele detaliate ale evaluării de către Comisie a strategiei Franței (12) și pentru a trage învățăminte din practicile existente. Grupul-pilot și rețeaua de puncte de contact naționale pentru integrarea romilor, al căror obiectiv este încurajarea schimbului reciproc de metode între statele membre, furnizează acestui exercițiu un sprijin suplimentar.
Cu aceste ocazii, Comisia a subliniat importanța de a implica organizațiile societății civile și romii înșiși în revizuirea și punerea în aplicare a strategiei. Toate statele membre au fost invitate în mod oficial să prezinte, înainte de sfârșitul anului, informații relevante cu privire la acest proces.
În plus, în cadrul dialogului său bilateral cu Franța, Comisia a evidențiat necesitatea ca strategia națională a Franței să cuprindă măsuri adecvate care să abordeze toate chestiunile privind integrarea romilor itineranți, inclusiv accesul acestora la locuințe și la utilități publice. Comisia nu a primit încă informații privind planurile actualizate ale Franței în această privință.
Comisia va prezenta în primăvara anului 2013 un raport privind progresele înregistrate cu privire la punerea în aplicare a strategiilor naționale.
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-009960/12
till kommissionen
Renate Weber (ALDE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Cecilia Wikström (ALDE) och Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 oktober 2012)

Angående: Frankrikes nationella strategi för integrering av romer
Frankrikes förra regering gjorde ett åtagande att genomföra en nationell strategi för integrering av romer. Nyligen beslutade den nya regeringen att se över landets strategi för integrering av romer till följd av anmärkningar som kommissionen gjort i sitt meddelande om romer från 2012.






1.


Vet kommissionen om Frankrike har några planer på att revidera sin strategi för integrering av romer?










2.


Bistår kommissionen de franska myndigheterna i arbetet med att revidera den nationella strategin för integrering av romer? Om så är fallet, hur ser detta bistånd ut?










3.


Hur tänker kommissionen se till att romerna själva verkligen inkluderas i arbetet med att revidera strategin?










4.


Känner kommissionen till om den reviderade strategin för integrering av romer kommer att innehålla ett erkännande av husvagnar som en laglig bostadsform, för att på så sätt göra det möjligt för romer som bor i husvagnar på egen mark att anslutas till rinnande vatten och el och få bostadsbidrag?




Svar från Viviane Reding på kommissionens vägnar
(18 december 2012)
Medlemsstaterna förväntas ta kommissionens bedömning (13) i beaktande vid genomförandet av åtgärder.
Frankrikes premiärminister sammankallade den 22 augusti 2012 ett ministermöte efter vilket ett flertal åtaganden rörande integreringen av romer offentliggjordes (14). Ett av dessa åtaganden var att se över Frankrikes nationella strategi för integrering av romer.
Till stöd för denna översyn hölls ett par bilaterala möten mellan kommissionen och franska beslutsfattare – den 31 augusti i Bryssel och den 20 september i Paris – för att diskutera resultatet av kommissionens bedömning av Frankrikes nationella strategi (15) och dra lärdom av de befintliga förfarandena. Nätverket av nationella kontaktpunkter för medlemsstaternas nationella strategier för integrering av romer och pilotgruppen av medlemsstater tillhandahåller också stöd för översynen.
Kommissionen betonade vid mötena vikten av att det civila samhällets organisationer och romerna själva involveras i översynen och genomförandet av strategin. Alla medlemsstater har formellt uppmanats att före årets slut tillhandahålla information om denna process.
Kommissionen betonade också vikten av att Frankrike i sin nationella strategi infogar adekvata åtgärder för att möta alla utmaningar som har med integreringen av ”resande” (Gens du voyage) att göra, inbegripet frågan om bostäder och tillgången till el, vatten, etc. Kommissionen har ännu inte fått någon information om landets planer i detta avseende.
Kommissionen kommer under våren 2013 att avlägga rapport om framstegen i genomförandet av de nationella strategierna.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009960/12
to the Commission
Renate Weber (ALDE), Sophia in 't Veld (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Cecilia Wikström (ALDE) and Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: France's national Roma integration strategy
France’s previous government committed itself to implementing a national Roma integration strategy. Recently, the new government decided to revise the country’s Roma integration strategy on account of comments made by the Commission in the 2012 Roma communication.






1.


Does the Commission know whether France has any plans to revise its Roma integration strategy?










2.


Is the Commission providing support to the French authorities for the revision of the national Roma integration strategy, and, if so, in what form?










3.


How will the Commission ensure genuine participation by Roma in the revision of the strategy?










4.


Does the Commission know whether the revised Roma integration strategy will include the recognition of caravans as a legal form of housing, thereby making it possible for Roma living in caravans on their own land to be connected to running water and electricity and to receive housing-related social assistance?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
Member States are expected to take into account the results from the Commission's assessment (16) in the implementation of measures. 
On 22 August 2012, France's Prime Minister conveyed an inter-ministerial meeting, at the end of which a number of commitments on Roma integration were made public (17). One is to revise the French national Roma integration strategy. 
In order to support this revision, bilateral meetings between the Commission and France's decision-makers took place on 31 August in Brussels and on 20 September in Paris so as to discuss the detailed results from the assessment by the Commission of France's strategy (18) and draw lessons from existing practices. The pilot group and the network of national Roma contact points, aiming at supporting mutual learning among Member States, provide additional support to this exercise.
On these occasions, the Commission has stressed the importance of involving civil society organisations and the Roma themselves in the revision and implementation of the strategy. All Member States have been formally invited to provide, before the end of the year, the relevant information on this process.
Moreover, in its bilateral dialogue with France, the Commission has highlighted the need to include, in the French national strategy, adequate measures addressing all challenges related to the integration of travellers, including their access to housing and public utilities. The Commission has not yet received any information on France's updated plans in this regard.
The Commission will report on progress on the implementation of the national strategies in spring 2013.
(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)
Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-009961/12
Tarybai
Rolandas Paksas (EFD)
(2012 m. spalio 31 d.)

Tema: Žvejyba Mauritanijos zonoje
2012 m. liepos 26 d. parafuotas Europos Sąjungos ir Mauritanijos Islamo Respublikos protokolas, kuriuo dvejiems metams nustatomos dabar galiojančiame abiejų susitariančiųjų šalių žvejybos partnerystės susitarime numatytos žvejybos galimybės ir finansinis įnašas. Atkreiptinas dėmesys į tai, kad derybos dėl šio susitarimo vyko sunkiai, buvo net 6 jų raundai ir susitarimas pasirašytas tik 7 raundo metu. Susitarimu padidinta draudimo žvejoti zona nuo 12 iki 20 jūrmylių, taip pat nustatyta pareiga 2 proc. laimikio neatlygintinai atiduoti Mauritanijai. Be to, reikalaujama laivuose įdarbinti 60 proc. vietinių Mauritanijos gyventojų.






1.


Kokią įtaką šios susitarimo sąlygos turės žvejybai Mauritanijos zonoje? Ar Sąjungos laivams nebus apribotos žvejybos galimybės šioje zonoje, ar žvejyba netaps nerentabili, nes daugelis ES narių žvejybos laivynų dėl itin nepalankių ir neįgyvendinamų susitarimo sąlygų turės nutraukti žvejybą? Kodėl nustačius tokias griežtas žvejybos sąlygas nenumatoma galimybių įsigyti komercinių licencijų?










2.


Pažymėtina, kad ne tik Lietuvos, bet ir daugelis kitų ES valstybių laivų iš Mauritanijos zonos turėjo pasitraukti į Ispanijos Las Palmaso uostą. Jie nežvejoja, turi prastovų ir didžiulių nuostolių. Kokių veiksmų ketinama imtis, kad būtų išeita iš tokios susidariusios situacijos ir pašalintos kliūtys vykdyti žvejybą?










3.


Ar šis parafuotas susitarimas nepažeidžia ES šalių žvejybos laivynų, žvejojančių Mauritanijos zonoje, taip pat verslo subjektų interesų ir neapriboja konkurencijos galimybių? Ar tokiose šalyse, kaip Lietuva, nežlugs okeaninė žvejyba?




Atsakymas
(2013 m. sausio 21 d.)
2012 m. gruodžio 3 d. Taryba priėmė sprendimą dėl Protokolo, kuriuo dvejiems metams nustatomos Europos Sąjungos ir Mauritanijos Islamo Respublikos žvejybos partnerystės susitarime numatytos žvejybos galimybės ir finansinis įnašas, pasirašymo Europos Sąjungos vardu ir jo laikino taikymo.
Šiuo protokolu užtikrinama, kad Europos Sąjungos laivynai turi pirmumo teisę žvejoti likučius, esančius Mauritanijos žvejybos zonose. Kitų užsienio laivynų, turinčių teisę žvejoti Mauritanijos žvejybos zonose, žvejybos galimybių atžvilgiu, protokolo 1 priede nustatytos Europos Sąjungos laivynams skirtos žvejybos galimybės iš esamų likučių skiriamos pirmumo tvarka.
Su Europos Sąjungos valstybių narių vėliava plaukiojantys laivai gali žvejoti Mauritanijos žvejybos zonose tik turėdami žvejybos leidimą, išduotą laikantis šio protokolo ir sąlygų, nustatytų šio protokolo I priede.
Taryba negali atsakyti į hipotetinius klausimus dėl konkrečių žvejybos laivynų, todėl gerbiamo Parlamento nario bet kokį klausimą, susijusį su techninėmis sąlygomis, išdėstytomis parafuotame protokole su Mauritanija, prašoma pateikti Komisijai.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009961/12
to the Council
Rolandas Paksas (EFD)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone
The Protocol between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania setting out fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the two Parties currently in force and covering a period of two years was initialled on 26 July 2012. It should be noted that the negotiations on the Agreement were very strenuous and required no fewer than six rounds, with the Agreement signed only during the seventh round. The Agreement extends the prohibited fishing zone from 12 to 20 nautical miles and establishes an obligation of returning 2% of the catch to Mauritania free of charge. In addition, 60% of Mauritanian seamen must be signed on by EU vessels.






1.


How will the terms of the Agreement affect fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone? Will they not restrict fishing opportunities for EU vessels in the zone? Will fishing not become non-cost-effective, since many fishing fleets of Member States will have to discontinue their fishing activities due to the terms of the Agreement, which are very disadvantageous and difficult to implement? Why is there no possibility of purchasing commercial licences when the rules governing fishing are so strict?










2.


It is worth noting that many vessels — not only from Lithuania but also from other Member States — have had to withdraw from the Mauritanian zone to the Spanish port of Las Palmas. They are not engaged in fishing activities and are currently idle and incurring huge losses. What action is planned in order to change this situation and remove the obstacles to fishing activities?










3.


Does this Agreement not impinge on the interests of EU fishing fleets engaged in fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone and the interests of businesses, and does it not limit the possibilities for competition? Will ocean fishing not collapse in countries such as Lithuania?




Reply
(21 January 2013)
On 3 December 2012 the Council adopted a decision on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, and on the provisional application of the Protocol setting out the fishing opportunities and financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania for a period of two years.
The Protocol grants European Union fleets priority access to available surpluses in Mauritanian fishing zones. The fishing opportunities allocated to European Union fleets, as set out in Annex 1 to the Protocol, come from the available surpluses and have priority over fishing opportunities allocated to other foreign fleets authorised to fish in Mauritanian fishing zones.
Vessels flying the flag of a Member State of the European Union may fish in Mauritanian fishing zones only if they are in possession of a fishing authorisation issued under the Protocol in accordance with Annex 1 thereto.
Since it is not for the Council to answer hypothetical questions on specific fishing fleets, the Honourable Member is invited to put any question related to the technical conditions laid down in the initialled Protocol with Mauritania to the Commission.
(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)
Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. E-009962/12
Komisijai
Rolandas Paksas (EFD)
(2012 m. spalio 31 d.)

Tema: Žvejyba Mauritanijos zonoje
2012 m. liepos 26 d. parafuotas Europos Sąjungos ir Mauritanijos Islamo Respublikos protokolas, kuriuo dvejiems metams nustatomos dabar galiojančiame abiejų susitariančiųjų šalių žvejybos partnerystės susitarime numatytos žvejybos galimybės ir finansinis įnašas. Atkreiptinas dėmesys į tai, kad derybos dėl šio susitarimo vyko sunkiai, buvo net 6 jų raundai ir susitarimas pasirašytas tik 7 raundo metu. Susitarimu padidinta draudimo žvejoti zona nuo 12 iki 20 jūrmylių, taip pat nustatyta pareiga 2 proc. laimikio neatlygintinai atiduoti Mauritanijai. Be to, reikalaujama laivuose įdarbinti 60 proc. vietinių Mauritanijos gyventojų.






1.


Kokią įtaką šios susitarimo sąlygos turės žvejybai Mauritanijos zonoje? Ar Sąjungos laivams nebus apribotos žvejybos galimybės šioje zonoje, ar žvejyba netaps nerentabili, nes daugelis ES narių žvejybos laivynų dėl itin nepalankių ir neįgyvendinamų susitarimo sąlygų turės nutraukti žvejybą? Kodėl nustačius tokias griežtas žvejybos sąlygas nėra numatoma galimybių įsigyti komercinių licencijų?










2.


Pažymėtina, kad ne tik Lietuvos, bet ir daugelis kitų ES valstybių laivų iš Mauritanijos zonos turėjo pasitraukti į Ispanijos Las Palmaso uostą. Jie nežvejoja, turi prastovų ir didžiulių nuostolių. Kokių veiksmų ketinama imtis, kad būtų išeita iš tokios susidariusios situacijos ir pašalintos kliūtys vykdyti žvejybą?










3.


Ar šis parafuotas susitarimas nepažeidžia ES valstybių žvejybos laivynų, žvejojančių Mauritanijos zonoje, taip pat verslo subjektų interesų ir neapriboja konkurencijos galimybių? Ar tokiose šalyse, kaip Lietuva, nežlugs okeaninė žvejyba?




Komisijos narės M. Damanaki atsakymas Komisijos vardu
(2013 m. sausio 10 d.)
Neseniai pasirašytu ir laikinai taikomu protokolu ES laivynui siūlomos geros galimybės ir užtikrinamas žvejybos veiklos tęstinumas. Juo ES laivynui užtikrinama pirmenybė patekti į Mauritanijos vandenis, o ne ES laivynai turi laikytis tokių pačių techninių ir finansinių sąlygų, kokios numatytos protokole. Be to, jame numatyta galimybė suderinti naujas technines sąlygas, dėl kurių turi būti susitarta būsimame jungtinio komiteto posėdyje.
Visuose žuvininkystės sektoriaus partnerystės susitarimuose yra išimties nuostata, pagal kurią neleidžiama sudaryti privačių susitarimų. Susitarimai sudaromi siekiant naudos laivynams, jais užtikrinama, kad ūkinės veiklos vykdytojai negalėtų apeiti susitarimų sąlygų įsigydami privačias licencijas, o už teises žvejoti vandenyse ir žuvininkystės sektoriams remti mokamos lėšos.
Kai kurie ES laivyno segmentai dar nenusprendė kreiptis dėl licencijų, tačiau šią galimybę jau pasirinko tunų ir senegalinių jūrinių lydekų žvejybos laivynai.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009962/12
to the Commission
Rolandas Paksas (EFD)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone
The Protocol between the European Union and the Islamic Republic of Mauritania setting out fishing opportunities and the financial contribution provided for in the Fisheries Partnership Agreement between the two Parties currently in force and covering a period of two years was initialled on 26 July 2012. It should be noted that the negotiations on the Agreement were very strenuous and required no fewer than six rounds, with the Agreement signed only during the seventh round. The Agreement extends the prohibited fishing zone from 12 to 20 nautical miles and establishes an obligation of returning 2% of the catch to Mauritania free of charge. In addition, 60% of Mauritanian seamen must be signed on by EU vessels.






1.


How will the terms of the Agreement affect fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone? Will they not restrict fishing opportunities for EU vessels in the zone? Will fishing not become non-cost-effective, since many fishing fleets of Member States will have to discontinue their fishing activities due to the terms of the Agreement, which are very disadvantageous and difficult to implement? Why is there no possibility of purchasing commercial licences when the rules governing fishing are so strict?










2.


It is worth noting that many vessels — not only from Lithuania but also from other Member States — have had to withdraw from the Mauritanian zone to the Spanish port of Las Palmas. They are not engaged in fishing activities and are currently idle and incurring huge losses. What action is planned in order to change this situation and remove the obstacles to fishing activities?










3.


Does this Agreement not impinge on the interests of EU fishing fleets engaged in fishing activities in the Mauritanian zone and the interests of businesses, and does it not limit the possibilities for competition? Will ocean fishing not collapse in countries such as Lithuania?




Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
The recently signed and provisionally applied Protocol offers viable opportunities for the EU fleet, and guarantees continuity of fishing operations. It ensures priority access for the EU fleet to the Mauritanian waters and non-EU fleets must respect the same technical and financial conditions as foreseen in the Protocol. Moreover, it allows for adjustments of the new technical conditions to be agreed in the context of the upcoming Joint Committee. 
All Fisheries Partnership Agreements contain an ‘exclusivity clause’ which preclude private arrangements. The agreements are concluded for the benefit of the fleets, and the amounts paid for access rights and sectorial support and at preventing operators from avoiding the terms of the agreements by taking out private licences.
Some segments of the EU fleet have not yet chosen to apply for licences but on the other hand, tuna and black hake fleets have chosen to do so. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009963/12
alla Commissione
Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)
(31 ottobre 2012)

Oggetto: Stanziamento di 670 milioni di euro all'Emilia-Romagna attraverso il Fondo di solidarietà dell'Unione europea (FSUE)
Secondo quanto pubblicato da alcuni organi d'informazione italiani, tra cui Asca, alcune «fonti comunitarie», come quest'ultima agenzia le definisce, avrebbero dichiarato che lo stanziamento di aiuti per 670 milioni di euro varato dalla Commissione, lo scorso 19 settembre, attraverso il Fondo di solidarietà dell'Unione europea, a favore della ricostruzione a seguito dei danni provocati dal sisma in Emilia-Romagna nel mese di maggio del 2012, non sarà esigibile a causa della mancanza di liquidità. Citando l'articolo pubblicato da Asca: ««Lo stanziamento c'è, ma i soldi non ci sono», fanno sapere da Bruxelles.»
— Considerato che la commissione per i bilanci del Parlamento europeo ha approvato tale stanziamento in data 18 ottobre 2012;
— considerato che i costi per la ricostruzione in Emilia-Romagna sono stimati in 13,3 miliardi di euro;
— considerato che, per l'anno 2012, si tratta della seconda richiesta di accesso al Fondo di solidarietà dell'Unione europea, il quale è stato creato proprio per aiutare le zone colpite da disastri naturali che necessitano di un supporto economico;
Può la Commissione confermare o smentire e, conseguentemente, chiarire il fondamento di quanto riportato, tra le altre, dall'agenzia giornalistica succitata?
Risposta di Janusz Lewandowski a nome della Commissione
(4 gennaio 2013)
Il progetto di bilancio rettificativo relativo alla sovvenzione di 670 milioni di euro del Fondo di solidarietà dell’Unione europea a favore dell'Emilia-Romagna è stato adottato dall'autorità di bilancio il 21 novembre 2012.
Sarà applicata la procedura prevista dal regolamento (CE) n. 2012/2002, dell'11 novembre 2002, che istituisce il Fondo di solidarietà dell’Unione europea e la Commissione sta provvedendo all’iscrizione degli stanziamenti nel bilancio dell'Unione europea.
La Commissione desidera confermare che farà in modo da disporre di liquidità sufficiente per effettuare il versamento senza indugio non appena saranno soddisfatte tutte le condizioni di pagamento previste dal citato regolamento.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009963/12
to the Commission
Lorenzo Fontana (EFD)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: EUR 670 million grant to Emilia-Romagna from the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF)
As published by several Italian news agencies, including ASCA, ‘Community sources’ have apparently stated that the EUR 670 million in aid granted by the Commission on 19 September, through the European Union Solidarity Fund, to support the reconstruction effort following the earthquake in Emilia-Romagna in May 2012, cannot be paid due to a lack of liquidity. Quoting the article published by ASCA: ‘According to sources in Brussels, the budget has been approved but there is no money.’
The Committee on Budgets of the European Parliament approved this grant on 18 October 2012. The costs of reconstruction in Emilia-Romagna are estimated to be EUR 13.3 billion. Given that, for 2012, this is the second request for access to the European Union Solidarity Fund, which was set up precisely in order to help areas affected by natural disasters and needing financial support, can the Commission confirm or deny, and in any case, clarify the above information reported by the ASCA news agency, amongst others?
Answer given by Mr Lewandowski on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The draft amending budget relating to the EUR 670 million grant to Emilia-Romagna from the European Union Solidarity Fund was adopted by the budgetary authority on 21 November 2012. 
The procedure foreseen in Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund will apply and the Commission is proceeding with the inscription of the appropriations in the EU budget.
The Commission would like to confirm that it will make sure that sufficient liquidity is available to honour the payment without delay as soon as all conditions for payment foreseen by the abovementioned Regulation are met. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009964/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Mario Mauro (PPE)
(31 ottobre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Nuove tensioni nei rapporti Tibet-Cina
Un nuovo episodio in violazione dei diritti umani si è consumato in Tibet dove, ormai da anni, si svolgono proteste contro quello che viene definito nella zona «imperialismo» di Pechino, per una piena libertà religiosa e per chiedere il ritorno del leader spirituale dei tibetani, il Dalai Lama. Un tibetano, Dorje Rinchen, 58 anni, si è dato fuoco di fronte a una caserma della polizia, poco distante dal celebre monastero di Labrang, nella provincia cinese di Gansu, ed è morto a causa delle ustioni riportate. Secondo fonti locali, sarebbe la settima persona a darsi fuoco in questo mese per protestare contro le politiche cinesi e il dominio di Pechino nella regione. I monaci di Labrang sono famosi, infatti, per aver messo in atto una protesta anti-Pechino nel 2008, durante la visita di un gruppo di giornalisti occidentali. Nelle fasi successive all'autoimmolazione la polizia ha cercato di sequestrare in tutta fretta il corpo, incontrando l'opposizione della cittadinanza. I tibetani si sono scontrati con gli agenti, riuscendo infine a prelevare il cadavere di Dorje Rinchen e a riportarlo presso la sua abitazione.
Nel frattempo le forze di sicurezza cinesi hanno sbarrato il passaggio ai monaci di Labrang, che si stavano recando nella casa della vittima per rendergli l'ultimo saluto. In risposta, i religiosi buddisti — assieme a un gruppo di abitanti della zona — hanno recitato preghiere e inni per la strada, poco lontano l'abitazione dell'uomo, protetta da un rigido cordone di polizia. Per arginare il dramma di monaci e gente comune che decide di darsi fuoco, la comunità tibetana in esilio ha deciso di riunirsi in seduta plenaria a fine settembre, per la prima volta in quattro anni, per proporre una nuova politica che possa fermare questa serie di suicidi. Invece di adottare una politica conciliatoria, il Partito comunista cinese in Tibet ha aumentato il livello di repressione. I monasteri della regione sono blindati e guardati a vista dalla polizia speciale, le lezioni di lingua tibetana sono proibite, la pratica religiosa è di fatto impedita. Il Partito è arrivato a proibire le autoimmolazioni «pena una condanna in carcere di 5 anni».
Alla luce di tali elementi si chiede:







Il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è a conoscenza dei fatti sopra riportati?











Ritiene possibile un intervento delle politiche europee per poter dirimere tali contrasti tra Tibet e Cina?











Ritiene sia possibile fornire degli aiuti concreti per le popolazioni del Tibet?




Risposta dell’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(4 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione nutre serie preoccupazioni per il peggioramento della situazione in Tibet, dimostrato in particolare dall’aumento, sin dagli inizi dell’anno, dei casi di autoimmolazione e degli scontri tra le forze di polizia e la popolazione locale, e ne segue da vicino l’evoluzione.
L’AR/VP Catherine Ashton aveva rilasciato già lo scorso 12 giugno una dichiarazione sulla situazione in Tibet dinanzi al Parlamento europeo.
I casi noti di persone autoimmolatesi dal 2011 sono più di ottanta. I tragici episodi hanno avuto luogo principalmente nella provincia del Sichuan, ma anche in altre regioni abitate dai Tibetani in cui le crescenti limitazioni delle attività religiose avrebbero portato a un intensificarsi della frustrazione e a nuove proteste.
Dopo la dichiarazione dell'AR/VP al Parlamento europeo, la questione della situazione in Tibet è stata sollevata dall'UE nella sessione di giugno del Consiglio dei diritti umani e in occasione del 15° vertice UE-Cina. Infine, nel quadro dell'Assemblea generale delle Nazioni Unite, l'Unione europea sollecita la Cina ad avviare un fecondo dialogo con i rappresentanti del Dalai Lama e del popolo tibetano in Tibet.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009964/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Mario Mauro (PPE)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Fresh tensions in relations between Tibet and China
Yet another violation of human rights has taken place in Tibet where, for years, there have been protests against what is locally known as Beijing's ‘imperialism’ and where the people have been calling for full religious freedom and the return of the Tibetan spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama. A 58-year old Tibetan, Dorje Rinchen, recently set himself on fire in front of a police station, a short distance away from the famous Labrang monastery in the Chinese province of Gansu, and died as a result of his burns. According to local sources, this is the seventh person to set himself on fire this month in protest against Chinese policies and Beijing's rule in the region. The Labrang monks are, in fact, well-known for having staged an anti-Beijing protest in 2008, during the visit of a group of Western journalists. 
After the act of self-immolation, the police hastily tried to seize the body, meeting with the opposition of the local population. The Tibetans clashed with the police officers and eventually manage to remove Dorje Rinchen's corpse and take him back home.
Meanwhile, the Chinese security forces blocked the road in front of the Labrang monks, who were going to the victim's home to pay their last respects. In response, the Buddhist monks, together with a group of local residents, recited prayers and sang hymns in the street, not far from the man's house, which was protected by a tight police cordon. To curb the tragedy of monks and ordinary people who have been setting themselves on fire, the Tibetan community in exile decided to meet in plenary session at the end of September, for the first time in four years, to propose a new policy to put an end to this series of suicides. But instead of adopting a policy of conciliation, the Chinese Communist Party in Tibet has increased the level of repression. The monasteries in the region are armoured and placed under surveillance by the special police, Tibetan language classes have been prohibited and the practice of religion is, in fact, being prevented. The Party has even gone as far as to prohibit self-immolation, subject to ‘a five-year prison sentence’.






1.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of these facts?










2.


Does she think the EU could take any action to help resolve these conflicts between Tibet and China?










3.


Does she believe it might be possible to provide specific aid to the people of Tibet?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The Commission is concerned by the deterioating situation in Tibet and is following closely the evolution of the situation, in particular as illustrated by the wave of self immolations and clashes between the police and the local population since the beginning of the year.
Already on 12 June of this year, HR/VP Ashton delivered a statement on the situation in Tibet to the European Parliament, which was then released to the press.
The known toll now exceeds 80 cases since 2011. The cases have been concentrated in Sichuan province but have also taken place in other Tibetan-populated areas where increasing restrictions on religious activities seem to have given rise to a surge of frustration and new protests.
Since the HR/VP statement to the European Parliament, the situation in Tibet has been raised by the EU during the June session of the Human Rights Council and during the 15th EU-China summit. Finally, at the General Assembly of the United Nations, the EU urges China to enter into a meaningful dialogue with representatives of the Dalai Lama and of the Tibetan people within Tibet.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009965/12
alla Commissione
Francesco De Angelis (S&D)
(31 ottobre 2012)

Oggetto: Piano industriale FIAT e rilancio dello stabilimento FIAT di Piedimonte San Germano
Pur ribadendo l'impegno a mantenere operativi tutti gli stabilimenti del gruppo in Italia, il piano industriale FIAT presentato alle parti sociali il 30 ottobre 2012 non indica cifre né date per il rilancio effettivo della produzione.
La grave crisi del settore perdura e vi è un parziale congelamento della produzione in un numero significativo di stabilimenti FIAT, mediante ricorso alla cassa integrazione ordinaria, non da ultimo presso lo stabilimento FIAT di Piedimonte San Germano (FR), la cui produzione viene sospesa per ulteriori cinque settimane complessive nel periodo ottobre-novembre 2012.
Con i suoi 3 900 dipendenti e i circa 6 000 lavoratori dell'indotto, lo stabilimento FIAT di Piedimonte San Germano è l'unico in Europa con un sistema logistico integrato, rappresentando dunque una delle più importanti realtà industriali del centro Italia. Tuttavia, dal 2007 la sua produzione ha subito un drastico ridimensionamento a spese dei lavoratori.






1.


Ciò premesso, può la Commissione far sapere quali misure intende adottare nei confronti del governo italiano, affinché quest'ultimo verifichi la compatibilità del nuovo piano industriale FIAT con gli obiettivi occupazionali annunciati, onde evitare ulteriori blocchi della produzione, con il conseguente ricorso massiccio alla cassa integrazione straordinaria e, in prospettiva, alla chiusura degli stabilimenti?










2.


Quali azioni intende adottare la Commissione europea affinché la crisi produttiva che interessa gli stabilimenti FIAT, e in particolare quello di Piedimonte San Germano, non si risolva in una crisi occupazionale per la quale si renderebbe necessaria la mobilitazione di ingenti risorse a titolo del Fondo europeo di adeguamento alla globalizzazione?




Risposta di László Andor a nome della Commissione
(16 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione non ha poteri per interferire nelle decisioni di imprese specifiche che sfociano nella chiusura di impianti in Europa. La Commissione sollecita tuttavia le imprese e tutti gli altri stakeholder a gestire in modo proattivo, nella misura del possibile, le ristrutturazioni e a realizzarle in modo socialmente responsabile. A tal fine, e dando seguito al Libro verde del gennaio 2012 «Ristrutturare e anticipare i mutamenti: quali insegnamenti trarre dall'esperienza recente»?  (19), la Commissione sta esaminando come meglio incoraggiare l'applicazione e assicurare il rispetto delle pratiche ottimali esistenti in questo ambito.
La Commissione è preoccupata per la situazione estremamente difficile in cui versa l'industria automobilistica nonché per le conseguenze sociali che le eventuali perdite di posti di lavoro presso gli impianti Fiat potrebbero comportare. In proposito la Commissione è disposta a usare tutti gli strumenti a propria disposizione — tra cui il Fondo europeo di adeguamento alla globalizzazione e il Fondo sociale europeo — per supportare la riconversione della regione interessata dalla ristrutturazione dell'industria automobilistica e aiutare i lavoratori messi in esubero.
Più in generale la Commissione è impegnata nell'attuazione del piano d'azione CARS 2020 che comprende misure di lungo, medio e breve termine per aiutare questo settore a costruire un futuro sostenibile per le sue attività e per i posti di lavoro ad esse associati.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009965/12
to the Commission
Francesco De Angelis (S&D)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Fiat restructuring plan and reopening of Fiat plant at Piedimonte San Germano
Fiat’s restructuring plan, which was presented to social partners on 30 October 2012, merely underlined the commitment to keep all its Italian plants operational: it did not specify any figures or a date for the actual production re-launch.
The serious crisis in the industry persists and there is a partial freeze on production in a significant number of Fiat plants, with use being made of the ordinary Wage Guarantee Fund (Cassa Integrazione Ordinaria), and at the Fiat factory in Piedimonte San Germano (Frosinone) in particular, where production has been at a standstill for the last five full weeks, during October‐November 2012.
With 3 900 employees and approximately 6 000 contractors, the Fiat plant in Piedimonte San Germano is the only factory in Europe with an integrated logistics system, thus making it one of the most important industrial facilities in central Italy. Since 2007, however, production there has been reduced drastically at the expense of its workers.






1.


Can the Commission therefore state how it intends to intervene with the Italian Government to ensure that it verifies whether Fiat’s new restructuring plan is compatible with the proposed employment targets? Will it ensure that the plan avoids further halts to production, with the resulting wholesale use of the emergency Wage Guarantee Fund (Cassa Integrazione Straordinaria) and, potentially, the closing down of the factories?










2.


What measures does the Commission intend to take to ensure that the production crisis at the Fiat plants, and in particular the factory in Piedimonte San Germano, does not lead to an employment crisis which would require the deployment of huge resources under the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF)?




Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(16 January 2013)
The Commission has no powers to interfere in specific companies’ decisions leading to closure of plants in Europe. However, the Commission urges companies and all other concerned stakeholders to anticipate restructuring as far as possible and to manage it in a socially responsible way. For that purpose, and following the January 2012 Green Paper on ‘Restructuring and anticipation of change: what lessons from recent experience?’ (20), the Commission is considering on how to best encourage and ensure wide observance of the best practices in that field.
The Commission is concerned about the extremely difficult situation of the automotive industry as well as about the social consequences that any job losses at Fiat's plants could bring. In that regard, the Commission is willing to consider using all tools at its disposal — including the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the European Social Fund — to support the reconversion of the region affected by the restructuring of the automotive industry and to help workers that are made redundant.
More generally, the Commission is engaged in the implementation of the CARS 2020 Action Plan which includes long-term, medium-term and short term measures to help this sector build a sustainable future for its activities and the jobs associated with it.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009966/12
to the Commission
Derek Roland Clark (EFD)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Red diesel
I understand that the derogation to allow the use of ‘red diesel’ in the case of recreational craft has been allowed to continue since 2006. I now understand that there is a proposal to reintroduce the ban via the Recreational Craft Directive.
Can the Commission please confirm that this is the case, and, if so, offer a justification for reintroducing such a ban?
I should point out that the quantity of ‘red diesel’ used recreationally is but a fraction of the total amount in use. Such a ban will therefore detract from the enjoyment of a number of people whose increased contribution by way of tax is insignificant. A reduction in the use of such craft for pleasure purposes will also impact upon the incomes of a wide variety of waterside businesses.
Will the Commission reconsider abandoning this derogation?
Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The question raised by the Honourable Member concerns the supply of marked gas oil to pleasure craft in the UK after the expiry, end 2006, of the possibility for the UK to apply a lower level of taxation to such uses of gas oil. In that respect, the Commission would refer to its replies to questions E-003285/2012 andE-000130/2012.
Neither the current Directive (Recreational Craft Directive 94/25/EC amended by 2003/44/EC — RCD) nor the directive’s revision proposal COM(2011)456 regulates the fuels which are supposed to be finally used in recreational craft. The directive just refers to reference fuels which shall be used during the testing procedure on exhaust emissions (see Recital 23 and Annex I B 2.3. of the revision proposal). 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009967/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Georgios Koumoutsakos (PPE)
(31 Οκτωβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Ανησυχητική αύξηση του διαδικτυακού εκφοβισμού
Σύμφωνα με στοιχεία που δημοσίευσε διαδικτυακή έρευνα του uknowkids.com, μόνο το 2011 ένα εκατομμύριο παιδιά υπήρξαν θύματα διαδικτυακού εκφοβισμού στο facebook, ενώ αναφέρεται ότι το σύνολο των εφήβων που περνούν περισσότερες από 3 ώρες την ημέρα σε μέσα κοινωνικής δικτύωσης είναι πιο πιθανό να παρενοχληθούν από συνομηλίκους τους. Επιπλέον, η διακίνηση προσωπικών φωτογραφιών μέσω κινητών τηλεφώνων, το λεγόμενο «sexting», έχει εξελιχθεί σε πραγματική μαύρη αγορά μεταξύ εφήβων. Ως παράδειγμα αναφέρεται ότι στη Γαλλία, στις αρχές του μήνα, ένας έφηβος αυτοκτόνησε μετά από επίμονο ηλεκτρονικό εκβιασμό από συμμαθητές του.
Δεδομένου ότι μέσω του Προγράμματος Daphne ΙΙΙ χρηματοδοτούνται δράσεις για την καταπολέμηση της διαδικτυακής βίας και εκφοβισμού και ότι στην πρόταση για σύσταση της Διευκόλυνσης «Συνδέοντας την Ευρώπη» (COM(2011)0665) προβλέπονται ρυθμίσεις για ανάπτυξη κέντρων Safer Internet στα κράτη μέλη καθώς και υποστηρικτικές υπηρεσίες για τον χειρισμό υποθέσεων διακίνησης πορνογραφικού περιεχομένου, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


 Με ποιον τρόπο μπορεί να βοηθήσει περαιτέρω τα κράτη μέλη στις δράσεις τους για ευαισθητοποίηση της κοινής γνώμης για το σοβαρό αυτό φαινόμενο που επηρεάζει το μεγαλύτερο αριθμό των εφήβων στην ΕΕ;










—


 Επίσης, δεδομένου ότι σχεδόν το σύνολο των μαθητών στην ΕΕ έχουν πρόσβαση στο διαδίκτυο και ότι παρόλες τις δράσεις, τόσο σε κοινοτικό όσο και σε εθνικό επίπεδο, ο διαδικτυακός εκφοβισμός παίρνει όλο και περισσότερο ανησυχητικές διαστάσεις, θεωρεί ότι χρειάζεται να ενισχύσει τη δράση της για την καταπολέμηση του φαινομένου; Εάν ναι, με ποιον τρόπο και σε ποιους τομείς;




Απάντηση της κ. Kroes εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(13 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή συμμερίζεται την ανησυχία του Αξιότιμου Μέλους του Κοινοβουλίου και αποβλέπει στην ενδυνάμωση των παιδιών και των νέων για την αντιμετώπιση των προκλήσεων που προκύπτουν από τους διάφορους τρόπους με τους οποίους οι νέοι Ευρωπαίοι συνδέονται διαδικτυακά.
Το πρόγραμμα για την ασφαλέστερη χρήση του διαδικτύου (21)
συγχρηματοδοτεί σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη κέντρα «για ένα ασφαλέστερο διαδίκτυο» (Safer Internet) (22)
για την ευαισθητοποίηση των νέων, των εκπαιδευτικών και των γονέων, όσον αφορά τους πιθανούς κινδύνους που οι νέοι μπορεί να αντιμετωπίσουν στο διαδίκτυο και για να τους ενδυναμώσει στην αντιμετώπιση αυτών των κινδύνων. Στα εν λόγω κέντρα λειτουργούν τηλεφωνικές γραμμές για την παροχή συμβουλών για κάθε θέμα που αντιμετωπίζουν στο διαδίκτυο, συμπεριλαμβανομένου του κυβερνοεκφοβισμού. Με την ημέρα για την ασφαλέστερη χρήση του διαδικτύου (23)
προωθείται η ασφαλέστερη και πιο υπεύθυνη χρήση των επιγραμμικών (διαδικτυακών) τεχνολογιών στα παιδιά και τους νέους. Ημέρα για την ασφαλέστερη χρήση του διαδικτύου για το 2013 ορίστηκε η 5η Φεβρουαρίου, με το σύνθημα «Συνδέσου με σεβασμό». Το 2012, 99 χώρες έλαβαν μέρος στην Ημέρα για την ασφαλέστερη χρήση του διαδικτύου και το μήνυμά της έφτασε σε σχεδόν 800 000 παιδιά, 3,4 εκατομμύρια εφήβους, 17 000 σχολεία, και 133 000 εκπαιδευτικούς.
Με την ανακοίνωση «Διαδίκτυο καλύτερα προσαρμοσμένο στα παιδιά: μια ευρωπαϊκή στρατηγική» (24), η Επιτροπή προτείνει στον κλάδο τη δημιουργία και την εγκατάσταση σε ολόκληρη την ΕΕ, σε συνεργασία με τους αρμόδιους εθνικούς φορείς, ενός μηχανισμού που θα παρέχει στα παιδιά τη δυνατότητα να χρησιμοποιούν τις υπηρεσίες του για την καταγγελία επιβλαβούς περιεχομένου και συμπεριφοράς. Πρόοδος στο πεδίο αυτό αναμένεται να αναφερθεί στην αρχή του 2013 μέσω των εργασιών του συνασπισμού ανώτατων διευθυντικών στελεχών για τη βελτίωση του διαδικτύου προς όφελος των παιδιών (25).
Το 2013, μία από τις προτεραιότητες χρηματοδότησης του προγράμματος DAPHNE III θα εστιαστεί σε έργα που επεξεργάζονται και εφαρμόζουν στα σχολεία πολιτικές και προγράμματα που αντιμάχονται τον κυβερνοεκφοβισμό, με συμμετοχή παιδιών, εκπαιδευτικών και του προσωπικού. Τα μέσα κοινωνικής δικτύωσης μπορούν να συμπεριληφθούν στο πεδίο εφαρμογής των εν λόγω έργων. Μια άλλη προτεραιότητα είναι η καλλιέργεια αλλαγών σε στάσεις και συμπεριφορές στο πλαίσιο της σεξουαλικοποίησης των παιδιών. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009967/12
to the Commission
Georgios Koumoutsakos (PPE)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Worrying increase in cyberbullying
According to a recent Internet survey by uknowkids.com, one million children were victims of cyberbullying on Facebook in 2011 alone and all teenagers who spend more than 3 hours a day on social networking sites are very likely to be intimidated by their peers. Furthermore, there is now a real black market among teenagers for personal photographs uploaded from mobile phones, a practice known as ‘sexting’. One example is cited of a teenager in France who committed suicide at the beginning of the month following persistent cyberbullying by his peers.
Given that the Daphne III programme is used to finance actions to combat cyberviolence and cyberbullying and that the proposal to establish the Connecting Europe Facility (COM(2011)0665) includes arrangements to develop Safer Internet centres in the Member States and support services for handling cases involving transmission of pornographic content, will the Commission answer the following:






—


 What more can it do to support the Member States in their action to raise public awareness of this serious problem, which affects a large number of teenagers in the EU?










—


 Also, given that almost all pupils in the EU have Internet access and that, despite all the action taken at both Community and national level, cyberbullying is taking on increasingly worrying proportions, does it consider that it needs to step up its action to combat this problem and, if so, how and in which sectors?




Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)
The Commission shares the Honourable Member's concern and aims at empowering children and young people to deal with the emerging challenges arising from the diverse ways in which young Europeans go online.
The Safer Internet Programme (26)
co-funds Safer Internet Centres (27)
in all the Member States to raise awareness among young people, teachers and parents, regarding the possible risks young people may face online and empower them to deal with these risks. The Centres run helplines providing advice on any issue they face online, including cyber bullying. Safer Internet Day (28) promotes safer and more responsible use of online technologies amongst children and young people. Safer Internet Day 2013 takes place on 5 February with the slogan ‘Connect with respect’. In 2012, 99 countries took part in Safer Internet Day reaching almost 800 000 children, 3.4 million teenagers, 17 000 schools, and 133 000 teachers.
In the ‘European Strategy for a Better Internet for Children’ (29)
the Commission recommends to industry to establish and deploy EU-wide, in cooperation with relevant national actors, a mechanism allowing children using their services to report harmful content and conduct. Progress in this area is expected to be reported at the beginning of 2013 through the work of the CEO Coalition to make the Internet a better place for kids (30).
In 2013, one DAPHNE III funding priority will focus on projects that develop and roll out anti-bullying policy and programmes in schools, to involve children, teachers and staff. Social networking may be included in the scope of those projects. A second priority is on fostering attitudinal and behavioural changes in the context of sexualisation of children. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009968/12
alla Commissione
Roberta Angelilli (PPE)
(31 ottobre 2012)

Oggetto: Informazioni circa l'utilizzo dei fondi europei del periodo 2007-2013 da parte del comune di Massa
Nell'ambito del quadro finanziario dell'Unione europea 2007-2013 sono stati inseriti numerosi programmi intesi a sostenere le amministrazioni locali in diversi settori e tematiche.
Per quanto riguarda il Comune di Massa (Toscana), può la Commissione far sapere se tale comune ha presentato progetti per i seguenti programmi:






—


ICT-PSP (Tecnologie dell'Informazione e della Comunicazione)










—


Protezione Civile










—


Progress










—


Daphne










—


Apprendimento permanente (Lifelong Learning)










—


Energia intelligente per l'Europa










—


Sanità pubblica










—


Safer Internet










—


Cittadinanza










—


Cultura










—


Life+










—


Youth on the Move










—


Europa per i cittadini?




Inoltre, può la Commissione fornire:







un quadro dei finanziamenti concessi direttamente alla città di Massa a titolo dei programmi dell'UE gestiti dalla Commissione;











un quadro dei finanziamenti concessi alla città di Massa relativi alla gestione concorrente;











un quadro generale dell'utilizzo dei finanziamenti da parte delle città della Toscana;











un quadro dei fondi europei (2007-2013) destinati alla Regione Toscana e il loro livello di attuazione;











qualora questi dati fossero consultabili on line, i riferimenti delle pagine web che contengono tali informazioni?




Risposta di Janusz Lewandowski a nome della Commissione
(18 dicembre 2012)
Per quanto riguarda i progetti gestiti direttamente dalla Commissione, si invita l'onorevole parlamentare a consultare il sistema di trasparenza finanziaria all’indirizzo: http://ec.europa.eu/beneficiaries/fts/index_en.htm 
Si invita inoltre l'onorevole parlamentare a contattare le autorità di gestione italiane competenti, incaricate appunto della gestione dei progetti, in quanto non esiste un’unica banca dati generale contenente informazioni su tutti i progetti gestiti dai singoli Stati membri. È possibile reperire i contatti delle autorità di gestione italiane ai seguenti indirizzi: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/manage/authority/authorities.cfm?LAN=IT&pay=it&lang=it, http://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=386&langId=it
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009968/12
to the Commission
Roberta Angelilli (PPE)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Information on the use of EU funds for 2007-2013 by the municipality of Massa
A number of programmes were included as part of the EU financial framework 2007‐2013 in support of local governments in various sectors and areas.
With regard to the municipality of Massa (Tuscany), can the Commission say whether this municipality has submitted plans for the following programmes:






—


Information Communication Technologies Policy Support Programme (ICT PSP)










—


Civil Protection










—


Progress










—


Daphne










—


Lifelong Learning










—


Intelligent Energy-Europe Programme










—


Public health










—


Safer Internet Programme










—


Citizenship Programme










—


Culture










—


Life+










—


Youth on the move










—


Europe for Citizens?




Can the Commission also provide:







an overview of funding granted directly to the town of Massa under the EU programmes managed by the Commission;











an overview of funding granted to the town of Massa relating to shared management;











a general overview of how funding is used by Tuscan towns;











an overview of EU funds (2007‐2013) assigned to the region of Tuscany and how much has been implemented so far;











if this information is available online, the address of the website where the data can be found?




Answer given by Mr Lewandowski on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
For projects managed directly by the Commission, the Honourable Member is invited to consult the Financial Transparency System at:
http://ec.europa.eu/beneficiaries/fts/index_en.htm. 
The Honourable Member is invited to contact the relevant managing authorities in Italy for projects managed by them as there is no unique comprehensive database with all projects managed by individual Member States. The contact details of Italian managing authorities can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/manage/authority/authorities.cfm?lan=EN&pay=it, 
http://ec.europa.eu/esf/main.jsp?catId=386&langId=en. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009969/12
aan de Commissie
Laurence J. A. J. Stassen (NI)
(31 oktober 2012)

Betreft: Turkije weigert partnerschap EU
Turkije wil alleen het volledige lidmaatschap van de Europese Unie. De Turkse minister van Europese Zaken, Egemen Bagis, heeft gezegd dat zijn land het door de Duitse bondskanselier, Angela Merkel, aangeboden geprivilegieerd partnerschap weigert. „Wij lachen om zo'n partnerschap," zei minister Bagis. Ook alle andere „tussenoplossingen” weigert Turkije.







1.


Is de Commissie bekend met het bericht 










1.


Is de Commissie bekend met het bericht 



„Turkije wil EU-lidmaatschap of niets” (31)?





2.


Wat vindt de Commissie van de uitspraken van minister Bagis? Deelt de Commissie de mening dat dit getuigt van misplaatste Turkse arrogantie en zelfs naar chantage neigt, en verwerpt de Commissie dit? Zo neen, waarom niet?










3.


Heeft de Commissie er een verklaring voor dat Turkije alléén het volledige lidmaatschap van de EU wil? Deelt de Commissie de mening dat dit, onder andere, gestoeld is op financiële voordelen vanuit de EU voor Turkije, en verwerpt de Commissie dit?










4.


Deelt de Commissie de mening dat uit de starre houding van Turkije ten aanzien van de EU de in feite anti-Europese sentimenten van Turkije blijken? Deelt de Commissie de mening dat Turkije feitelijk helemaal niet bij de EU wil horen en zich niet aan de Europese standaards wil aanpassen, maar dat het het land slechts om financiële voordelen vanuit de EU te doen is? Zo neen, waarom niet?










5.


Wat gaat de Commissie naar aanleiding van de misplaatste uitspraken van minister Bagis ondernemen? Gaat zij Turkije hierop aanspreken? Is de Commissie ertoe bereid níet te zwichten voor Bagis




” chantage en direct alle toetredingsonderhandelingen met én alle EU-geldstromen naar Turkije te beëindigen? Zo neen, waarom niet?
Antwoord van de heer Füle  namens de Commissie
(18 december 2012)
Het vaste beleid en het strategische doel van Turkije is toetreding tot de Europese Unie, ten minste sinds zijn formele aanvraag in 1987. De Commissie gelooft dat het indienen van het verzoek om toetreding, in combinatie met de continue deelname aan het toetredingsproces, aantoont dat het land tot de EU wil toetreden en is het daarom niet eens met het standpunt dat het geachte Parlementslid heeft geuit in zijn vragen.
Bovendien vestigt de Commissie de aandacht op het kader voor de onderhandelingen met Turkije, waarmee alle lidstaten in 2005 akkoord gingen en waarin duidelijk staat dat „het gemeenschappelijke doel van de onderhandelingen toetreding is.”
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009969/12
to the Commission
Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Turkey rejects partnership with EU
Turkey wants nothing less than full membership of the European Union. The Turkish Minister of European Affairs, Egemen Bağış, has said that his country rejects the privileged partnership offered by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. ‘We scorn such a partnership’, said Mr Bağış. Turkey also rejects all other ‘transitional solutions’. 







1.


Is the Commission aware of the report entitled 










1.


Is the Commission aware of the report entitled 



‘Turkije wil EU-lidmaatschap of niets’ [Turkey wants EU membership or nothing] (32)?2.What is the Commission’s opinion of the statements by Mr Bağış? Does the Commission agree that this shows misguided Turkish arrogance and even smacks of blackmail, and does the Commission reject this? If not, why not?






3.


Can the Commission explain why Turkey wants nothing but full membership of the EU? Does the Commission agree that this is partly based on obtaining financial benefits for Turkey from the EU, and does the Commission reject this? 










4.


Does the Commission agree that Turkey’s rigid attitude towards the EU reveals anti-European feeling on the part of Turkey? Does the Commission agree that Turkey actually does not want to join the EU at all and does not want to adapt to European standards but that the country is just interested in financial benefits from the EU? If not, why not?










5.


What action will the Commission take on Mr Bağış’s misguided statements? Will it approach Turkey on this matter? Is the Commission prepared not to give in to Bağış’s blackmail and to immediately halt all accession negotiations with Turkey, as well as all financial flows from the EU to Turkey? If not, why not? 




Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
Accession to the European Union is Turkey's standing policy and strategic objective, at least since it submitted its formal application in 1987. The Commission believes that the application of a country for EU accession, reinforced by continued participation in the accession process, reflects a will to join the EU, and therefore disagrees with the views expressed in the Honourable Member's questions.
Moreover, the Commission draws the attention to the Negotiating Framework for Turkey, agreed by all Member States in 2005, which clearly states that ‘the shared objective of negotiations is accession’.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009970/12
aan de Commissie
Laurence J. A. J. Stassen (NI)
(31 oktober 2012)

Betreft: Commissaris Füle wil „stevige uitbreiding EU”
Commissaris Stefan Füle, verantwoordelijk voor uitbreiding, vindt dat de EU zich stevig moet richten op uitbreiding met andere landen, ondanks scepsis in sommige lidstaten. De commissaris heeft gezegd: „Uitbreidingsvermoeidheid is als een yeti. Iedereen praat erover, maar niemand heeft het gezien. Uitbreiding is nooit een probleem geweest, maar een oplossing.” Stand van zaken: Kroatië treedt in juli 2013 toe. Verder staan IJsland, Macedonië, Montenegro, Servië en Turkije in de rij. Albanië heeft een aanvraag tot toetreding ingediend.







1.


Is de Commissie bekend met het bericht 










1.


Is de Commissie bekend met het bericht 



„Europese Unie moet zich verder uitbreiden” (33)?





2.


Commissaris Füle stelt dat uitbreiding geen probleem maar een oplossing zou zijn. Hoe verklaart de Commissie deze uitspraak? Ofwel: waarvoor zou uitbreiding een oplossing zijn?










3.


Welke voordelen heeft uitbreiding voor de huidige lidstaten en specifiek voor de netto betalende lidstaten?










4.


Hoe verantwoordt de Commissie het dat door uitbreiding met economisch relatief zwakkere (toekomstig netto ontvangende) landen de huidige lidstaten  ter compensatie méér geld aan de EU zullen moeten afdragen?










5.


Hoe verantwoordt de Commissie het dat door uitbreiding met relatief minder ontwikkelde landen de huidige lidstaten mogelijkerwijze negatief beïnvloed zullen worden?










6.


Deelt de Commissie de mening dat de EU reeds groot genoeg of zelfs té groot is? Heeft de Commissie geleerd van de premature toetredingen, in 2004 en 2007, van landen die daar toentertijd (nog) niet klaar voor waren en de negatieve effecten daarvan? Zo neen, hoe is dat mogelijk? Zo ja, is de Commissie er derhalve toe bereid geen verdere uitbreiding meer na te streven?




Antwoord van de heer Füle  namens de Commissie
(7 januari 2013)
De Commissie is bekend met het persbericht waarnaar het geachte Parlementslid verwijst. Zoals in de Uitbreidingsstrategie 2012-2013 staat, geeft het uitbreidingsbeleid al meer dan vier decennia gehoor aan de legitieme wens van de bewoners van ons werelddeel om deel te nemen aan het project van een verenigd, vreedzaam, democratisch en bloeiend Europa. 
Het uitbreidingsbeleid biedt een oplossing voor een reeks problemen. De voordelen voor de EU zijn zowel economisch als politiek en gaan veel verder dan overwegingen over netto-overdrachten van de EU-begroting. De uitbreiding naar Midden‐ en Oost-Europa zorgde niet alleen voor een einde aan decennia van kunstmatige scheiding, maar ook voor een diepere handelsintegratie, een grotere interne markt en meer werkgelegenheid. Vanaf het begin van de toetredingsonderhandelingen tot aan de toetreding is de export van de EU naar de toetredingslanden meer dan verdrievoudigd. 
Het uitbreidingsbeleid helpt risico's van instabiliteit te overwinnen. Het aanpakken van deze risico's in de landen van de Westelijke Balkan is in het belang van ons allen, gezien de geschiedenis van oorlog en verdeeldheid in deze regio. De uitbreiding geeft de EU ook meer gewicht als internationale speler. De geopolitieke rol van Turkije, zijn bijdrage aan de continuïteit van de energievoorziening en de dynamiek van de Turkse economie bieden zowel Turkije als de EU kansen in de context van het toetredingsperspectief. 
Binnen strenge maar eerlijke voorwaarden is het perspectief op toetreding een impuls voor politieke en economische hervormingen. De Commissie legt meer nadruk op de rechtsstaat en democratisch bestuur. Er worden problemen aangepakt op het gebied van justitie, de strijd tegen de georganiseerde misdaad en corruptie en de bescherming van de grondrechten die rechtstreeks van belang zijn voor burgers in de EU en de toetredingslanden. Daarom blijft het uitbreidingsbeleid waardevol voor de toekomst.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009970/12
to the Commission
Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Commissioner Füle wants to see the EU ‘expand considerably’
Commissioner Stefan Füle, who is responsible for enlargement, thinks that the EU should be ready to expand considerably to take in new countries, despite the scepticism in some Member States. More specifically, the Commissioner has said that ‘enlargement fatigue is like a yeti. Everyone talks about it, but no one has ever seen it. Enlargement has never been a problem, but only a solution.’ As things stand, Croatia will join the Union in July 2013, with Iceland, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey next in line. Albania has also applied for accession.







1.


Is the Commission aware of the report entitled 










1.


Is the Commission aware of the report entitled 



‘European Union must enlarge further’ (34)?





2.


Commissioner Füle claims that enlargement is not a problem, but rather a solution. What explanation does the Commission have for this statement, or can it explain how precisely enlargement is a solution?










3.


What benefits would enlargement bring for the current Member States, and in particular for those which are net contributors to the EU budget?










4.


How does the Commission justify the fact that the current Member States will be required to hand more money over to the EU to offset the cost of enlargement involving economically weaker countries which will in future be net beneficiaries under the EU’s budget arrangements?










5.


How does the Commission justify the fact that enlargement involving less developed countries may have an adverse impact on the existing Member States?










6.


Does the Commission agree that the EU is already big enough, or perhaps even too big? Has the Commission learned from the premature accession, in 2004 and 2007, of countries which were not (yet) ready and the problems this has caused? If not, how is this possible? If so, is the Commission then prepared to abandon the policy of seeking further enlargements of the Union?




Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The Commission took note of the press report referred to. As set out in the Enlargement Strategy 2012-2013, enlargement policy for more than four decades has been a response to the legitimate aspiration of the peoples of our continent to be united in a peaceful, democratic and prospering Europe. 
Enlargement policy contributes to the solution of a series of challenges. Benefits for the EU cover a range of economic and political aspects, which go far beyond considerations on the net transfers from the EU budget. The enlargement to Central and Eastern Europe not only ended decades of artificial separation; it provided deeper trade integration, a larger internal market and job opportunities. From the start of negotiations to accession, exports from the EU to the acceding countries more than tripled. 
Enlargement policy helps overcome risks of instability. Addressing such risks in the western Balkans is in our joint interest, given the legacy of wars and division in this region. Enlargement also contributes to increasing the weight of the EU as an international player. Turkey’s geopolitical role and its contribution to energy security, in addition to the dynamism of its economy, represent an opportunity for both Turkey and the EU, best tapped within an accession perspective. 
Within a framework of strict but fair conditionality, the prospect of accession drives political and economic reforms. The Commission puts increased focus on rule of law and democratic governance. This addresses issues of direct concern to citizens in both the EU and the enlargement countries such as justice, the fight against organised crime and corruption, and the protection of fundamental rights. Therefore, enlargement policy continues to be valid for the future.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009972/12
an den Rat
Ingeborg Gräßle (PPE)
(31. Oktober 2012)

Betrifft: Personalkarussell: Beamte und Vertragsbedienstete aus dem Ratssekretariat mit neuen Posten in der Tabakindustrie
Fragen in Bezug auf Beamte:







Wie viele Beamte haben das Ratssekretariat in den vergangenen zehn Jahren verlassen, um anschließend einen Posten in der Tabakindustrie zu übernehmen? In welchen Positionen waren diese zuvor im Rat tätig?











Wie viele Beamte haben nach ihrer Pensionierung einen Posten in der Tabakindustrie übernommen? In welchen Positionen waren diese zuvor tätig?




Fragen in Bezug auf Vertragsbedienstete:







Wie viele Vertragsbedienstete haben das Ratssekretariat in den vergangenen zehn Jahren verlassen, um anschließend einen Posten in der Tabakindustrie zu übernehmen? In welchen Positionen waren diese zuvor im Rat tätig?











Wie viele Vertragsbedienstete haben nach ihrer Pensionierung einen Posten in der Tabakindustrie übernommen? In welchen Positionen waren diese zuvor tätig?




Antwort
(21. Januar 2013)
Den Informationen des Rates zufolge hat in den letzten zehn Jahren kein Beamter oder Vertragsbediensteter das Generalsekretariat des Rates verlassen, um anschließend einen Posten in der Tabakindustrie zu übernehmen, und kein Beamter oder Vertragsbediensteter hat einen solchen Posten nach der Pensionierung übernommen.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009972/12
to the Council
Ingeborg Gräßle (PPE)
(31 October 2012)

Subject: Revolving doors: Council Secretariat officials/contract agents taking up positions in the tobacco industry
With regard to officials:







How many officials have left the Council’s Secretariat in the last 10 years to take up a position in the tobacco industry? What were their former positions in the Council?











How many retired officials have taken up a position in the tobacco industry? What were their former positions?




With regard to contract agents:







How many contract agents have left the Council’s Secretariat in the last 10 years to take up a position in the tobacco industry? What were their former positions in the Council?











How many retired contract agents have taken up a position in the tobacco industry? What were their former positions?




Reply
(21 January 2013)
According to the information available to the Council, no official or contract agent has left the service of the General Secretariat of the Council in the last 10 years to take up a position in the tobacco industry, and no official or contract agent has taken up such a position after retirement.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-009973/12
à la Commission
Gaston Franco (PPE) et Véronique Mathieu (PPE)
(5 novembre 2012)

Objet: Surpopulation de sangliers en Europe
Le sanglier est une espèce ayant un rôle écologique important à jouer dans la revitalisation des sols forestiers, la dispersion des spores et graines, l'élimination des larves et autres parasites. Néanmoins cet animal peut devenir invasif et causer de multiples dégâts en raison du phénomène de surpopulation observé dans de nombreux pays européens. Dans les Alpes-Maritimes par exemple, un arrêté préfectoral du 21 mai 2012 classe le sanglier comme «nuisible» sur certaines communes du département pour la saison 2012-2013.
Outre son impact négatif sur la relation entre chasseurs et agriculteurs, la prolifération des sangliers soulève d'importants problèmes: dégradation des cultures, danger pour la sécurité routière (collisions avec les automobiles), troubles à la sécurité publique dans les zones urbaines (récents incidents à Berlin, par exemple) et les jardins des particuliers, risques sanitaires (prolifération de maladies comme la grippe porcine, le streptocoque suis, la brucellose ou la trichine).
La prolifération des sangliers s'explique par une pluralité de facteurs: hausse des surfaces cultivées en maïs, adoucissement des conditions climatiques, augmentation des zones protégées, modification des habitats due aux tempêtes, choix historique de faire augmenter les populations à la demande des chasseurs et des administrations, pratique de l'agrainage.
Une étude de juin 2012 sur la démographie des sangliers, conduite dans une quinzaine de pays européens par ELO (European landowners' organization) sous la direction scientifique de l'Université polytechnique de Madrid, estime que pour une réduction efficace de ces populations, il faut avant tout chercher des solutions locales s'appuyant notamment sur une utilisation d'un nourrissage dissuasif bien ciblé, une pratique de tirs moins restrictive et une pratique agricole plus réfléchie.






1.


À la lumière de cette étude et des ses propres analyses, quelles mesures la Commission entend-elle mettre en œuvre pour enrayer la surpopulation des sangliers au niveau européen?










2.


A-t-elle chiffré l'ampleur du phénomène dans l'Union européenne et son impact?










3.


Quelle réponse propose-t-elle d'apporter aux problèmes économiques, sanitaires (transmission de maladies aux animaux d'élevage et à l'homme, lors de la consommation de viandes ou d'abats de sanglier) et humains (accidents routiers) causés par la prolifération des sangliers?










4.


Dans le cadre de la réforme de la politique agricole commune (PAC), que prévoit-elle pour indemniser les catégories d'agriculteurs (par exemple: agriculteurs de montagne, horticulteurs, arboriculteurs) qui subissent la pression des sangliers?




Réponse donnée par M.Potočnik au nom de la Commission
(9 janvier 2013)
La Commission est consciente des problèmes engendrés par les surpopulations de sangliers dans l'Union européenne et elle a connaissance de l'étude produite par l'organisation européenne des propriétaires terriens (ELO). 
Parmi les mesures envisagées susceptibles de réduire efficacement les populations, certaines sont spécifiquement liées à la chasse. C'est le cas notamment de l'adaptation des périodes de chasse et de la régulation de l'alimentation artificielle. La chasse au gibier relève de la responsabilité des États membres. La Commission n'a pris aucune initiative visant à évaluer l'étendue du problème et ses répercussions dans l'Union. 
La Commission est favorable à une approche globale de la politique vétérinaire en matière de contrôle et d'éradication des principales maladies porcines, telles que la peste porcine classique (PPC) et la peste porcine africaine (PPA), affectant les porcs et les sangliers. Le succès de l'éradication de la peste porcine classique (par exemple, en Allemagne) et de la peste porcine africaine (par exemple en Espagne) est le résultat d'une combinaison de vaccination orale des sangliers, dans le cas de la PPC, et du renforcement de la surveillance et de la biosécurité (à la fois pour la PPC et pour la PPA) chez les porcs et les sangliers. Ces programmes d'éradication ont bénéficié de fonds européens considérables. En ce qui concerne la transmission de maladies à l'homme par la consommation de viande de sanglier, notamment les abats, des règles strictes s'appliquent en matière d'hygiène des denrées alimentaires et d'inspection des viandes de gibier, dont le dépistage de Trichinella chez les sangliers destinés à la consommation humaine. Les tendances font l'objet d'une évaluation annuelle par l'Autorité européenne de sécurité des aliments. 
La Commission n'a pas proposé que la future PAC indemnise les agriculteurs pour les dommages causés par la faune sauvage. Toutefois, après 2013 comme à l'heure actuelle, il sera possible, au titre de la politique de développement rural, de proposer un soutien en faveur de la prévention des dommages, par exemple, des aides aux investissements dans ce domaine.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009973/12
to the Commission
Gaston Franco (PPE) and Véronique Mathieu (PPE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Overpopulation of wild boar in Europe
Wild boar play an important role in revitalising forest soils, dispersing spores and seeds and getting rid of larvae and other parasites. As a result of their excessive numbers in many European countries, however, they can become a nuisance and cause considerable damage. In the Alpes-Maritimes department in France, for example, a prefectural decree issued on 21 May 2012 classified wild boar as a ‘pest’ in some municipalities for the 2012-2013 hunting season.
Besides putting a strain on relations between hunters and farmers, the increase in wild boar numbers is causing significant problems: crop damage, dangers to road users (animal-vehicle collisions), disturbances in urban areas (for example, the recent incidents in Berlin) and private gardens and health risks (the spreading of diseases, such as swine flu, Streptococcus suis, brucellosis or trichinosis).
The explosion in wild boar numbers is the result of a series of factors: the increase in areas down to maize, climate change, more protected areas, changes to habitats due to storms, the earlier decision to allow numbers to rise at the request of hunters and the authorities and the practice of spreading grain.
A study published in June 2012 on this subject, which was carried out in 15 European countries by the European Landowners’ Organisation (ELO) in collaboration with the Polytechnic University of Madrid, concluded that effective measures to reduce the wild boar population should start with local solutions, particularly involving artificial feeding, fewer restrictions on hunting and more carefully thought-out agricultural practices.






1.


In the light of this study and its own analysis of the problem, what measures will theCommission take to halt the increase in wild boar numbers in Europe?










2.


Has the Commission assessed the extent of this problem and its impact in theEuropean Union?










3.


What action does the Commission propose to take to address the economic, health(transmission of diseases to livestock and humans through the consumption of wild boarmeat or offal) and social problems (road accidents) caused by the overpopulation of wildboar?










4.


In the context of the reform of the common agricultural policy, how does theCommission propose to compensate the farmers (e.g. mountain farmers, marketgardeners and fruit farmers) who have to deal with the damage wild boar cause?




Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(9 January 2013)
The Commission is aware of the problems caused by overpopulations of wild boars in the EU and of the study produced by the European Landowners' Organisation. 
Some of the possible measures likely to be effective to curb populations, such as adapting hunting periods and regulating artificial feeding, are specific hunting-related measures. Hunting of game is a responsibility of the Member States. The Commission has not taken any initiative aimed at assessing the extent of the problem and its impact in the EU. 
The Commission supports a holistic veterinary policy on control and eradication of major swine diseases, such as classical swine fever (CSF) and African swine fever (ASF), affecting pigs and also wild boar. Successful eradication of CSF (e.g. in Germany) and ASF (e.g. in Spain) has been based on a combination of oral vaccination of wild boar for CSF and strengthened surveillance and biosecurity (for both CSF and ASF) in pigs and wild boar. These eradication programmes have received substantial EU funds. As regards transmission of diseases to humans from the consumption of wild boar meat, including offal, strict provisions apply on food hygiene and meat inspection for game, including the testing of wild boars intended for human consumption for Trichinella. Trends are evaluated annually by the European Food Safety Authority. 
The Commission has not proposed that the future CAP compensate farmers for damage caused by wildlife. However, after 2013 as at present, it will be possible through rural development policy to offer support for preventing damage — e.g. support for relevant investments.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης P-009974/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Ειδικός λογαριασμός για αποπληρωμή των δόσεων των δανείων της Ελλάδας
Υπάρχουν δημοσιεύματα αλλά και ομολογίες κυβερνητικών παραγόντων εντός της Βουλής των Ελλήνων ότι ασκούνται πιέσεις στην ελληνική κυβέρνηση προκειμένου να αποδεχτεί την αλλαγή του τρόπου λειτουργίας του ειδικού λογαριασμού στον οποίο κατατίθενται οι δόσεις των δανείων που λαμβάνει η Ελλάδα στο πλαίσιο της Σύμβασης Χρηματοδοτικής Διευκόλυνσης. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, σύμφωνα με τις ίδιες πηγές, η διαχείριση του λογαριασμού που ήδη υπάρχει, βάσει της ανωτέρω Σύμβασης, μεταβιβάζεται σε διεθνή φορέα, όπως η ΕΚΤ.
Ταυτόχρονα προβλέπεται ότι σε αυτό το λογαριασμό η ελληνική πλευρά θα προκαταβάλλει φορολογικά έσοδα, ανεξαρτήτως εκτέλεσης του προϋπολογισμού και παράλληλα προωθείται «αυξημένη εποπτεία από την Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή», η οποία θα πρέπει να συναινεί στη χορήγηση δανείων ακόμα και στους Οργανισμούς Τοπικής Αυτοδιοίκησης.
Κατόπιν των ανωτέρω ερωτάται η Επιτροπή: Πως σχολιάζει τις παραπάνω πληροφορίες; υπάρχουν σχετικές εισηγήσεις από κράτη μέλη; θεωρεί ότι χρειάζονται αλλαγές στον τρόπο διάθεσης και διαχείρισης του ειδικού λογαριασμού στον οποίο κατατίθενται οι δόσεις των δανείων και, αν ναι, ποιες;
Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(21 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Ο ειδικός λογαριασμός με την ονομασία «Ελληνικό Δημόσιο (ΕΔ) Εισπράξεις και Πληρωμές για την εξυπηρέτηση του Δημοσίου χρέους» δημιουργήθηκε με το νόμο αριθ. 4063 που ψηφίστηκε από την Ελληνική Βουλή στις 28 Μαρτίου 2012. Στόχος του είναι να εξασφαλίζει την αποτελεσματική υλοποίηση της εξυπηρέτησης του χρέους, την παρακολούθηση των ταμειακών ροών, την αποφυγή της εκτροπής της δημόσιας χρηματοδότησης και την έγκαιρη εξυπηρέτηση του χρέους. Τηρείται στην Τράπεζα της Ελλάδος και χρησιμοποιείται αποκλειστικά για την εξυπηρέτηση του δημόσιου χρέους. 
Πρόσφατα, η λειτουργία του λογαριασμού αυτού ενισχύθηκε περαιτέρω με την πρόβλεψη της υποχρεωτικής μεταφοράς στον εν λόγω λογαριασμό των εσόδων από τις ιδιωτικοποιήσεις από το «Ταμείο Αξιοποίησης Ιδιωτικής Περιουσίας του Δημοσίου» (ΤΑΙΠΕΔ) (ΦΕΚ 228 της 18ης Νοεμβρίου 2012). Η Ελλάδα έχει επίσης δεσμευθεί να μεταφέρει στον λογαριασμό αυτό το προϊόν των μελλοντικών προβλεπόμενων πρωτογενών πλεονασμάτων και το 30% όλων των πρωτογενών πλεονασμάτων που θα υπερβαίνουν τους συμφωνηθέντες στόχους. 
Αυτό εξασφαλίζει ότι οι πληρωμές για την εξυπηρέτηση του χρέους θα μπορούν να γίνονται σε τριμηνιαία μακρόπνοη βάση. Θα αυξήσει επίσης τη διαφάνεια των συναλλαγών στον διαχωρισμένο λογαριασμό. Στη δήλωσή της της 27ης Νοεμβρίου 2012, η Ευρωομάδα εξέφρασε την ικανοποίησή της για τις ρυθμίσεις αυτές.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-009974/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Special account for the payment of loan instalments to Greece
It has been reported — and acknowledged by government figures in the Greek Parliament — that the Greek Government is under pressure to accept a change in the operating rules of the special account in which loan instalments received by Greece under the Financial Assistance Facility Agreement are deposited. More specifically, according to the same sources, the management of the existing account is to be transferred, under this Agreement, to an international body, such as the ECB.
Provision has also been made for the Greek side to advance tax revenue on this account, regardless of the implementation of the budget; at the same time, efforts are being made to promote an increased supervisory role for the Commission, whose consent will be mandatory even for loans to local government authorities.
In view of the above, will the Commission say: how does it view the above information? Have Member States made any suggestions in this connection? Does it believe that changes are needed in the way in which the special account in which the loan instalments are paid operates and is managed? If so, what changes?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(21 January 2013)
The specific account entitled ‘Greek State (SS) Receipts and Payments for the service of the public debt’was established in the Law No 4063 voted by the Greek parliament on 28 March 2012. Its aim is to ensure an effective implementation of the debt servicing, to monitor cash flows, avoid the diversion of official financing and secure a timely debt servicing. It is held at the Bank of Greece and is used exclusively to service the public debt. 
Recently the functioning of this account has been further strengthened providing the mandatory transfer to this account of privatisation receipts from the Hellenic Republic Asset Development Fund (HRADF) (FEK 228 of 18 November 2012). Greece has also committed to transfer to this account the proceeds of future targeted primary surpluses and 30% of all primary surpluses in excess of agreed targets. 
This will ensure debt service payments can be met on a quarterly forward-looking basis. It will also increase transparency on transactions on the segregated account. The Eurogroup in its statement on 27 November 2012 noted its satisfaction with these arrangements.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-009976/12
aan de Commissie
Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)
(5 november 2012)

Betreft: Niet-aangemelde handel in Atlantische blauwvintonijn







1.


Is de Commissie op de hoogte van het onderzoek over de handel in Atlantische blauwvintonijn










1.


Is de Commissie op de hoogte van het onderzoek over de handel in Atlantische blauwvintonijn




 (35) dat in opdracht van het WNF uitgevoerd is? Volgens de uitkomsten van de studie is tussen 2000 en 2010 het equivalent van 18 704 ton levende blauwvintonijn via Panama verhandeld zonder dat dit gemeld is aan de Internationale Commissie voor het behoud van de Atlantische tonijn (ICCAT). Volgens de studie waren daar verscheidene lidstaten van de EU bij betrokken. Dit soort onaangemelde handel betekent een ernstige inbreuk op de IOO-verordening.
Bovendien werden in 2012 in het kader van een onafhankelijke wetenschappelijke analyse getiteld „Trade-based Estimation of Bluefin Tuna Catches in the Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, 2005‐2011”, van A. Gagern, J. van den Bergh and R. Sumaila, officiële handelsgegevens onderzocht om een schatting te maken van de omvang van de illegale vangst. Deze analyse borduurt voort op eerdere studies, waaronder de analyse „Mind the Gap” van PEW uit 2011. In de studie van 2012 wordt de schatting gemaakt dat de totale toegestane quota met 62 % overschreden werden tussen 2005 en 2011 en met 77 % tussen 2008 en 2011, hetgeen een bevestiging is van eerdere rapporten over aanhoudende en wijdverspreide illegale visvangst in de blauwvintonijnvisserij.






2.


Is de Commissie daarom bereid om met spoed een serieus, systematisch en diepgaand onderzoek in te stellen om ofwel de door de studie aangeduide verdenkingen over IOO-activiteiten uit te kunnen sluiten, ofwel te kunnen bevestigen? 




Zoals de Commissie wel weet heeft het Permanent comité voor onderzoek en statistiek (SCRS) van de ICCAT duidelijk aangegeven dat de visstandevaluatie gepaard gaat met veel wetenschappelijke onzekerheden en heeft het daarom aanbevolen om de quota te handhaven op 12 900 ton, of, als een maximum, op hetzelfde niveau vast te stellen als de quota van 2010 (13 500 ton). Ik ben een groot voorstander van de voorzichtige aanpak van de Commissie, waarbij de voorkeur gegeven wordt aan wetenschappelijk gefundeerde quota en aan het handhaven van de quota van 12 900 ton en ik vertrouw erop dat dit ook het definitieve standpunt van de EU zal zijn.






3.


Is de Commissie bereid bij de ICCAT, op de komende 18 speciale ontmoeting van die commissie van 12 tot 19 november in Agadir (Marokko), aan te dringen om een werkgroep op te zetten (zoals door het SCRS aanbevolen is) om nader onderzoek te doen naar de handelsgegevens in verhouding tot de gemelde vangstgegevens zodat er voor de juiste quota gezorgd kan worden en er een beter overzicht komt van de illegale vangst?




Antwoord van mevrouw Damanaki namens de Commissie
(1 februari 2013)
De Commissie is op de hoogte van de door het geachte Parlementslid aangehaalde studies over mogelijke discrepanties tussen de verhandelde hoeveelheden blauwvintonijn, waaronder die welke via Panama worden verhandeld, en de jaarlijkse totaal toegestane vangsten. Het WWF heeft deze studie aan de Internationale Commissie voor het behoud van de Atlantische tonijn ICCAT verstrekt vóór haar jaarlijkse vergadering. Omdat de studie na de bij Aanbeveling [08-09] voorgeschreven  termijn van 120 dagen werd ingediend, hebben de verdragspartijen helaas niet de gelegenheid gehad ze naar behoren te bespreken. 
Wat de andere studie betreft, is tijdens de vergadering van dit jaar een aantal soortgelijke studies voorgelegd aan het Permanent comité voor onderzoek en statistiek (SCRS) van de ICCAT. In het kader van het SCRS is een werkgroep opgericht die heeft geconcludeerd dat deze studies de gegevens over de omvang van de vangsten sterk kunnen verbeteren en kunnen worden gebruikt  ter bevestiging van de gemelde totale vangsten. Vooraleer het zover is en deze kwestie verder kan worden besproken, moet de voor het  terugrekenen van de hoeveelheden verhandelde vis ontwikkelde methode eerst worden verbeterd en informatie uit andere bronnen (waaronder vangstdocumenten) verder worden geïntegreerd.
De controle op en het beheer van de visserij op blauwvintonijn blijft een prioriteit van de EU en de Commissie neemt deze studies dan ook zeer ernstig en zal er een passende follow-up aan geven. 
Wat de totale toegestane vangsten voor 2013 betreft, kan de Commissie bevestigen dat het wetenschappelijke advies strikt is gevolgd. De door de ICCAT vastgestelde totale toegestane vangst van 13 400 ton voor 2013 vloeit rechtstreeks voort uit de aanzienlijke inspanningen die de voorbije jaren zijn geleverd om het herstel en de duurzaamheid op lange  termijn van het blauwvintonijnbestand te waarborgen. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009976/12
to the Commission
Gerben-Jan Gerbrandy (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Unreported trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna







1.


Is the Commission aware of the study commissioned by WWF concerning the trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna?










1.


Is the Commission aware of the study commissioned by WWF concerning the trade in Atlantic bluefin tuna?




 (36)
The study claims that between 2000 and 2010 the equivalent of 18 704 tonnes of live bluefin tuna were traded via Panama without being reported to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT). According to the study, several EU Member States were involved. This type of unreported trade is a serious breach of the IUU Regulation.
In addition, in 2012 an independently reviewed scientific analysis entitled ‘Trade-based Estimation of Bluefin Tuna Catches in the Eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean, 2005‐2011’, by A. Gagern, J. van den Bergh and R. Sumaila, examined official trade records to provide an estimate of the level of illegal catch. This analysis builds on previous studies, including ‘Mind the Gap’ (Pew 2011). The 2012 study estimates that total allowable quotas were exceeded by 62% between 2005 and 2011 and by 77% between 2008 and 2011, confirming previous reports of persistent and widespread illegal fishing in the bluefin tuna fishery.






2.


Is the Commission therefore willing to launch, as a matter of urgency, a serious, systematic and thorough investigation that would make it possible either to rule out or to confirm the suspicions of IUU activities pinpointed by the study?




As the Commission is aware, ICCAT’s Standing Committee on Research and Statistics (SCRS) has highlighted the scientific uncertainties associated with the stock assessment, and has therefore recommended that quotas be maintained at 12 900 metric tonnes (mt) or, as a maximum, set at the same level as the 2010 quotas (13 500 mt). I strongly support the Commission’s precautionary approach in favour of science-based quotas and of maintaining the 12 900 mt quota, and trust that this will also be the EU’s final position.






3.


Is the Commission willing to urge ICCAT, at its forthcoming 18th special meeting to be held in Agadir (Morocco) from 12 to 19 November, to set up a working group (as recommended by the SCRS) to further examine trade data relative to reported catch data so as to ensure correct quotas and gain a better overview of illegal catch?




Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission
(1 February 2013)
The Commission is aware of the studies referred to by the Honourable Member relating to potential discrepancies between traded quantities of bluefin and annual TACs including those traded via Panama. WWF distributed this study to ICCAT in advance of the annual meeting. Unfortunately, as the submission arrived after the 120-day timeframe required under Recommendation [08-09], the Contracting Parties did not have the opportunity to adequately discuss. 
Regarding the other study, a number of similar studies were presented to the ICCAT Scientific Committee (SCRS) during this year's meeting. A working group was set up in the SCRS which concluded that these studies could greatly improve size data and could be used to corroborate reported total catch. For this purpose and before it could be further considered, it would be necessary to improve the methodology developed for the back-calculation of the traded fish and further integrate information from other sources (including catch documents).
Control and management of bluefin tuna fisheries remains a priority in the EU and the Commission therefore takes these studies and discussions very seriously and initiates appropriate follow-up. 
Regarding the TAC for 2013, the Commission can confirm that the the scientific advice was strictly adhered t. The adopted TAC of 13,400 tonnes for 2013 by ICCAT is a direct result of the significant efforts undertaken in recent years to ensure the recovery and long-term sustainability of the Bluefin tuna stock. 
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-009977/12
till kommissionen
Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)
(5 november 2012)

Angående: Innebörden av ”närstående rättigheter”
Europeiska konventets presidium, som inrättades av Europeiska rådet, angav i sina kommentarer till artikel 17.2 i Europeiska unionens stadga om de grundläggande rättigheterna (37) att immateriella rättigheter ”omfattar dels litterära och konstnärliga rättigheter, dels patent‐ och varumärkesrätt samt närstående rättigheter”. Jag har frågat rådet vad som avses med närstående rättigheter, men rådet vill ogärna ge en tolkning, eftersom det sedan dess har bytt ordförande flera gånger och ett nytt europeiskt konvent (med presidium) sedan dess har införts och avskaffats.
Kan kommissionen bringa klarhet i vad konventets presidium menade med ”närstående rättigheter”?
Svar från Michel Barnieron  på kommissionens vägnar
(15 januari 2013)
Kommissionen måste dessvärre meddela att ärendet i fråga inte ligger inom dess ansvarsområde. Förklaringarna avseende stadgan om de grundläggande rättigheterna härrör inte från kommissionen. Kommissionen kan därför inte ta på sig något ansvar för tolkningen av dessa. Kommissionen erinrar om inledningen av dessa förklaringar (38) som innehåller följande: Förklaringarna utarbetades ursprungligen på initiativ av presidiet för det konvent som utarbetade Europeiska unionens stadga om de grundläggande rättigheterna. De har uppdaterats på initiativ av Europeiska konventets presidium mot bakgrund av de justeringar av stadgetexten som gjorts av det senare konventet (särskilt artiklarna 51 och 52) samt unionsrättens vidare utveckling. Även om förklaringarna inte i sig har rättslig status, utgör de ett värdefullt tolkningsverktyg avsett att klargöra stadgans bestämmelser. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009977/12
to the Commission
Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: The meaning of ‘associated rights’
In the comments to Article 17(2) provided in the text of explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (39), the Praesidium of the European Convention, an institution set up at that time by the European Council, stated that intellectual property ‘covers not only literary and artistic property but also patent and trademark rights and associated rights’. I have asked the Council what it might mean by ‘associated rights’, but it is reluctant to provide an interpretation since the Council has changed leadership many times since and a new European Convention (with Praesidium) has since been reformed and closed down.
Can the Commission bring clarity as to what the Praesidium of the Convention meant by ‘associated rights’?
Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(15 January 2013)
The Commission regrets to inform the Honorable Member that the matter in question is not within the Commission's remit. The explanations relating to the Charter of Fundamental Rights do not emanate from the Commission. The Commission therefore cannot claim authority for their interpretation. The Commission would recall the introductory part of these explanations (40) which state the following: ‘These explanations were originally prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. They have been updated under the responsibility of the Praesidium of the European Convention, in the light of the drafting adjustments made to the text of the Charter by that Convention (notably to Articles 51 and 52) and of further developments of Union law. Although they do not as such have the status of law, they are a valuable tool of interpretation intended to clarify the provisions of the Charter.’
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-009979/12
till kommissionen
Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)
(5 november 2012)

Angående: Brist på bakomliggande forskning för att fastställa bästa praxis vid skydd av barn
En uppföljningsfråga, som kräver svar, till kommissionens svar på fråga E-007751/2012:
Om det inte finns någon sammanställd statistik på EU-nivå, vilka uppgifter utgjorde då grunden för rådets rambeslut 2004/68/RIF av den 22 december 2003 om bekämpande av sexuellt utnyttjande av barn och barnpornografi (EUT L 13, 20.1.2004, s. 44), och Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv 2011/92/EU av den 13 december 2011 om bekämpande av sexuella övergrepp mot barn, sexuell exploatering av barn och barnpornografi samt om ersättande av rådets rambeslut 2004/68/RIF (EUT L 335, 17.12.2011, s. 1)?
Jag har tagit del av konsekvensbedömningen av förslaget som inte klargör något närmare för frågan. Dessutom verkar inte heller kommissionens svar på den skriftliga frågan E-008898/2011 kasta något ljus på frågan. Jag hänvisar särskilt till att förordningar ska ge svar på frågor som uppstått efter en analys och efter det att motsvarande politiska riktlinjer utarbetats.
Enligt ert svar utfärdades de ovannämnda förordningarna utan stöd i verkligheten, eftersom de specifika uppgifterna endast kommer att finnas tillgängliga 2015 som en följd av de åtgärder ni nu vidtar.
Svar från Cecilia Malmström på kommissionens vägnar
(10 januari 2013)
Det är ett väldokumenterat faktum att barn utsätts för sexuella övergrepp, att bilder av sådana övergrepp tas, sprids och konsumeras, att många bilder visar våldtäkter och tortyr av barn under 10 år, att en stor del av spridningen sker via Internet och att barnen på grund av spridningen av bilderna på dem utsätts för grova kränkningar av sitt privatliv, och dessutom viktimiseras upprepade gånger.
Det finns en bred forskning och många rapporter som styrker dessa fakta. En del av dem nämndes i den konsekvensanalys som åtföljer kommissionens förslag till direktiv om exploatering av barn (41). Andra finns tillgängliga i vetenskapliga publikationer samt rapporter från olika organ som arbetar med dessa frågor, bl.a. nationella och internationella organisationer och icke-statliga organisationer. Det är därför felaktigt att hävda att avsaknaden av sammanställd statistisk på EU-nivå om antalet utredningar eller åtal för barnpornografibrott innebär avsaknad av saklig grund för direktivet. 
Kommissionen påminner om att Europaparlamentet antog direktivet med stor majoritet och att stödet i rådet var enhälligt.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009979/12
to the Commission
Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Lack of underlying research to establish best practice in child protection
Further to the Commission’s answer to Question E-007751/2012, a follow-up question requires a response:
If there are no consolidated statistics at EU level, what was the factual basis for the Council Framework Decision 2004/68/JHA of 22 December 2003 on combating the sexual exploitation of children and child pornography, OJ L 13, 20.1.2004, p. 44, and Directive 2011/93/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?
I have taken note of the impact assessment for the proposal, which contains no further clarification of this issue. In addition, the Commission’s reply to Written Question E-008898/2011 appears not to cast any light on this matter. I am referring specifically to the fact that regulations are supposed to give answers to issues found after an analysis and after the corresponding policies have been developed.
According to your answer, the abovementioned regulations were issued without any factual basis, as the specific data will only be available in 2015, as a result of your current actions.
Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
It is a well-established fact that children are sexually abused; that images of such abuse are produced, disseminated and viewed; that many involve the rape or torture of children under the age of 10; that a much of that dissemination takes place on the Internet; and that because of the circulation of their images, children suffer a gross violation of their privacy, as well as repeated victimisation.
There is a wide range of scientific research and reports to substantiate these facts. Some were referenced in the impact assessment accompanying the Commission proposal for the Child Exploitation Directive (42). Others are available in scientific publications, as well as in reports by different bodies dealing with these topics, including by national and international organisations, and NGOs. It is therefore incorrect to suggest that a lack of consolidated statistics at EU level on the number of investigations or prosecutions for child pornography offences implies a lack of a factual basis for the directive. 
The Commission recalls that the European Parliament adopted the directive by a large majority and that there was unanimous support in the Council.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-009980/12
til Kommissionen
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(5. november 2012)

Om: Gebyrer og provenu for indrejse‐ og opholdstilladelser
Spørgeren er blevet bekendt med, at der i USA findes et føderalt agentur, ESTA, der udsteder indrejse‐ og opholdsdokumenter til De forenede Stater. En sådan tilladelse koster angiveligt ca. 14 USD.






1.


Kan Kommissionen oplyse, om EU har et lignende agentur, der står for at udstede sådanne tilladelser?










2.


Hvis et sådant agentur findes, kan Kommissionen da oplyse, hvor stort et gebyr, der opkræves, og hvad det samlede provenu er?










3.


Hvis et sådant agentur ikke findes, kan Kommissionen da oplyse, hvad et gebyr af samme størrelsesorden som det amerikanske ville kunne indbringe EU?




Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Cecilia Malmström
(7. januar 2013)
I henhold til det amerikanske Visa Waiver Program kan statsborgere fra visse lande (herunder alle EU-lande undtagen Polen, Cypern, Rumænien og Bulgarien) tage på ferie‐ eller forretningsrejse i USA i op til 90 dage uden visum. De skal dog opnå en rejsetilladelse via ESTA (elektronisk system for rejsetilladelser) forud for rejsen. Rejsende skal betale et administrationsgebyr på p.t. 14 USD. Med en ESTA-rejsetilladelse kan man rejse til USA, men man er ikke garanteret indrejse.
I 2009 blev der gennemført en undersøgelse af muligheden for at indføre et ESTA-system på EU-plan for ikke‐visumpligtige tredjelandsstatsborgere eller for alle tredjelandsstatsborgere. På grundlag af undersøgelsens resultat konkluderede Kommissionen i sin meddelelse om »intelligente grænser« af 25. oktober 2011, at en etablering af et ESTA-system på EU-plan ikke bør iværksættes på nuværende tidspunkt, da den eventuelle øgede sikkerhed, dette ville give for medlemsstaterne, hverken ville begrunde indsamlingen af personoplysninger i et sådant omfang eller de økonomiske omkostninger og virkningen for de internationale forbindelser.
Kommissionen vil på et senere tidspunkt vende tilbage til spørgsmålet om et ESTA-system på EU‐plan og dets eventuelle bidrag til den videre udbygning af den fælles visumpolitik som anført i Stockholmprogrammet. Størrelsen af et eventuelt ESTA-gebyr samt de pågældende grupper af tredjelandsstatsborgere vil blive undersøgt i den forbindelse. Det er på nuværende tidspunkt ikke muligt at vurdere, hvor store indtægter et ESTA-gebyr på EU-plan kan indbringe.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009980/12
to the Commission
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Fees for entry and residence permits, and revenue from such fees
My attention has been drawn to the existence in the USA of a federal agency, ESTA, which issues documents for entry to and residence in the USA. Such permits apparently cost around USD 14.






1.


Can the Commission say whether the EU has a similar agency responsible for issuing such permits?










2.


If so, what fee is charged, and what is the total revenue from such fees?










3.


If not, can the Commission say what revenue a fee of the same level as that charged in the USA might generate for the EU?




Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
Under the Visa Waiver Program set up by the United States, nationals from certain countries (including all EU countries, except Poland, Cyprus, Romania and Bulgaria) are eligible to travel to the US for business or tourism, for stays of 90 days or less without obtaining a visa. They have to obtain an ESTA (‘Electronic System for Travel Authorisation’) authorisation prior to their travel. Travellers are required to pay an administrative fee, currently set up at USD 14. Possession of an ESTA authorisation establishes that the person concerned is eligible to travel to the US, but does not guarantee him/her admission. 
In 2009, a study was carried out on the feasibility of introducing an EU ESTA for visa-exempted third-country nationals or for all third-country nationals. Based on its outcome, the Commission concluded in its communication on ‘Smart Borders’ of 25 October 2011 that the establishment of an EU ESTA should not be pursued at this stage, as the potential contribution to enhancing the security of the Member States would justify neither the collection of personal data at such a scale, nor the financial cost, nor the impact on international relations. 
The Commission intends to return at a later stage to the issue of an EU ESTA and its possible contribution to the further development of the common visa policy, as set out in the Stockholm programme. The level of a possible EU ESTA fee and the categories of third-country nationals which would be concerned would be examined in that context. At this stage, it is not possible to evaluate the amount an EU ESTA fee could generate. 
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-009981/12
til Kommissionen
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(5. november 2012)

Om: Firmaets Apples misbrug af sin dominerende stilling på markedet
Den danske forfatter, Peter Øvig, har netop udgivet andet bind af sin historie om 1960'ernes »hippies« i Danmark. Værket, »Hippie 2« ligger på de danske bestsellerlister, og forfatteren ønsker derfor naturligvis også bogen forhandlet gennem Apples netboghandel, iBookstore, hvor bogen kan læses på en af Apples mobile platforme. Apple har imidlertid nægtet at forhandle bogen, angiveligt med henvisning til, at den indeholder nøgenbilleder. Det bemærkes, at der i øvrigt er tale om et historisk, ikke-pornografisk værk. Som det er tilfældet med Apples iTunes for musik, er markedet for e-bøger i stærk vækst, og iBookstore har nu en markedsandel på næsten 50 pct. Sagen kan sammenlignes med Microsoft-sagen, hvor Microsoft efter sagsanlæg fra Kommissionen blev idømt en meget stor bøde for misbrug af sin dominerende stilling på markedet i forbindelse med styresystemet Windows. Spørgeren finder det derfor også betænkeligt, at Apple tilsyneladende uden konkrete og saglige begrundelser afviser en bogudgivelse.
Kommissionen har tidligere i svaret på spørgsmål P-011048/2010 udtrykt betænkelighed i en parallel sag, hvor Apple nægtede den danske avis Ekstra Bladet adgang pga. den såkaldte »Side 9-pige«.
Vil Kommissionen på baggrund heraf redegøre for, om der kan være tale om misbrug af en dominerende stilling på markedet, samt oplyse, hvad man agter at gøre for at tilsikre, at aktører på EU's indre marked også agerer proportionalt og fair over for markedets øvrige aktører, herunder forfattere i relation til iBook-udbydere?
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-010480/12
til Kommissionen
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(16. november 2012)

Om: Firmaet Apples misbrug af sin monopolstilling i forbindelse med en såkaldt app
Nedenstående spørgsmål stilles i forlængelse af spørgsmålet »Firmaet Apples misbrug af sin dominerende stilling på markedet« af 2. november 2012, da sagen har udviklet sig yderligere i mellemtiden. Som oplyst i det tidligere spørgsmål har den danske forfatter Peter Øvig Knudsen netop udgivet andet bind af sin historie om 1960'ernes »hippies« i Danmark. Firmaet Apple har fjernet værket, »Hippie 2«, fra sin netboghandel, iBookstore, med henvisning til, at det indeholder nøgenbilleder. En »censureret« udgave, hvor kønsorganer mv. var dækket af æbler blev også fjernet af Apple efter blot fire dage — efter først at være blevet godkendt — uden yderligere begrundelse. 
Forfatteren har stiftet et selskab, »Hippieselskabet«, der i samarbejde med forlaget Gyldendal har til formål at eksperimentere med nye, digitale formater af bogen. Selskabet har med betydeligt tidsforbrug og omkostninger udviklet en avanceret applikation, en såkaldt app, der kan købes i »App Store«, og som giver mulighed for både at læse bogen og få den læst op af forfatteren sammen med musik komponeret til lejligheden af en af bogens hovedpersoner. Denne app er formentlig den første af sin art i verden og giver således også synshæmmede og blinde mulighed for at få glæde af bogen. Seriens første bind, »Hippie 1«, udkom som denne app sammen med papirudgaven i oktober 2011, godkendt af Apple, og har således været til salg i over et år. Andet bind, »Hippie 2«, blev også godkendt af Apple og var til salg i App Store i to uger efter udgivelsen. Apple har nu med en telefonopringning fra hovedsædet i Californien meddelt selskabet, at app'en ikke længere er til salg i App Store. Hvor e-udgaven af bøgerne også kan købes andre steder, er dette ikke tilfældet med app'en, som udelukkede kan anvendes på Apples platforme iPad og iPhone. Apple har således i dette tilfælde et reelt monopol.
Finder Kommissionen på baggrund heraf, at der er tale om misbrug af en monopolstilling på markedet, og vil den oplyse, hvad den agter at foretage sig for at sikre, at aktører på EU's indre marked også agerer forholdsmæssigt og fair over for markedets øvrige aktører?
Finder Kommissionen det endvidere rimeligt, at en markedsaktør med monopol de facto kan forhindre salget af dansksprogede bøger til en gruppe af danske læsere?
Samlet svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Joaquín Almunia
(8. januar 2013)
Ifølge EU's konkurrenceret kan virksomheder i princippet frit indgå aftaler og fastlægge vilkårene og betingelserne for sådanne aftaler. Dog kan en afvisning af aftaleindgåelse under visse særlige omstændigheder give anledning til konkurrencemæssige problemer i henhold til artikel 102 i TEUF.
Anvendelsen af artikel 102 i TEUF afhænger af en række faktiske, retlige og økonomiske forhold, herunder af om Apple anses for at indtage en dominerende stilling på markedet i forbindelse med salg af e-bøger til forbrugere fra sin iBookstore og/eller App Store. Kommissionen har dog i øjeblikket ingen dokumentation for, at Apple indtager en sådan dominerende stilling.
Kommissionen vil fortsat følge udviklingen vedrørende Apples forretningspolitik for at sikre, at konkurrence, innovation og lige vilkår opretholdes mellem alle markedsdeltagere. Kommissionen forpligter sig desuden fortsat til at sikre fuld overholdelse af de europæiske konkurrenceregler på dette område.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009981/12
to the Commission
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Apple's abuse of its dominant market position
The Danish author, Peter Øvig, has just published the second volume of his history of the 1960s hippies in Denmark. The work, ‘Hippie 2’, is on Denmark’s bestseller lists, and the author would of course also like the book to be available through Apple’s online bookstore, iBookstore, where the book can be read on one of Apple’s mobile platforms. Apple has, however, refused to market the book, ostensibly on the grounds that it contains nudity. It should be noted that this is in fact a historic, non-pornographic work. As is the case with Apple’s iTunes for music, the market for e-books is expanding rapidly, and iBookstore now has a market share of almost 50%. This case can be compared to the Microsoft case in which Microsoft, following legal proceedings brought by the Commission, was required to pay a hefty fine for abuse of its dominant market position regarding its Windows operating system. I am also therefore concerned that Apple should apparently refuse to publish a book without giving specific and objective reasons.
In its answer to my Question P-011048/2010, the Commission previously expressed concern in a parallel case when Apple refused access to the Danish Ekstra Bladet newspaper because of its so-called ‘Page 9 girl’.
Will the Commission therefore clarify whether this is an abuse of a dominant market position, and indicate what action it intends to take to ensure that operators in the EU internal market also act in a proportionate and fair manner vis-à-vis other market players, including authors with respect to iBook providers?
Question for written answer E-010480/12
to the Commission
Morten Messerschmidt (EFD)
(16 November 2012)

Subject: Abuse by Apple of its monopoly position in connection with an app
This question is being tabled further to the question entitled ‘Apple’s abuse of its dominant market position’, dated 2 November 2012, as there have been developments in this connection in the meantime. As stated in that question, the Danish author Peter Øvig Knudsen recently published the second volume of his history of the 1960s’ hippies in Denmark. Apple has removed the work, ‘Hippie 2’, from its online iBookstore on the ground that it contains nudity. A ‘censored’ edition, in which apples were used to cover up sex organs, was also removed by Apple after only four days — after it had been approved — with no further reasons being given. 
The author has formed a company, ‘Hippieselskabet’, whose purpose is, in cooperation with the publishing house Gyldendal, to experiment with new, digital formats for books. In a time-consuming process, and at significant cost, the company has developed an advanced app, on sale in the App Store, for both reading the book and listening to it being read by the author, accompanied by music specially composed by one of the book’s main characters. This is thought to be the first such app in the world, making it possible for visually impaired and blind people, too, to enjoy the book. The first volume, ‘Hippie 1’ was published both in app form and on paper in October 2011, with Apple’s approval, and has therefore been on sale for over a year. The second volume, ‘Hippie 2’, was also approved by Apple and was on sale in the App Store for two weeks following publication. Apple, in a telephone call from its headquarters in California, has now notified the company that the app is no longer on sale in the App Store. The e-edition of the books can be bought elsewhere, but that is not the case for the app, which can be used only on Apple’s iPad and iPhone platforms. In this instance, then, Apple has a genuine monopoly.
Accordingly, does the Commission regard this as an abuse of a monopoly market position, and will it say what it intends to do to ensure that operators on the EU’s internal market also act proportionately and fairly vis-à-vis other operators on the market?
Furthermore, does the Commission consider it reasonable that a market operator with a monopoly can effectively prevent the sale of Danish-language books to Danish readers?
Joint answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
Under EU competition law, companies in principle are free to contract and to define the terms and conditions for the contracts they conclude. However, a refusal to conclude a contract may, in certain exceptional circumstances, raise competition concerns under Article 102 TFEU.
The application of Article 102 TFEU would depend on a range of factual, legal and economic elements including, inter alia, that Apple be found to hold a dominant position in relation to the sale of e-books to consumers through its iBookstore and/or the AppStore. However, the Commission currently does not have any evidence that Apple holds such a dominant position. 
The Commission will continue to monitor developments regarding Apple's commercial policies so as to ensure that competition, innovation and a level playing field are preserved amongst all market players. The Commission also remains committed to ensuring the full respect of European competition rules in this area.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009982/12
alla Commissione
Mara Bizzotto (EFD)
(5 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Adesione all'UE della Turchia: rispetto dell'acquis comunitario
Il 29 ottobre si è celebrato l’89° anniversario della fondazione della Repubblica Turca. Durante la festa nazionale, un gruppo di manifestanti composto dei rappresentanti di 40 movimenti laici guidati dal leader dell’opposizione Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu ha deciso di sfilare nonostante il veto del governo, muovendosi dal primo parlamento fino al mausoleo di Mustafa Kemal Atatürk primo presidente della Repubblica, per ricordare quelle radici laiche della Repubblica che molti cittadini turchi rivendicano ancora.
Per disperdere una manifestazione in chiaro contrasto con il progetto del premier Erdogan, denunciato ripetutamente dall'opposizione, di imporre a tutti i costi una politica volta all’islamizzazione progressiva del paese, le forze dell’ordine sono intervenute contro i convenuti con lacrimogeni, spray urticanti e idranti.
Il premier turco Erdogan il 31 ottobre ha poi lanciato un ultimatum all’UE, affermando che se entro il 2023 non sarà consentito alla Turchia l’ingresso nell’Unione, il paese ritirerà la candidatura, con conseguenze negative per tutta l’economia UE.






1.


La Commissione è a conoscenza dell'accaduto?










2.


In quanto paese candidato che sta negoziando l'adesione all'UE, la Turchia dovrebbe assicurare il rispetto dei diritti fondamentali di tutti i suoi cittadini, delle disposizioni della Convenzione europea dei diritti dell'uomo, della giurisprudenza della Corte europea dei diritti dell'uomo, come ha sottolineato la Commissione più volte nelle risposte a mie interrogazioni in merito. Non ritiene che questi fatti mettano, invece, palesemente in luce il completo disinteresse della Turchia verso l'integrazione e l'adeguamento all'acquis comunitario?










3.


Come valuta le denunce dei partiti di opposizione al governo turco che affermano che la politica della maggioranza è volta ad un processo di reislamizzazione della Repubblica Turca?




Risposta congiunta di Štefan Füle a nome della Commissione
(18 dicembre 2012)
La Commissione è a conoscenza degli incidenti menzionati dall’onorevole parlamentare. 
La Commissione segue con la massima attenzione gli sviluppi in Turchia per quanto riguarda i criteri politici, di cui il rispetto dei diritti fondamentali, compresa la libertà di espressione e di riunione, costituisce un elemento fondamentale. La relazione della Commissione pubblicata il 10 ottobre 2012 segnala i numerosi casi di violenza e di uso eccessivo della forza da parte delle forze di sicurezza nei confronti dei manifestanti verificatisi negli ultimi dodici mesi. Inoltre la Commissione solleva regolarmente la questione nei suoi contatti con le autorità turche. 
Per quanto riguarda il processo di adesione della Turchia, la Commissione invita l’onorevole parlamentare a consultare le chiare disposizioni contenute nel quadro negoziale approvato nel 2005 da tutti gli Stati membri e la decisione del Consiglio del dicembre 2006. 
La relazione ha indicato esplicitamente che occorreva indagare sulle denunce riguardanti l’uso eccessivo della forza da parte delle forze di sicurezza.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009982/12
to the Commission
Mara Bizzotto (EFD)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: EU membership of Turkey — respect for the acquis communautaire

On 29 October 2012, the 89th anniversary of the founding of the Turkish Republic was celebrated. On the National Day, a group of protesters consisting of representatives of 40 lay movements, led by opposition leader Kemal Kılıçdaroğlu, decided to hold a protest march despite a government ban on doing so. The protesters marched from the first parliament to the mausoleum of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the first president of the republic, in commemoration of the secular roots of the republic to which many Turkish citizens are still attached.
In order to disperse a demonstration that clearly ran counter to Prime Minister Erdogan's plan, which has been repeatedly condemned by the opposition, to impose, at all costs, a policy of gradual Islamisation of the country, the police intervened with tear gas, pepper spray and water cannons.
On 31 October, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan then issued an ultimatum to the EU, stating that if Turkey was not allowed to join the EU by 2023 it would withdraw its application, with negative consequences for the entire EU economy.






1.


Is the Commission aware of the above events?










2.


As a candidate country which is negotiating EU membership, Turkey should ensure that it respects the fundamental rights of all its citizens, in addition to the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights, as the Commission has pointed out several times in its answers to my questions on the matter. Does the Commission not agree, however, that these facts clearly highlight Turkey's complete disregard for integration and alignment with the 




acquis
?






3.


What is the Commission's view of the opposition parties' complaints to the Turkish Government that the policy of the majority is to re-Islamise the Turkish Republic?




Question for written answer E-010062/12
to the Commission
William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Turkish protests
The Turkish police recently fired tear gas and water cannons to disperse protesters against the government’s ban on Republic Day celebrations.
Does the Commission believe that such heavy-handedness by an Islamic-leaning government is acceptable behaviour for an EU candidate country?
Question for written answer E-010063/12
to the Commission
William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Turkey's EU candidacy
Does the Commission believe that Turkey’s sharp government-secularist divide, exemplified by the recent clash over a government ban on commemorations of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s founding of the Turkish Republic and by the jailing of opposition figures, can actually be resolved by EU membership?
Joint answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
The Commission is aware of the incidents mentioned by the Honourable Members. 
The Commission closely monitors developments in Turkey under the political criteria, of which respect the fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, is an essential component. In its progress report, published on 10 October 2012, the Commission stated that on several occasions over the past year there were scenes of violence, disruption of demonstrations and disproportionate use of force by security forces against demonstrators. Moreover, the Commission regularly raises this matter in its ongoing contacts with the Turkish authorities. 
Regarding Turkey's accession process the Commission refers the Honourable Members to the provisions clearly set out in the Negotiating Framework agreed by all Member States in 2005 as well as the Council decision of December 2006.
The progress report made clear that allegations against members of the security forces for use of excessive force should be investigated.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009983/12
an die Kommission
Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Fusion von Glencore und Xstrata
Glencore hat die Europäische Kommission am 2. Oktober über den Zusammenschluss der Unternehmen Glencore und Xstrata benachrichtigt.
Mehrere Akteure haben auf mögliche negative Folgen dieser Fusion für den europäischen Zinkmarkt hingewiesen. Daher möchte ich die Europäische Kommission fragen:







Für welche anderen europäischen Rohstoffmärkte wird die Fusion nach Ansicht der Kommission negative Folgen im Hinblick auf den Wettbewerb haben?











Für welche europäischen Rohstoffmärkte wird die Fusion zur Folge haben, dass der Wert des Herfindahl-Hirschman-Index (HHI) mehr als 2500 beträgt?











Für welche europäischen Rohstoffmärkte wird die Fusion einen Anstieg des HHI-Werts um mehr als 200 zur Folge haben?




Antwort von Herrn Almunia im Namen der Kommission
(19. Dezember 2012)
Das Vorhaben wurde am 22. November 2012  (43) von der Kommission unter der Voraussetzung genehmigt, dass Glencore unter anderem i) seine mit Nyrstar, dem weltweit größten Hersteller von Zinkmetall, geschlossenen Vereinbarungen über die Abnahmepreise für Zinkmetall im EWR kündigt und ii) seine Minderheitsbeteiligung an Nyrstar veräußert.






1.


Die Kommission hatte nur im Hinblick auf das Zinkmetallangebot im EWR Bedenken, dass der geplante Zusammenschluss den Wettbewerb beeinträchtigen könnte.




 Nach umfangreicher Prüfung kam die Kommission zu dem Ergebnis, dass die geplante Übernahme für Produktion und Angebot folgender Rohstoffe und Erzeugnisse voraussichtlich wettbewerbsrechtlich unbedenklich sein würde: Zinkkonzentrat, Kraftwerkskohle und Kokskohle, Kupfer, Sekundärkupfer und Kupferkonzentrat, Blei und Bleikonzentrat, Nickel und Zwischenerzeugnisse, Kobalt und Zwischenerzeugnisse, Ferrochrom und andere Nicht-Kernprodukte (Gold, Molybdän, Platin, Palladium, Schwefelsäure, Vanadium, Ferrovanadium und Silber).






2.


Der einzige europäische Rohstoffmarkt, auf dem das Vorhaben möglicherweise sowohl zu erheblichen Wettbewerbsüberschneidungen als auch zu einem Herfindahl-Hirschman-Index (HHI) von über 2 500 führen würde, ist der Zinkmetallmarkt im EWR.










3.


Der einzige europäische Rohstoffmarkt, auf dem das Vorhaben voraussichtlich einen Anstieg des HHI-Werts um mehr als 200 Punkte zur Folge haben würde, ist ebenfalls der Zinkmetallmarkt im EWR. In einem kleinen hypothetischen Teilsegment des Marktes für hochwertige Bleimetalle würde es zwar ebenfalls zu einem Anstieg des HHI-Werts um mehr als 200 Punkte kommen, allerdings würde der HHI nach dem Zusammenschluss noch immer weit unter einem Wert von 2 500 liegen.




Im Hinblick auf die Punkte 2) und 3) stellt die Kommission fest, dass außer Zinkmetall die meisten untersuchten Erzeugnisse (z. B. Zinkkonzentrat, Kupferkonzentrat, Kupfermetall, Kraftwerkskohle usw.) ohnehin auf weltweiten Märkten gehandelt werden.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009983/12
to the Commission
Reinhard Bütikofer (Verts/ALE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Glencore-Xstrata merger
On 2 October 2012, Glencore filed a merger notification with the Commission regarding the proposed Glencore-Xstrata fusion.
A number of actors have highlighted the possible adverse effects this merger might have on the European zinc market. In this context, I would like to ask the Commission the following:







On which other European commodity markets does the Commission believe the merger could have an adverse effect with regard to competition?











In which European commodity markets would the merger lead to a Herfindahl-Hirschmann index (HHI) of over 2 500?











In which European commodity markets would the merger lead to an increase in the HHI of more than 200 points?




Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
The transaction was cleared by the Commission on 22 November22 Novem 20ber 2012 (44) on condition that Glencore inter aliainter alia (i) (i) terminates its off-take arrangements for zinc metal in the EEA with Nyrstar, the world's largest zinc metal producer, and (ii) divests its minority shareholding in Nyrstar.






1.


The Commission had concerns that the proposed transaction could 




have an adverse effect on competition only with respect to the supply of zinc metal in the EEA. The Commission found that the proposed transaction was unlikely to raise competition concerns as regards the production or supply of: zinc concentrate; thermal coal and coking coal; copper, secondary copper and copper concentrate; lead and lead concentrate; nickel and nickel intermediates; cobalt and cobalt intermediates; ferrochrome; and other ‘non-core’ products (gold, molybdenum, platinum, palladium, sulphuric acid, vanadium, ferrovanadium, and silver).






2.


The only potential European commodity market where the proposed transaction would both give rise to appreciable competition overlaps and a HHI of over 2 500 was in the supply of zinc metal in the EEA.










3.


The only potential European commodity market where the proposed transaction would lead to an increase in the HHI of more than 200 points was in the supply of zinc metal in the EEA. There would also be an increase of more than 200 points on a hypothetical small sub-segment of higher quality grades of lead metal, but the post-merger HHI would still remain significantly below 2 500.




With respect to points (2) and (3), the Commission notes that, in any event, most of the examined products other than zinc metal (e.g. e.g. zinc concentrate, copper concentrate, copper metal, seaborne thermal coal, etc etc.) constituted markets which are worldwide in scope.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009984/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Competencia y posible conflicto de intereses en el sector aeroportuario
Con la nacionalización de BFA-Bankia por parte del Gobierno español a través del FROB, éste ha pasado a controlar de manera directa un 12,087 % de las acciones de IAG, que se suman al 2,71 % que ya controlaba la SEPI (de titularidad pública). Es decir, que, en total, el Gobierno español controla un 14,8 % de las acciones de IAG. Esta participación es la más alta de las ostentadas por un sólo accionista, tal y como se puede comprobar en la página 87 del último Informe Anual Consolidado (45). IAG es un holding que controla dos compañías aéreas: Iberia y British Airways. Iberia tiene la base de operaciones en el aeropuerto de Barajas, Madrid. Este holding también tiene intereses en múltiples compañías del sector. Algunas están situadas en España, como Multiservicios Aeroportuarios SA en la que IAG tiene un 49 % de las acciones.
Esta empresa da servicio tanto a aerolíneas como a aeropuertos (46). A su vez, Iberia (IAG) es el accionista principal de la aerolínea Vueling, con el 45, 85 % de las acciones (47), que tiene como base de operaciones el aeropuerto de Barcelona. Además, IAG, en la página 66 de su Informe Anual Consolidado, en referencia a la intervención del Estado reconoce que «nuestra capacidad de cumplir la normativa e influir en ella es clave para mantener nuestro rendimiento operativo y financiero». Por otra parte, en España existe un control público centralizado de todos los aeropuertos a través de la empresa de titularidad pública AENA, controlada a su vez por el gobierno central.






1.


¿No cree la Comisión que el Gobierno español puede incurrir en ayudas de Estado tal y como las define el artículo 107 del TUE, al controlar a su vez todas las decisiones relacionadas con los aeropuertos y ser el máximo accionista de dos de las principales aerolíneas (Iberia y Vueling) que operan en España, así como de otras empresas de servicios del sector?










2.


¿No cree la Comisión que para evitar sospechas de conflicto de intereses bajo el capítulo de normas de competición del TUE, el gobierno central debería o bien proceder a la liquidación de las acciones de BFA-Bankia sobre IAG o bien descentralizar y/o liberalizar la gestión aeroportuaria?




Respuesta del Sr. Almunia en nombre de la Comisión
(8 de enero de 2013)
La Comisión remite a Su Señoría a la respuesta dada a la pregunta escrita P-010226/2012 (48).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009984/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Competition and potential conflict of interest in the airport sector
Following the Spanish Government’s nationalisation of BFA-Bankia through the Fund for Orderly Bank Restructuring (FROB), the Government now owns 12.087% of shares in the International Airlines Group (IAG); this is in addition to the 2.71% stake already held by the state-owned Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (SEPI). In other words, the Spanish Government now has a total stake of 14.8% in IAG. This makes the Spanish Government the biggest single shareholder in the company, as confirmed on page 87 of the latest Consolidated Annual Report (49). IAG is a holding company with control over two air carriers, Iberia and British Airways. Iberia’s hub is Barajas Airport in Madrid. IAG also owns shares in a number of other companies in the airport sector. Several of these companies are located in Spain, such as Multiservicios Aeroportuarios SA, in which IAG has a 49% stake.
Multiservicios Aeroportuarios SA provides services to both airlines and airports (50). In turn, Iberia (owned by IAG) is the main shareholder in the airline Vueling, with a 45.85% stake (51); Vueling’s hub is Barcelona Airport. Furthermore, regarding State intervention, IAG admits on page 66 of its Consolidated Annual Report that ‘our ability to both comply with and influence any changes in these regulations is key to maintaining our operational and financial performance’. Moreover, all Spanish airports are managed centrally by the State through the publicly-owned company AENA, which is under the control of the Spanish Government.






1.


Does the Commission agree that the Spanish Government runs the risk of infringing the rules governing state aid, as defined in Article 107 of the TFEU, by having control over all decisions relating to airports while also being the majority shareholder in two of the main airlines operating in Spain (Iberia and Vueling), as well as other airport service companies?










2.


Does the Commission agree that to avoid any suggestion of a conflict of interest under the competition rules laid down by the Treaties, the Spanish Government should either sell the shares that BFA-Bankia holds in IAG, or decentralise and/or liberalise airport management services?




Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question P-010226/2012 (52).
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009985/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Ayudas del Estado en regiones con condiciones parecidas de subempleo
Según el artículo 107, apartdo 1, del TUE sobre ayudas estatales: «[…] serán incompatibles con el mercado interior, en la medida en que afecten a los intercambios comerciales entre Estados miembros, las ayudas otorgadas por los Estados o mediante fondos estatales, bajo cualquier forma, que falseen o amenacen falsear la competencia, favoreciendo a determinadas empresas o producciones». Más adelante, en el artículo 107, apartado 2, letra c), el TUE deja claro que existe una exención para «las ayudas concedidas con objeto de favorecer la economía de determinadas regiones de la República Federal de Alemania, afectadas por la división de Alemania, en la medida en que sean necesarias para compensar las desventajas económicas que resultan de tal división. […]». Así pues, se entiende que las ayudas a las regiones están incluidas dentro de las ayudas del Estado. Este extremo se confirma con el artículo 107, apartado 3, letra a), que dice que «las ayudas destinadas a favorecer el desarrollo económico de regiones en las que el nivel de vida sea anormalmente bajo o en las que exista una grave situación de subempleo, así como el de las regiones contempladas en el artículo 349, habida cuenta de su situación estructural, económica y social;».
Actualmente, en España existe un desempleo del 25,1 %, según los últimos datos. Este desempleo tiene variaciones significativas por regiones, pero en todos los casos el desempleo se encuentra muy por encima de la media europea. Por lo tanto, no se puede decir que una región tenga una situación de subempleo más anormal que otra, teniendo en cuenta que en todas la situación es terriblemente grave. Por otro lado, en los presupuestos del Gobierno central del Estado español, hay disparidades estructurales entre el gasto que se dedica a cada región y su peso en el PIB. Estas disparidades se pueden comprobar anecdóticamente en los presupuestos para el 2013 (53), pero son recurrentes en los presupuestos del Estado.






1.


Teniendo en cuenta que el nivel de desempleo es en todas las regiones de España, muy superior a la media europea, ¿piensa la Comisión que la inversión sistemática en algunas regiones por parte del Gobierno central, con un gasto muy por encima de su peso en el PIB, representa ayudas del Estado para las empresas radicadas en dichas regiones?










2.


Si estas regiones reciben ayudas del Estado, ¿actuará la Comisión para corregir tal situación?




Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009986/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Posibles ayudas del Estado
Según el artículo 107, apartado 1, del TUE sobre ayudas estatales «[…] serán incompatibles con el mercado interior, en la medida en que afecten a los intercambios comerciales entre Estados miembros, las ayudas otorgadas por los Estados o mediante fondos estatales, bajo cualquier forma, que falseen o amenacen falsear la competencia, favoreciendo a determinadas empresas o producciones». Más adelante, en el artículo 107, apartado 2, letra c), el TUE deja claro que existe una exención para «las ayudas concedidas con objeto de favorecer la economía de determinadas regiones de la República Federal de Alemania, afectadas por la división de Alemania, en la medida en que sean necesarias para compensar las desventajas económicas que resultan de tal división. […]». Así pues, se entiende que las ayudas a las regiones están incluidas dentro de las ayudas del Estado. Este extremo se confirma con el artículo 107, apartado 3, letra a), que dice que «las ayudas destinadas a favorecer el desarrollo económico de regiones en las que el nivel de vida sea anormalmente bajo o en las que exista una grave situación de subempleo, así como el de las regiones contempladas en el artículo 349, habida cuenta de su situación estructural, económica y social;».
En el Estado español, es recurrente el hecho de que el Gobierno central utiliza los presupuestos del Estado para ayudar a algunas regiones muy por encima de otras. Así, en el año 2011 (54), el Gobierno central invierte en Castilla León el 14,9 % del gasto en infraestructuras a pesar de que la región solo representa un 5,2 % del PIB español, en cambio Catalunya, con el 18 % del PIB, solo recibirá un 11,9 % de la inversión. Esta situación no es propia solo de esta Comunidad, ni es coyuntural, sino que es una práctica generalizada de ayuda estatal a ciertas regiones muy concretas. Además, estas ayudas del Estado también se manifiestan en la ejecución de los presupuestos. Así, por ejemplo, el tanto por ciento de ejecución en materia de infraestructuras en Catalunya fue para el año 2011 del 35 % frente al 111 % en la Comunidad de Madrid. Estas diferencias de inversión, pues, al ser estructurales, tienen consecuencias para la competitividad de las empresas situadas en las distintas regiones.
¿Piensa la Comisión investigar si la distribución del gasto por regiones de los presupuestos del Gobierno central del Estado español para el año 2013 y los anteriores desde el año 2000, representan ayudas del Estado dirigidas indirectamente a las empresas de ciertas regiones políticamente favorecidas?
Respuesta conjunta del Sr. Almunia en nombre de la Comisión
(24 de enero de 2013)
La Comisión tiene competencia exclusiva para evaluar la compatibilidad de las ayudas estatales a las empresas de conformidad con el artículo 107 del TFUE y la normativa aplicable sobre ayudas estatales, pero no desempeña ningún papel en la evaluación del reparto de los fondos del presupuesto nacional de un Estado miembro entre sus regiones. La Comisión solo interviene en caso de que las medidas adoptadas por un Estado miembro (a cualquier nivel) se consideren ayuda estatal en el sentido del artículo 107, apartado 1, del TFUE y sean contrarias al mercado interior en virtud de las normas sobre ayudas estatales.
Por lo que se refiere a la noción de ayuda, el artículo 107, apartado 1, del TFUE se refiere a todas las ventajas concedidas directa o indirectamente mediante recursos del Estado al efecto de favorecer a determinadas empresas o la producción de bienes o servicios determinados. El hecho de que la ayuda sea concedida directamente por el Estado o por entidades regionales y locales es irrelevante. Una medida que no implique una transferencia directa o indirecta de recursos estatales no puede considerarse ayuda estatal, aun si se cumplen las demás condiciones del artículo 107, apartado 1, del TFUE.
El artículo 107, apartado 1, del TFUE prohíbe las ayudas estatales, pero el mismo artículo, en su apartado 3, prevé algunas excepciones por las que una ayuda estatal puede considerarse compatible con el mercado interior. Sobre la base del artículo 107, apartado 3, letras a) y c), la Comisión puede considerar que una ayuda estatal dirigida a fomentar el desarrollo económico de determinadas zonas desfavorecidas de la UE es compatible con el mercado interior. Las ayudas estatales de este tipo se denominan ayudas de Estado de finalidad regional y su objeto es contribuir al desarrollo de las regiones más desfavorecidas mediante el apoyo a la inversión y la creación de empleo. El desempleo es uno de los criterios utilizados para definir las regiones más desfavorecidas. En cualquier caso, los efectos positivos de las ayudas de cara al desarrollo de una región desfavorecida deben compensar los efectos negativos resultantes de la distorsión de la competencia que entrañan tales ayudas.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009985/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: State aid in regions with underemployment
Article 107(1) of the TFEU provides that ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.’ In Article 107 (2)(c), the Treaty makes it clear that there is an exemption for ‘aid granted to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic of Germany affected by the division of Germany, in so far as such aid is required in order to compensate for the economic disadvantages caused by that division […].’ It is therefore assumed that aid granted to regions is included in the concept of state aid. Article 107 (3)(a) confirms this by stating that ‘aid to promote the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment, and of the regions referred to in Article 349, in view of their structural, economic and social situation’, is compatible with the internal market.
According to the most recent data, the rate of unemployment in Spain is 25.1%. This rate of unemployment varies considerably across regions, but it is well above the European average in all cases. It is impossible to say that one region has a more acute problem of underemployment than another, since all regions have extremely serious unemployment situations. In addition, the amounts of central government budget funds allocated to each region are disproportionate to the different regions’ contributions to GDP. These discrepancies can be seen in the estimated budget for 2013 (55), although they are a consistent feature of the annual government budgets.






1.


Bearing in mind that the unemployment rate in all regions of Spain is considerably higher than the European average, does the Commission think that the central government’s systematic investment in certain regions, with expenditure disproportionately higher than the region’s contribution to GDP, amounts to state aid being given to businesses located in those regions?










2.


If these regions are receiving state aid, will the Commission take action to rectify this situation?




Question for written answer E-009986/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Potential state aid
Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that ‘any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market.’ In Article 107 (2)(c), the Treaty makes it clear that an exemption is given for ‘aid granted to the economy of certain areas of the Federal Republic of Germany affected by the division of Germany, in so far as such aid is required in order to compensate for the economic disadvantages caused by that division […].’ It is therefore assumed that aid granted to regions is included in the concept of state aid. Article 107 (3)(a) confirms this by stating that ‘aid to promote the economic development of areas where the standard of living is abnormally low or where there is serious underemployment, and of the regions referred to in Article 349, in view of their structural, economic and social situation’, is compatible with the internal market.
In Spain, the central government repeatedly grants much more aid from the national budget to some regions than others. In 2011 (56), for example, the government invested 14.9% of the amount allocated to infrastructure expenditure in Castile and León, despite this region only accounting for 5.2% of Spain’s GDP. In contrast, Catalonia, which contributes 18% of Spain’s GDP, only received 11.9% of this investment in infrastructure. This situation is not unique to Catalonia, and nor is it an isolated case; rather, this is an example of the ongoing practice of granting state aid to certain specific regions. Furthermore, this way of distributing state aid is also reflected in how the budget is executed. For example, the total percentage of the budget for infrastructure that was spent in Catalonia was 35% for 2011, compared to 111% in the Community of Madrid. Given that the differences in investment expenditure are structural, they are affecting the competitiveness of businesses located in the different regions.
Does the Commission plan to investigate whether the distribution of national budget funds among the different regions in Spain for 2013 and for all previous years from 2000 onwards corresponds to state aid going indirectly to businesses in certain regions which are given preferential treatment for political reasons? 
Joint answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(24 January 2013)
The Commission has sole competence to assess the compatibility of state aid to undertakings under Article 107 TFEU and the applicable state aid rules, but has no role in assessing a Member State's distribution of national budget funds among its regions. The Commission only intervenes if measures adopted by a Member State (at any level) are considered as state aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU and are contrary to the internal market under state aid rules. 
As regards the notion of aid, Article 107(1) TFEU covers all the advantages granted directly or indirectly through State resources to favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods or services. Whether the aid is granted directly by the State or by regional and local bodies is immaterial. A measure which does not involve a direct or indirect transfer of State resources cannot be regarded as state aid, even if it fulfils the other conditions of Article 107(1) TFEU.
Article 107(1) TFEU prohibits state aid. But Article 107(3) provides for some exemptions on the basis of which state aid might be considered as compatible with the internal market. On the basis of Article 107(3)(a) and (c), the Commission may consider state aid which is to promote the economic development of certain disadvantaged EU areas as compatible with the internal market. This kind of state aid is known as regional aid and is designed to assist the development of the most disadvantaged regions by supporting investment and job creation. Unemployment is one of the criteria used to identify the most disadvantaged regions. In any event, the positive effects of the aid in terms of the development of a less-favoured region must outweigh the negative effects resulting from the distortion of competition entailed by such aid.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009987/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Σύλληψη του Έλληνα δημοσιογράφου Κ. Βαξεβάνη για παραβίαση προσωπικών δεδομένων
Με εντολή του Εισαγγελέα Πλημμελειοδικών Αθηνών, η αστυνομία συνέλαβε τον Έλληνα δημοσιογράφο Κώστα Βαξεβάνη επειδή δημοσίευσε στο περιοδικό του την λεγόμενη «Λίστα Λαγκάρντ», που περιελάμβανε 2 059 ονόματα Ελλήνων πολιτών με καταθέσεις στην ελβετική τράπεζα HSBC και την οποία είχε παραδώσει η Υπουργός Οικονομικών της Γαλλίας, στα τέλη του 2010, στον Έλληνα ομόλογό της, χωρίς όμως να αξιοποιηθεί καθ’ οιονδήποτε τρόπο από τις ελληνικές αρχές. Σημειώνεται ότι η δημοσίευση περιλάμβανε μόνο τα ονόματα και την ιδιότητα των καταθετών, χωρίς λοιπά στοιχεία. Ο Κ. Βαξεβάνης κατηγορήθηκε ότι δημοσίευσε την «Λίστα Λαγκάρντ» και ως εκ τούτου, παραβίασε τη νομοθεσία που προστατεύει τα προσωπικά δεδομένα.
Λαμβάνοντας υπόψη την απόφαση C-73/07 του Ευρωπαϊκού Δικαστηρίου και ειδικότερα τα σημεία 50-62 της απόφασης όπου το Δικαστήριο αναφέρει, μεταξύ άλλων, ότι «η προστασία των προσωπικών δεδομένων δεν μπορεί να επιδιώκεται χωρίς να λαμβάνεται υπόψη ότι πρέπει να πραγματοποιείται, μέχρις ορισμένου βαθμού, συμβιβασμός των εν λόγω θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων σε σχέση με το θεμελιώδες δικαίωμα της ελευθερίας του λόγου» … «Προκειμένου να επιτευχθεί ο συμβιβασμός μεταξύ των δύο αυτών θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων υπό την έννοια της οδηγίας 95/46, τα κράτη μέλη καλούνται να προβλέψουν ορισμένες παρεκκλίσεις ή ορισμένους περιορισμούς όσον αφορά την προστασία δεδομένων και, επομένως, όσον αφορά το θεμελιώδες δικαίωμα στο ιδιωτικό απόρρητο, […]. Οι σχετικές παρεκκλίσεις πρέπει να προβλέπονται αποκλειστικά για δημοσιογραφικούς σκοπούς ή στο πλαίσιο καλλιτεχνικής ή λογοτεχνικής εκφράσεως, που εμπίπτουν στο θεμελιώδες δικαίωμα της ελευθερίας του λόγου …».
Με δεδομένο ότι δεν υπάρχει αμφιβολία ότι ο σκοπός της δημοσίευσης ήταν δημοσιογραφικός, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


 Πως σχολιάζει τα παραπάνω;










—


 Ποια νομολογία έχει προκύψει από αποφάσεις του Ευρωπαϊκού Δικαστηρίου όσον αφορά την επεξεργασία προσωπικών δεδομένων αποκλειστικά για δημοσιογραφικούς σκοπούς;




Απάντηση της κ. Reding εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(16 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος στην απάντησή της στην γραπτή ερώτηση P‐009861/2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009987/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Arrest of Greek journalist for breach of privacy
Greek journalist Costas Vaxevanis has been arrested by order of the public prosecutor of the Athens lower criminal courts for publishing the ‘Lagarde list’ in his magazine, naming 2 059 Greek citizens with Swiss bank accounts with HSBC, which the French Minister for Finance handed to her Greek counterpart at the end of 2010 and on which the Greek authorities failed to act. The article only contains the names and the fact that they have accounts; there are no other details. Mr Vaxevanis is charged with having published the Lagarde list and, hence, of breach of privacy laws.
In light of the judgment passed by the European Court of Justice in Case C-73/07 and, in particular, paragraphs 50 to 62 of that judgment, in which the Court states, inter alia, that personal data protection cannot be pursued without having regard to the fact that those fundamental rights must, to some degree, be reconciled with the fundamental right to freedom of expression and that, in order to reconcile these two fundamental rights for the purposes of Directive 95/46/EC, the Member States are required to provide for a number of derogations or limitations in relation to the protection of data and, therefore, in relation to the fundamental right to privacy. These derogations must be made solely for journalistic purposes or the purpose of artistic or literary expression, which fall within the scope of the right to freedom of expression.
Given that there is some doubt as to the journalistic purpose of the publication, will the Commission answer the following:






—


 What comment does it have on this?










—


 What case-law has been established by European Court of Justice on the use of personal data for purely journalistic purposes?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(16 January 2013)
The Commission refers the Honourable Member to its reply to Written Question P‐009861/2012.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009988/12
an die Kommission
Andreas Mölzer (NI)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Innerafrikanische Handelsbarrieren verstärken Hungersnot
Eine aktuelle Studie der Weltbank kommt zu dem Schluss, dass die Flutung der Märkte durch die reichen Industriestaaten mit hoch subventionierten Billigstlebensmitteln nicht das größte Problem der afrikanischen Landwirte sei. Vielmehr würden bürokratische Hürden, kostspielige Wegelagerer und Importbarrieren für heimische Bauern den innerafrikanischen Agrarmarkt stark behindern. Laut der Studie sei es oft für nicht afrikanische Produzenten leichter, eine afrikanische Stadt zu versorgen, als für Landwirte vor den Toren des Ballungszentrums. Bauern aus Kenia, Tansania oder Uganda müssten alle 30 bis 50 Kilometer Wegzoll zahlen, so dass ihnen bestenfalls ein Fünftel des Endkundenpreises bleiben würde.
In weiterer Folge kommt die Studie zu dem Schluss, dass selbst Katastrophen in einem Land nicht zu einer Hungersnot führen müssten, da selten der ganze Kontinent unter Dürre leiden würde. Die Regierungen hätten indes selbst bei einer Hungersnot kein Interesse daran, dass die Feldfrüchte aus einem Nachbarland den Weg auf den heimischen Markt finden.






1.


Ist der Kommission diese Problematik bekannt?










2.


Ist die EU bei den im Rahmen der Entwicklungshilfe für afrikanische Verwaltung ausgezahlten Geldern darauf bedacht, diesbezüglich für Besserung zu sorgen?










3.


Welche Konzepte gibt es auf EU-Ebene, um im Falle von Ernteausfällen für eine bessere innerafrikanische Versorgung zu sorgen und somit die afrikanische Landwirtschaft zu stärken?




Antwort von Herrn Piebalgs im Namen der Kommission
(25. Januar 2013)







1.


Die Kommission ist sich der komplexen Ursachen für die Ineffizienz der Agrarmärkte in Afrika und der Lösungsmöglichkeiten durchaus bewusst. Kommissar Piebalgs erörtert diese Fragen häufig im Rahmen seiner Kontakte mit afrikanischen Regierungen.










2.


Wie in den Schlussfolgerungen des Rates zur Handelshilfe




 (57)
 (58)
 (59)







1.


Die Kommission ist sich der komplexen Ursachen für die Ineffizienz der Agrarmärkte in Afrika und der Lösungsmöglichkeiten durchaus bewusst. Kommissar Piebalgs erörtert diese Fragen häufig im Rahmen seiner Kontakte mit afrikanischen Regierungen.










2.


Wie in den Schlussfolgerungen des Rates zur Handelshilfe










3.


Die EU stellt jährlich über 1 Mrd. EUR zur Förderung der Resilienz in Ländern mit unsicherer Ernährungslage bereit und ist im Bereich der Ernährungssicherheit und nachhaltigen Landwirtschaft größter Geber. Die Kommission hat in ihrer kürzlich vorgelegten Mitteilung zur Frage der Resilienz ausgeführt, wie die Ursachen wiederkehrender Krisen bekämpft werden können. Zwei EU-Initiativen, AGIR und SHARE, zielen auf die Verbesserung der Resilienz in der Sahelzone und am Horn von Afrika. Dabei wird auf den bestehenden regionalen Strategien aufgebaut und das Thema Ernährungssicherheit angegangen, z. B. indem die Bewirtschaftung der natürlichen Ressourcen, die Tiergesundheit und der Handel, die Landwirtschaft (verbesserte Methoden/Kleinbewässerung) oder der Zugang zu alternativen Einkommensquellen und zur Grundversorgung (Wasser/Abwasser) gefördert werden.










1.


Die Kommission ist sich der komplexen Ursachen für die Ineffizienz der Agrarmärkte in Afrika und der Lösungsmöglichkeiten durchaus bewusst. Kommissar Piebalgs erörtert diese Fragen häufig im Rahmen seiner Kontakte mit afrikanischen Regierungen.










2.


Wie in den Schlussfolgerungen des Rates zur Handelshilfe




 (57), zur Agenda für den Wandel (58) (unter anderem mit Fokus auf Infrastruktur, verantwortungsvoller Staatsführung und regionaler Integration) und zu Handel, Wachstum und Entwicklung (59) dargelegt, fördert die EU die wirtschaftliche Integration, die Stärkung der regionalen Märkte und — insbesondere im Rahmen der Doha-Verhandlungen — Initiativen zur Erleichterung des Handels. Die Unterstützung der Entwicklungsländer im Handelsbereich ist seit langem Bestandteil der Entwicklungszusammenarbeit der EU und umfasst die Bereiche Infrastruktur, Kapazitätsaufbau und Regulierungsfragen. Zoll‐ und Handelserleichterungen sind Gegenstand der Gemeinsamen Strategie Afrika-EU und des Aktionsplans 2011-2013. Die EU und ihre Mitgliedstaaten haben in den letzten Jahren mit rund 10 Mrd. EUR jährlich den mit Abstand größten Beitrag zur Handelshilfe geleistet. Etwa ein Drittel dieses Beitrags ging an Afrika als Hauptempfängerregion.





3.


Die EU stellt jährlich über 1 Mrd. EUR zur Förderung der Resilienz in Ländern mit unsicherer Ernährungslage bereit und ist im Bereich der Ernährungssicherheit und nachhaltigen Landwirtschaft größter Geber. Die Kommission hat in ihrer kürzlich vorgelegten Mitteilung zur Frage der Resilienz ausgeführt, wie die Ursachen wiederkehrender Krisen bekämpft werden können. Zwei EU-Initiativen, AGIR und SHARE, zielen auf die Verbesserung der Resilienz in der Sahelzone und am Horn von Afrika. Dabei wird auf den bestehenden regionalen Strategien aufgebaut und das Thema Ernährungssicherheit angegangen, z. B. indem die Bewirtschaftung der natürlichen Ressourcen, die Tiergesundheit und der Handel, die Landwirtschaft (verbesserte Methoden/Kleinbewässerung) oder der Zugang zu alternativen Einkommensquellen und zur Grundversorgung (Wasser/Abwasser) gefördert werden.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-009988/12
to the Commission
Andreas Mölzer (NI)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Trade barriers in Africa increase famine
A recent study by the World Bank comes to the conclusion that the flooding of markets by rich industrialised countries with highly subsidised low-cost food is not the biggest problem facing African farmers. Bureaucratic obstacles, the costly effects of highwaymen and import barriers for domestic farmers are greater hindrances for the agricultural market within Africa. According to the study, for non-African producers it is often easier to provide supplies for an African city than for farmers at the very gates of a conurbation. Farmers from Kenya, Tanzania or Uganda have to pay a road toll every 30 to 50 kilometres in order to keep one fifth of the retail price — this is the best case scenario. 
The study then concludes that even disasters in one country do not necessarily have to lead to famine, as it is seldom the case that the entire continent suffers from drought. However, even in the event of a famine, governments have no interest in seeing farm crops from a neighbouring country find their way onto the domestic market. 






1.


Is the Commission aware of these issues?










2.


Is the EU concerned about improving the situation, on the basis of development aid funds for African governance?










3.


What ideas exist at EU level to ensure better provision within Africa itself in the event of crop failure and thus to improve African farming?




Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission
(25 January 2013)







1.


The Commission is fully aware of the complex causes of ineffective agricultural markets in Africa and their possible remedies. This is often discussed by Commissioner Piebalgs in his contacts with African governments. 










2.


As set out in the Council Conclusions on Aid for Trade




 (60)
 (61)
inter alia
 (62)







1.


The Commission is fully aware of the complex causes of ineffective agricultural markets in Africa and their possible remedies. This is often discussed by Commissioner Piebalgs in his contacts with African governments. 










2.


As set out in the Council Conclusions on Aid for Trade










3.


The EU has allocated more than EUR 1 billion per year to foster resilience in countries with food security risks and is the largest contributor to food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture. The Commission has presented a communication on Resilience on how to address the root causes of recurrent crises. Two EU 










1.


The Commission is fully aware of the complex causes of ineffective agricultural markets in Africa and their possible remedies. This is often discussed by Commissioner Piebalgs in his contacts with African governments. 










2.


As set out in the Council Conclusions on Aid for Trade




 (60), Agenda for Change (61) (with its focus on inter alia infrastructure, governance and regional integration) and Trade, Growth and Development (62), EU policies promote economic integration, strengthening of regional markets and, notably in the Doha negotiations, trade facilitation initiatives. Trade assistance to developing countries is a long standing component of EU development cooperation, covering infrastructure, capacity building and regulatory aspects. Customs and Trade Facilitation figure in the Joint Africa‐EU Strategy (JAES) and Action Plan 2011‐2013. The EU and its Member States are by far the main contributors of Aid for Trade, with about EUR 10 billion per year in recent years, of which about one third went to Africa, the main beneficiary region. 





3.


The EU has allocated more than EUR 1 billion per year to foster resilience in countries with food security risks and is the largest contributor to food and nutrition security and sustainable agriculture. The Commission has presented a communication on Resilience on how to address the root causes of recurrent crises. Two EU 



initiatives, AGIR and SHARE, are designed to strengthen resilience in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa, building on existing regional strategies and addressing food security e.g. through natural resources management, livestock health and trade, agriculture (improved practices, small-scale irrigation), alternative income activities and basic services (water, sanitation).(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009989/12
an den Rat
Andreas Mölzer (NI)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Stopp der Roma-Asylwelle
Die Visafreiheit für Bürger aus Serbien und Mazedonien wird von Tausenden Roma trotz absehbarer Aussichtslosigkeit eines Asylantrags dazu missbraucht, um etwa in Deutschland um politisches Asyl anzusuchen. Hintergrund dieses Ansturms — es gibt schon mehr Asylsuchende aus Serbien als aus Afghanistan — ist, dass etwa Berlin nach einem Urteil des Verfassungsgerichtshofs Antragstellern, die auf Erledigung ihres Antrags warten, gleich hohe Sozialleistungen bieten muss wie eigenen Arbeitslosen. 346 Euro bar im Monat sind anscheinend für viele Angehörige der Roma-Minderheit überaus verlockend.






1.


Zeichnen sich ähnliche Tendenzen auch in anderen Mitgliedstaaten mit hohen Sozialleistungen für Asylsuchende ab?










2.


Wann rechnet der Rat hinsichtlich der diskutierten Aufhebung der Visafreiheit für einige Balkanstaaten mit einer Entscheidung?




Antwort
(30. Januar 2013)
Der Rat hat die erste Frage des Herrn Abgeordneten nicht erörtert, da die Höhe der genannten Leistungen nicht in seinen Zuständigkeitsbereich fällt. Was die zweite Frage anbelangt, so hat die Kommission in ihrem dritten Bericht vom 28. August 2012 an das Europäische Parlament und den Rat über die Überwachung für die Zeit nach der Visaliberalisierung für die westlichen Balkanstaaten (63) aktualisierte Informationen über die Entwicklungen in diesem Bereich, unter anderem in Bezug auf das Phänomen des Missbrauchs der Visaliberalisierung, vorgelegt und bestimme Maßnahmen aufgezeigt, die sie in diesem Zusammenhang weiterhin für notwendig hält. Am Rande der Ratstagung vom 25./26. Oktober 2012 hat der Gemischte Ausschuss den Bericht der Kommission erörtert und unterstrichen, dass es wichtig ist, Abhilfemaßnahmen zu ergreifen. Unter anderem wurde dem Dialog mit den betreffenden Ländern große Bedeutung beigemessen.
Auf der Tagung des Forums der Minister der EU und der westlichen Balkanländer zum Thema „Justiz und Inneres“ vom 5./6. November 2012 in Tirana haben die Minister der westlichen Balkanländer eine gemeinsame Erklärung zum visumfreien Reisen angenommen, in der sie beschlossen, die weiter gehenden Reformen durchzuführen, die notwendig sind, um auf angemessene und wirksame Weise gegen dieses Phänomen vorzugehen, und in engem Kontakt mit der Kommission in einigen Bereichen Sofortmaßnahmen zu ergreifen (64).
Der Rat und das Europäische Parlament beraten derzeit über den Kommissionsvorschlag zur Änderung der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 539/2001 (65). Im Verordnungsentwurf ist eine Bestimmung enthalten, die unter außergewöhnlichen Umständen eine vorübergehende Aufhebung der Befreiung von der Visumpflicht für die Staatsangehörigen der in Anhang II der Verordnung Nr. 539/2001 aufgeführten Drittländer gestattet. Der Verordnungsentwurf enthält auch andere Elemente, insbesondere eine Bestimmung hinsichtlich eines verstärkten Visa-Gegenseitigkeitsmechanismus, über die noch verhandelt wird.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009989/12
to the Council
Andreas Mölzer (NI)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Stopping the wave of Roma asylum-seekers
In spite of the fact that an asylum application will have no chance of a successful outcome, visa-free travel for citizens from Serbia and Macedonia is being abused by thousands of Roma in order to apply for political asylum in countries such as Germany. Behind this rush of applications (there are already more asylum-seekers from Serbia than from Afghanistan) is the fact that, following a judgment by the Constitutional Court, Berlin, for instance, must provide applicants whose requests are pending, with the same level of welfare benefits as its own unemployed. EUR 346 a month in cash appears to be extremely tempting to many members of the Roma minority.






1.


Are similar trends also emerging in other Member States which provide generous welfare payments for asylum-seekers?










2.


When does the Council expect to reach a decision on the mooted revocation of visa-free travel for a number of Balkan states?




Reply
(30 January 2013)
The Council has not discussed the first question raised by the Honourable Member, as the level of such benefits does not fall within its sphere of competence. As regards the second question, in the third report of 28 August 2012 from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Post-Visa Liberalisation Monitoring for the Western Balkan countries (66), the Commission gave updated information on developments in this area, including in respect of the phenomenon of abuse of visa liberalisation, and identified certain actions it continued to deem necessary in this context. In the margins of the Council meeting of 25-26 October 2012, the Mixed Committee discussed the Commission report and underlined the importance of taking forward measures to remedy the situation. Among other things, dialogue with the countries concerned was seen to be of major importance.
At the EU-Western Balkans Ministerial Forum on Justice and Home Affairs on 5-6 November 2012 in Tirana, Ministers of the western Balkans adopted a joint declaration on visa-free travel in which they resolved to implement the further reforms that are necessary to appropriately and effectively address this phenomenon and to take immediate action in a number of areas in close contact with the Commission (67).
The Council and the European Parliament are currently discussing the Commission proposal for amending Regulation (EC) No 539/2001 (68). The draft Regulation includes a clause allowing for a temporary suspension in exceptional circumstances of the visa waiver granted to citizens of third countries listed in Annex II to Regulation No 539/2001. The draft Regulation also contains other elements, including in particular a provision still under negotiation for the reinforcement of the visa reciprocity mechanism. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009990/12
an die Kommission
Franz Obermayr (NI)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Notfallklausel für eine Wiedereinführung der Visapflicht für den Westbalkan
Die EU hat in den vergangenen Jahren auf den Visazwang für Länder des westlichen Balkans (Bosnien und Herzegowina, Albanien, Mazedonien, Montenegro und Serbien) verzichtet. Seit Ende 2009 brauchen etwa Mazedonier kein Visum mehr. Sechs Staaten — darunter Deutschland und Frankreich — haben nun bei der letzten Ratstagung der Innenminister vom 25.10.2012 gefordert, eine Notfallklausel einzuführen, welche eine Visapflicht wieder ermöglichen soll. Grund dafür sind steigende Asylwerberzahlen und vermehrter Asylmissbrauch: Die meisten Anträge stammen eindeutig von Wirtschaftsflüchtlingen — zumeist Roma — und nicht von politisch Verfolgten.






1.


Wie steht die Kommission zur Wiedereinführung der Visapflicht bzw. zur Implementierung einer Notfallklausel?










2.


Wie könnte Asylmissbrauch bereits in den Ländern des Westbalkans verhindert werden, sprich ist eine Überprüfung noch vor der Ausreise angedacht?










3.


Gibt es Möglichkeiten, Frontex besser in die Problematik einzubinden?










4.


Wie kann es rechtlich und politisch möglich sein, dass Bürger aus einem potenziellen Beitrittskandidatenland Asylanträge stellen?




Antwort von Frau Malmström im Namen der Kommission
(19. Dezember 2012)
Die Kommission ist sich dessen bewusst, dass die Asylsysteme mehrerer EU-Mitgliedstaaten in den vergangenen Monaten aufgrund einer neuen Flut von Asylanträgen einer hohen Belastung ausgesetzt waren. In ihrem am 28. August 2012 angenommenen dritten Bericht über die Überwachung für die Zeit nach der Visaliberalisierung stellte die Kommission mögliche Abhilfemaßnahmen für dieses Phänomen heraus und forderte die von der Visumpflicht befreiten Staaten des westlichen Balkans auf, dringend Maßnahmen in fünf Bereichen durchzuführen: 







Verstärkung der operativen Zusammenarbeit mit den Behörden der Mitgliedstaaten durch engeren Informationsaustausch;











Einleitung wirksamer Untersuchungen gegen Schleuser;











Verschärfung der Grenzkontrollen unter Wahrung der Grundrechte der Bürger;











Organisation von Informationskampagnen, um Bürger über ihre Rechte und Pflichten im Rahmen der Visumbefreiung aufzuklären; 











Erhöhung des Beistands für Minderheiten.




Diese Maßnahmen sind weiterhin notwendig, um die Zahl der unbegründeten Asylanträge in den Mitgliedstaaten zu verringern.
Auf der Tagung des Rates „Justiz und Inneres“ vom 25. Oktober wurde mehrfach der Ruf nach der zügigen Annahme einer Notfallklausel laut. Derzeit laufen die Verhandlungen zwischen den Mitgesetzgebern zur Annahme dieser Änderung. Die Kommission hofft, dass sie so bald wie möglich in Kraft tritt, spätestens jedoch zum Ende dieses Jahres.
Die Kommission brachte das Thema unbegründete Asylanträge auch auf der Tagung des Forums der Minister der EU und der westlichen Balkanländer vom 5.-6. November in Tirana zur Sprache, wo von den Ministern eine gemeinsame Erklärung über visumfreies Reisen angenommen wurde. Anschließend berief sie eine Sitzung mit führenden Beamten der von der Visumpflicht befreiten Staaten des westlichen Balkans ein, um die auf der Tagung eingegangenen politischen Verpflichtungen in konkrete Maßnahmen umzusetzen. Auf der Sitzung wurde die Aktualisierung des Überwachungsmechanismus für die Zeit nach der Visaliberalisierung vereinbart, unter enger Einbindung von Frontex.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009990/12
to the Commission
Franz Obermayr (NI)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Safeguard clause for the reintroduction of the visa requirement for the western Balkans
In recent years the EU has lifted the visa requirement for Western Balkan countries (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, Macedonia, Montenegro and Serbia). Since the end of 2009 Macedonians, for example, have no longer required visas. At the last meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Council, on 25.10.2012, six states — including Germany and France — called for the introduction of a safeguard clause which would make it possible to re-impose a visa requirement. The reason for this is the rising number of asylum-seekers and increased abuse of the asylum system. Many of the applicants are clearly economic refugees — mostly Roma — rather than victims of political persecution. 






1.


What is the Commission’s position on the reintroduction of a visa requirement or the implementation of a safeguard clause?










2.


How could abuse of asylum be prevented in the Western Balkan countries; i.e. are checks prior to leaving the country being considered?










3.


Are there any ways in which Frontex could be more effectively involved in the problem?










4.


How is it legally and politically possible for citizens of potential candidate countries to be making asylum applications?




Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
The Commission is fully aware that the asylum systems of several EU Member States have faced pressure in recent months as a result of a new surge in asylum applications. Its third post-visa liberalisation monitoring report, adopted on 28 August 2012, highlighted potential remedies for this phenomenon and called on the western Balkans visa-free states to urgently implement measures in five areas: 







Enhance operational cooperation with Member State authorities, facilitated by closer information sharing;











Launch effective investigations of the facilitators of irregular migration;











In line with citizens’ fundamental rights, strengthen border controls;











Organise information campaigns to inform citizens of their rights and obligations under the visa-free regime; 











Increase assistance to minority populations.




These measures remain necessary to reduce the number of unfounded asylum applications in the Member States.
At the JHA Council on 25 October, several delegations called for the speedy adoption of the suspension clause to the Visa regulation. Negotiations between the co-legislators are under way to adopt this amendment. The Commission hopes that it will enter into force as soon as possible, and no later than the end of this year.
The Commission also raised the issue of unfounded asylum applications at the EU-Western Balkans Ministerial Forum in Tirana on 5-6 November, where Ministers adopted a Joint Declaration on visa-free travel. It subsequently convened a meeting with the senior officials of the visa-free Western Balkans states to translate the summit’s political commitments into operational action. This meeting agreed to upgrade the visa liberalisation monitoring mechanism, with the close involvement of Frontex.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-009991/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Ραγδαία αύξηση των ανασφάλιστων ανέργων στην Ελλάδα. Επιτακτική ανάγκη η διασφάλιση της ιατροφαρμακευτικής τους κάλυψης
Η πρωτοφανής αύξηση της ανεργίας, σε συνδυασμό με την παρατεταμένη δυστοκία της ελληνικής αγοράς εργασίας για τη δημιουργία νέων θέσεων εργασίας, έχει ως αποτέλεσμα την τεράστια όξυνση του φαινομένου της μακροχρόνιας ανεργίας. Ένα μεγάλο μέρος των μακροχρόνια ανέργων παραμένουν εκτός απασχόλησης για χρονικό διάστημα που δεν τους επιτρέπει πλέον την ανανέωση του σχετικού βιβλιαρίου υγείας με συνέπεια την αδυναμία πρόσβασης τόσο αυτών, όσο και των προστατευόμενων μελών τους στις στοιχειώδεις υπηρεσίες ιατροφαρμακευτικής κάλυψης και φροντίδας. Ταυτόχρονα ένας σημαντικός αριθμός ελεύθερων επαγγελματιών, που έχουν σταματήσει την επαγγελματική τους δραστηριότητα, αδυνατούν να εκδώσουν αντίστοιχο βιβλιάριο οικονομικής αδυναμίας (απορίας) λόγω ανεξόφλητων οφειλών τους στον προηγούμενο ασφαλιστικό τους οργανισμό. Η παραπάνω κατάσταση εγκυμονεί σοβαρότατους κινδύνους ακόμη και για την ίδια τη ζωή των ανασφάλιστων ανέργων, διαμορφώνοντας συνθήκες ενός ιδιότυπου κοινωνικού αποκλεισμού για εκατοντάδες χιλιάδες Έλληνες πολίτες. Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο και με δεδομένο, αφενός, το διακηρυγμένο στόχο της ΕΕ για ενίσχυση της κοινωνικής προστασίας από τη φτώχεια και τον κοινωνικό αποκλεισμό και, αφετέρου, το αναφαίρετο και καθολικό δικαίωμα πρόσβασης των πολιτών στα συστήματα δημόσιας υγείας, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Πώς κρίνει τη συγκεκριμένη κατάσταση; Σκοπεύει να προβεί σε σχετικές συστάσεις προς την Ελλάδα προκειμένου να διασφαλίσει τη δωρεάν ιατροφαρμακευτική κάλυψη των ανασφαλίστων ανέργων;











Διαθέτει στατιστικά στοιχεία για το ποσοστό των ανασφαλίστων ανέργων στα κράτη μέλη;











Επεξεργάζεται ή πρόκειται να επεξεργαστεί ένα ενιαίο ευρωπαϊκό σχέδιο για την αντιμετώπιση του εν λόγω φαινομένου;











Προτίθεται να προωθήσει την ανταλλαγή βέλτιστων πρακτικών μεταξύ των κρατών μελών, ώστε να αναδειχθούν οι πιο ενδεδειγμένοι τρόποι για την προστασία της συγκεκριμένης ιδιαίτερα ευάλωτης ομάδας που συνεχώς αυξάνει σε αριθμό;











Υπάρχει δυνατότητα χρηματοδότησης από Ευρωπαϊκά Διαρθρωτικά Ταμεία σχετικών δράσεων για την αναβάθμιση του πλαισίου ιατροφαρμακευτικής περίθαλψης των ανασφάλιστων ανέργων;




Απάντηση του κ. Andor εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(23 Ιανουαρίου 2013)






1.


Η Επιτροπή γνωρίζει τη δύσκολη αυτή συγκυρία που επηρεάζει τους ανέργους στην Ελλάδα και συμμερίζεται την ανησυχία του κ. βουλευτή.










2.


Η Επιτροπή δεν διαθέτει τις πλήρεις πληροφορίες που έχουν ζητηθεί. Τα στοιχεία που προκύπτουν από την κοινή συνεργασία με τα κράτη μέλη καταδεικνύουν ότι, σχεδόν σε όλα τα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ (ΚΜ), η πρόσβαση στις υπηρεσίες υγειονομικής περίθαλψης δεν καθορίζεται από το καθεστώς απασχόλησης και ότι, πράγματι, η πληθυσμιακή κάλυψη είναι 100%. Οι EU-SILC (69) παρέχουν δεδομένα για τις ανάγκες της υγειονομικής περίθαλψης, οι οποίες δεν έχουν καλυφθεί για διάφορους λόγους, συμπεριλαμβανομένων και των οικονομικών (70) (παράρτημα) αλλά δεν παρέχουν ακριβώς τα στοιχεία που αφορούν τον αριθμό των ανασφάλιστων ανέργων.











3. και 4.


Σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 168 παράγραφος 7 της Συνθήκης, η οργάνωση των υπηρεσιών υγείας και της ιατρικής περίθαλψης είναι αποκλειστική ευθύνη των κρατών μελών. Δεδομένου ότι ο σχεδιασμός των συστημάτων κοινωνικής προστασίας είναι ευθύνη των κρατών μελών, η Επιτροπή δεν προβλέπει ένα ενιαίο σχέδιο προκειμένου να αντιμετωπίσει τα προβλήματα της πρόσβασης στις υπηρεσίες ιατροφαρμακευτικής περίθαλψης στα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ. Παρόλα αυτά, η Επιτροπή συνεργάζεται μαζί τους, ιδιαίτερα μέσω της ΕΣΠ










3. και 4.


Σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 168 παράγραφος 7 της Συνθήκης, η οργάνωση των υπηρεσιών υγείας και της ιατρικής περίθαλψης είναι αποκλειστική ευθύνη των κρατών μελών. Δεδομένου ότι ο σχεδιασμός των συστημάτων κοινωνικής προστασίας είναι ευθύνη των κρατών μελών, η Επιτροπή δεν προβλέπει ένα ενιαίο σχέδιο προκειμένου να αντιμετωπίσει τα προβλήματα της πρόσβασης στις υπηρεσίες ιατροφαρμακευτικής περίθαλψης στα κράτη μέλη της ΕΕ. Παρόλα αυτά, η Επιτροπή συνεργάζεται μαζί τους, ιδιαίτερα μέσω της ΕΣΠ




 (71), με σκοπό να ενισχύσει την προσπάθεια επίτευξης των τριών στόχων, οι οποίοι αφορούν την πρόσβαση για όλους, το υψηλό επίπεδο και τη βιωσιμότητα της υγειονομικής περίθαλψης, για παράδειγμα μέσω της ανταλλαγής εμπειριών. Επιπλέον, το ΜΣ (72) που εγκρίθηκε από κοινού με τις ελληνικές αρχές βάσει του ΠΟΠ (73) για την Ελλάδα, ορίζει με σαφήνεια ότι οι μεταρρυθμίσεις στον τομέα της υγείας θα πρέπει να διασφαλίζουν την καθολική πρόσβαση στην περίθαλψη.





5.


Τα ευρωπαϊκά διαρθρωτικά ταμεία δεν μπορούν να χρησιμοποιηθούν για την άμεση χρηματοδότηση της παροχής υπηρεσιών ιατροφαρμακευτικής περίθαλψης στους ανασφαλίστους. Το ΕΚΤ ιδιαίτερα, μπορεί να περιορίσει έμμεσα και ως ένα βαθμό το πρόβλημα στην Ελλάδα, καθώς διευκολύνει την επιστροφή στην απασχόληση και συνεπώς, επιτρέπει στους ανασφάλιστους ανέργους να αποκτήσουν ξανά πρόσβαση στην ασφάλιση ασθενείας. Το ΕΤΠΑ (74) μπορεί να χρησιμοποιηθεί για να βελτιωθούν οι υποδομές της υγειονομικής περίθαλψης ή για να αναπτυχθούν συστήματα ηλεκτρονικής υγείας.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-009991/12
to the Commission
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Spiralling increase in number of unemployed persons in Greece without insurance — urgent need to provide cover for medical care
The unprecedented rise in unemployment, combined with the prolonged failure of the Greek job market to create new jobs, has caused a massive increase in long-term unemployment. Many of the long-term unemployed have been out of work for so long that they are now unable to renew their health insurance card and neither they nor their family dependents are able to access basic medical cover and care. There are also a large number of self-employed persons who have ceased trading and are unable to obtain an ‘economic hardship card’ due to their unpaid debts to their old insurance funds. This situation is pregnant with the gravest risks, could even be fatal for unemployed persons without insurance, and is subjecting hundreds of thousands of Greek citizens to a particular form of social exclusion. Given this situation and also, on the one hand, the stated objective of the EU to strengthen social protection against poverty and social exclusion and, on the other hand, the inalienable and universal right of every citizen to access public health services, will the Commission answer the following:







What are its views on this particular situation? Does it intend to make recommendations to the Greek Government so as to ensure that unemployed persons without insurance can obtain free medical care?











Does it have statistics on the percentage of unemployed persons without insurance in the Member States?











Is it preparing or does it intend to prepare a single European plan to address this problem?











Does it intend to promote an exchange of best practices between the Member States, in order to highlight the best ways of protecting this specific, particularly vulnerable group, which is growing in size by the day?











Could action to improve medical care for unemployed persons without insurance be financed from the European structural funds?




Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(23 January 2013)






1.


The Commission is aware of the difficult situation affecting unemployed persons in Greece and shares the Honourable Member’s concern. 











2.


The Commission does not have the full information requested. Information from joint work with Member States indicates that, in almost all EU Member States (MS), access to healthcare services is not determined by employment status and, indeed, population coverage is 100%.The EU-SILC 










2.


The Commission does not have the full information requested. Information from joint work with Member States indicates that, in almost all EU Member States (MS), access to healthcare services is not determined by employment status and, indeed, population coverage is 100%.The EU-SILC 




 (75) do provide data of healthcare needs not met for various reasons, including financial ones (76) (annex) but do not specifically provide data on the number of people without insurance. 3 and 4. In accordance with Article 168(7) of the Treaty; MS are responsible for the organisation of their health services and medical care. As the design of social protection systems is the responsibility of the MS, the Commission is not planning a single plan to address issues of access to medical services in EU MS. Nevertheless, the Commission cooperates with them, in particular through the SPC  (77), with a view to helping them achieve the three goals of access for all, high quality and sustainability of healthcare, for instance through exchanges of experience. In addition, the MoU (78) agreed with Greek Authorities under the EAP (79) for Greece clearly states that health sector reform should ensure universal access to care.







5.


The European Structural Funds cannot be used to finance directly the purchasing of healthcare services for uninsured people. Indirectly, the ESF, in particular, may alleviate the problem to some extent in Greece in so far as it facilitates a return to employment and thus allows people to regain access to health insurance cover. The ERDF










5.


The European Structural Funds cannot be used to finance directly the purchasing of healthcare services for uninsured people. Indirectly, the ESF, in particular, may alleviate the problem to some extent in Greece in so far as it facilitates a return to employment and thus allows people to regain access to health insurance cover. The ERDF




 (80) can be used to improve healthcare infrastructure or develop e-health systems. (Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009992/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(5 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — In Cecenia proposta di insegnamento dell'Islam fin dall'asilo
Secondo fonti di stampa, il Primo Ministro ceceno Ramzan Kadyrovsta sta considerando di introdurre gradualmente l'insegnamento dei principi fondamentali dell'Islam nelle scuole materne della regione, a partire dalla capitale Grozny. Gli insegnanti saranno scelti tra laureati dell'Università islamica. Tutto questo con il tacito consenso di Mosca.
L'alto Rappresentante dell'UE come giudica sia l'introduzione dell'educazione islamica fin dall'asilo e, soprattutto, il comportamento di Mosca?
Risposta dell'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(17 gennaio 2013)
L’Unione europea è al corrente ed è preoccupata per la situazione nella regione russa del Caucaso settentrionale. I suoi timori sono stati espressi chiaramente in varie occasioni e a tutti i livelli del dialogo politico con la Federazione russa.
Gli esempi di limitazione dei diritti umani fondamentali nella regione sono preoccupanti e sempre più numerosi, come testimoniano le politiche del governo ceceno, di cui l’UE è venuta a conoscenza, che riconoscono i matrimoni precoci, mostrano clemenza per i delitti d’onore, impongono il velo in pubblico o l’insegnamento obbligatorio dell’Islam nelle scuole materne e nell’insegnamento secondario. Queste misure violano diritti garantiti sia dalla costituzione della Federazione russa che dalla costituzione della Repubblica cecena. L'UE continuerà a seguire gli sviluppi della situazione nel Caucaso settentrionale e a sollevare il problema con le autorità russe, come ha fatto il 7 dicembre scorso durante l'ultima riunione delle consultazioni UE-Russia sui diritti umani.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009992/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Proposal in Chechnya to introduce Islamic religious education from nursery school onwards
According to press reports, the Chechen Prime Minister Ramzan Kadyrovsta is considering measures which would involve the gradual introduction in nursery schools in the region, starting in the capital, Grozny, of teaching of the fundamental principles of Islam. The teachers would be chosen from among graduates of the Islamic university. All these measures have Moscow’s tacit approval.
What view does the Vice-President/High Representative take of the proposal to introduce Islamic religious education from nursery school onwards and, above all, of Moscow’s attitude?
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission 
(17 January 2013)
The EU is aware and concerned about the situation in the North Caucasus region of the Russian Federation. These concerns have been made explicit to the Russian Federation on a number of occassions, and at all levels of our political dialogue.
Increasing instances to restrict fundamental human rights in the region are worrying.. The Chechen government policies of acknowledging the marriage of underage children, showing leniency in cases of honour killings, requiring women to wear headscarves in public, or compulsory teaching Islam in nursery and secondary schools, which have been reported to the EU, are examples of such restrictions. These measures infringe rights guaranteed both by the Constitution of the Russian Federation and the Constitution of the Chechen Republic. The EU will continue following these developments in the Northern Caucasus and raising its concern with this situation with the Russian Authorities, as it did during the last meeting of the EU-Russia human rights consultations, on December 7 this year.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009993/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(5 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: La Commissione vigili su Paestum
In Italia, uno dei più grandi tesori della cultura antica, il sito di Paestum, versa ormai in condizioni spaventose di abbandono. Inoltre alcune strutture millenarie sono state vittime di scempi architettonici, tra cui la costruzione di una strada che attraversa l'antica arena.
Tutto ciò mentre, negli ultimi anni, sono stati spesi circa 22 milioni di euro per la valorizzazione del sito tramite il progetto PIT (Progetto integrato territoriale). Gran parte di questi fondi sono stati utilizzati per opere già abbandonate o quasi mai utilizzate.






1.


La Commissione ha contribuito finanziariamente a parte dei progetti sul sito di Paestum?










2.


Intende aprire un'inchiesta per verificare che non siano stati commesse irregolarità o frodi?










3.


Non ritiene opportuno redigere una catalogazione dei siti archeologici e di interesse culturale europeo al fine di monitorarne lo stato di conservazione?




Risposta di Johannes Hahn a nome della Commissione
(8 gennaio 2013)






1.


Il Fondo europeo di sviluppo regionale (FESR) ha erogato un sostegno al sito archeologico di Paestum per un importo di 16 milioni di euro su uno stanziamento complessivo di 30 milioni di euro a favore del 




«Progetto integrato Velia Paestum» nel quadro del programma regionale Campania 2000-2006. I finanziamenti erano destinati ad arrestare e invertire il degrado degli edifici (in particolare, insulae 1) e delle strutture decorative e architettoniche, limitare il rischio idrogeologico e, in generale, migliorare lo stato del sito e del suo museo.






2.


Non vi sono elementi che facciano pensare a un uso improprio dei finanziamenti o a frodi legate al progetto che è stottoposto ai normali controlli e audit previsti dai regolamenti dell'UE nel quadro delle procedure di chiusura del programma. Se emergessero prove in tal senso durante tali procedure, la Commissione prenderà tutte le misure necessarie per tutelare gli interessi finanziari dell'UE.










3.


Nel quadro della politica di coesione si applica il principio di gestione condivisa e gli Stati membri decisono le misure per monitorare e tutelare il loro patrimonio culturale. Più in generale, l'Unione europea non ha una competenza specifica allorché si tratta della tutela del patrimonio culturale. Conformemente all'articolo 167 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea, l'azione dell'UE si limita a incoraggiare la cooperazione tra gli Stati membri e, se necessario, ad appoggiare e ad integrare l'azione di questi ultimi, tra l'altro, ai fini della conservazione e salvaguardia del patrimonio culturale di importanza europea.




La gestione, la manutenzione, la protezione e la conservazione dei siti del patrimonio culturala rientrano pertanto per l'essenziale nelle responsabilità nazionali.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009993/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Commission scrutiny over Paestum
One of the greatest treasures of the ancient world, Paestum in Italy, is now in a dreadful state of neglect. Some structures that are thousands of years old have been ruined by architectural blunders, including the construction of a road through the ancient arena.
This is despite the disbursement of around EUR 22 million in recent years to develop the site through the PIT (Progetto integrato territoriale) regional plan. A sizeable proportion of these funds have been spent on facilities that have either been abandoned already or are hardly ever used.






1.


Did the Commission contribute funds to any of the projects at the Paestum site?










2.


Will it open an inquiry to check that no misappropriations or fraud occurred?










3.


Would be a good idea for archaeological and cultural sites in Europe to be catalogued to monitor their state of conservation?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)






1.


The European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) has provided support to the Paestum archeological site for an amount of EUR 16 Million out of a total allocation of EUR 30 million in favour of the 




‘Velia Paestum Integrated project’ within the framework of the 2000-2006 Campania regional programme. The funds were designed to stop and reverse the deterioration of the buildings (especially insulae 1) and the decorative and architectural fittings, to limit the hydrogeological risk and, in general, to improve the state of the site and its museum. 






2.


There are no elements suggesting misappropriations of funds or fraud relating to the project which is subject to the normal checks and audits provided for by EU regulations within the framework of the closure procedures of the programme. Should any evidence in that respect emerge during the procedures, the Commission will take all necessary measures to protect the EU financial interests. 










3.


In the framework of cohesion policy, the shared management principle applies and Member States decide the measures to monitor and preserve their cultural heritage. More generally, the European Union does not have a specific competence when it comes to protecting heritage. According to Article 167 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, action by the EU is limited to encouraging cooperation between Member States and, if necessary, supporting and implementing their action, 




inter alia
, with a view to the conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance.
The management, upkeep, protection and conservation of cultural heritage sites are therefore primarily a national responsibility. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-009994/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(5 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: La Commissione vigili sulle speculazioni ai danni dei titoli di Stato UE
Alla fine dello scorso anno, la Banca nazionale svizzera ha annunciato un «peg», ovvero un cambio fisso euro contro franco svizzero, a 1.2 e ha quindi cominciato una massiccia campagna di acquisti di euro al fine di frenare la supervalutazione della propria valuta. Secondo i report di diverse banche d'affari, questi euro sono stati per lo più investiti in Bund tedeschi e, contemporaneamente, lo spread dei BTP italiani nei confronti dei Bund tedeschi a 10 anni ha raggiunto livelli altissimi, soprattutto per la riduzione dei rendimenti dei Bund più che per l'incremento di quelli italiani. Questa manovra ha condotto l'Italia quasi sull'orlo del default.






1.


La Commissione non ritiene opportuno vigilare sugli interventi massicci delle banche centrali dei paesi non UE sui titoli di Stato europei affinché non si verifichino nuovamente distorsioni di mercato a discapito della solidità finanziaria degli Stati membri?










2.


Non ritiene opportuno indire una tavola rotonda con le banche centrali di alcuni grandi paesi extraeuropei per trovare soluzioni compatibili con l'eurosistema, pur mantenendo il principio della libertà di mercato?




Risposta di Olli Rehn a nome della Commissione
(11 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione europea non si esprime sulla politica monetaria della Banca nazionale svizzera né di altre banche centrali non appartenenti all'Unione. In generale, i rendimenti dei titoli sovrani degli Stati membri dell'UE dipendono sostanzialmente dai fondamentali economici e dall'attuazione di politiche e riforme strutturali interne. La Commissione conviene tuttavia che i mercati obbligazionari sono attualmente distorti e considera la frammentarietà dei mercati finanziari dell'UE un'importante sfida da affrontare in futuro. Collettivamente abbiamo compiuto progressi per risolvere questi problemi ed è fondamentale che anche l'azione politica degli Stati membri sia rivolta a tal fine.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009994/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Will the Commission monitor speculation damaging to EU government bonds?
In late 2011 the Swiss National Bank announced that it was introducing a peg, that is to say a fixed exchange rate for the euro against the Swiss franc of 1.2, and immediately began buying massive quantities of euros in order to curb the overvaluation of its own currency. According to reports from various commercial banks, these euros were primarily invested in German bunds, with the result that the spread between Italian treasury bonds and 10-year German bonds reached extremely high levels, more as a result of the fall in yields on the bunds than of an increase in the yields on the Italian bonds. This policy drove Italy to the brink of default.






1.


Does the Commission not see a need to monitor massive purchases of European government bonds by the central banks of non-EU countries in order to prevent further market distortions which undermine the financial stability of the Member States?










2.


Does it not see a need to arrange talks with the central banks of a number of major non-European countries in an effort to find solutions to this problem which are compatible with the single currency system and consistent with the principle of the free market?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)
The European Commission does not comment on the monetary policy of the Swiss National Bank or other non-EU central banks. More generally, EU Member States' sovereign yields ultimately depend on economic fundamentals and the implementation of domestic policies and structural reforms. The Commission nevertheless agrees that bond markets are currently distorted and regards the fragmentation of EU financial markets as a major challenge ahead. Progress has been made collectively to tackle these problems, and it is of outmost importance that policy actions in Member States are also geared towards this end. 
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-009995/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Línea Alta Tensión Foradada-La Pobla de Segur
En las últimas semanas, la compañía Red Eléctrica Española ha emprendido un aumento de la capacidad en la línea de alta tensión que une Foradada y La Pobla de Segur. Este aumento, que no ha sido propiamente comunicado como informan los vecinos de los pueblos afectados (81), significará un aumento en el tamaño de algunas torres de la línea (82), pero parece que no se efectuará ningún análisis sobre las consecuencias que este aumento de la capacidad de la dicha línea de alta tensión puede tener para la salud humana debido a la cercanía de la línea con casas habitadas.
El Consejo Europeo emitió el 12 de julio de 1999 una recomendación (1999/519/CE) en que se afirmaba que «las medidas en relación con los campos electromagnéticos deberán proporcionar un elevado nivel de protección a todos los ciudadanos de la Comunidad», así como que «la observancia de las restricciones y niveles de referencia recomendados debería proporcionar un elevado nivel de protección contra los efectos nocivos para la salud que pueden resultar de la exposición a campos electromagnéticos».






1.


¿Tiene conocimiento la Comisión de estos hechos?










2.


¿Considera la Comisión que las actuaciones de Red Eléctrica Española en la línea de alta tensión Foradada-La Pobla de Segur cumplen con los estándares europeos tal y como se ponen de relieve en la Recomendación 1999/519/CE?










3.


¿Conoce la Comisión si el aumento de capacidad de la línea Foradada-Pobla de Segur cumple con la normativa europea en materia de contaminación ambiental?




Respuesta del Sr. Borg en nombre de la Comisión
(11 de enero de 2013)






1.


La Comisión no ha sido informada sobre las recientes acciones de Red Eléctrica Española. El seguimiento de tales acciones en lo relativo a la exposición a campos electromagnéticos es competencia de las autoridades nacionales.











2.


Las disposiciones de los artículos 168 y 169 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea no confieren a la UE competencias para legislar en materia de protección de la población contra los posibles efectos de los campos electromagnéticos, sino que establecen que esa responsabilidad recae principalmente en los Estados miembros. La Recomendación del Consejo relativa a la exposición del público en general a campos electromagnéticos (1999/519/CE)










2.


Las disposiciones de los artículos 168 y 169 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea no confieren a la UE competencias para legislar en materia de protección de la población contra los posibles efectos de los campos electromagnéticos, sino que establecen que esa responsabilidad recae principalmente en los Estados miembros. La Recomendación del Consejo relativa a la exposición del público en general a campos electromagnéticos (1999/519/CE)




 (83) exige a las autoridades nacionales que evalúen los niveles de exposición a campos electromagnéticos y comprueben que estos no sobrepasan las restricciones establecidas en dicha Recomendación (84).






3.


Cabe señalar que, en función de las características del proyecto, podrían ser aplicables las disposiciones de la Directiva 2011/92/UE, de evaluación del impacto ambiental










3.


Cabe señalar que, en función de las características del proyecto, podrían ser aplicables las disposiciones de la Directiva 2011/92/UE, de evaluación del impacto ambiental




 (85). Esta Directiva exige que los Estados miembros evalúen los potenciales efectos medioambientales de los proyectos propuestos y realicen una consulta pública antes de adoptar cualquier decisión. Se requiere siempre una evaluación del impacto ambiental en caso de que se proponga una línea de alta tensión con un nivel mayor de 220 kV y una distancia mayor de 15 km. La Comisión no tiene conocimiento de que el proyecto en cuestión infrinja la Directiva. (English version)
Question for written answer E-009995/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: High-voltage power line between the villages of Foradada and La Pobla de Segur
A few weeks ago, the company Red Eléctrica Española began work to increase the capacity of the high-voltage power line between Foradada and La Pobla de Segur. The increase in capacity — which, according to the residents of the affected villages, was not properly communicated (86) — will mean that the size of some pylons will have to be increased (87). However, it seems that there are no plans to carry out an assessment into the consequences that increasing the capacity of this high-voltage power line might have for human health (owing to how close the power line is to homes).
On 12 July 1999, the European Council produced a recommendation (1999/519/EC) in which it declared that ‘measures with regard to electromagnetic fields should afford all Community citizens a high level of protection’, and that ‘adherence to the recommended restrictions and reference levels should provide a high level of protection as regards the established health effects that may result from exposure to electromagnetic fields’.






1.


Is the Commission aware of the above facts?










2.


Does the Commission believe that the actions of the Red Eléctrica Española with regard to the high-voltage power line between Foradada and La Pobla de Segur comply with the European standards set out in Recommendation 1999/519/EC?










3.


Does the Commission know whether the increase in the capacity of the Foradada — Pobla de Segur power line complies with EU legislation on environmental pollution?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)






1.


The Commission has not been informed of the recent actions of Red Eléctrica Española. Monitoring of such actions as regards exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) falls within the competence of national authorities.











2.


The provisions of Articles 168 and 169 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union do not confer the EU competence to legislate in the area of protection of the general public from the potential effects of EMF and leaves the primary responsibility with the Member States. Council Recommendation (1999/519/EC)










2.


The provisions of Articles 168 and 169 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union do not confer the EU competence to legislate in the area of protection of the general public from the potential effects of EMF and leaves the primary responsibility with the Member States. Council Recommendation (1999/519/EC)




 (88) on the exposure limits for electromagnetic fields asks the national authorities to monitor the levels of EMF exposure and check whether they exceed the limits set in the recommendation (89).






3.


It should be noted that, depending on the characteristics of the project, the provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 2011/92/UE










3.


It should be noted that, depending on the characteristics of the project, the provisions of the Environmental Impact Assessment Directive 2011/92/UE




 (90) might be applicable. This directive requires Member States to assess the potential environmental impacts of proposed projects and consult with the public before any decision is taken. An Environmental Impact Assessment is always required when a power line with a level of tension over 220 kV and a distance over 15 km is proposed. The Commission has no indication that the named project would be in breach of the directive.(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-009996/12
adresată Comisiei
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)
(5 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: Strategia UE pentru regiunea Dunării
În data de 25 octombrie 2012, Comisia a prezentat o declarație în plenul Parlamentului European cu privire la progresele înregistrate în cadrul Strategiei Dunării. În calitate de deputat în Parlamentul European și de cetățean al unui stat dunărean, consider că Strategia pentru regiunea Dunării poate aduce o serie de beneficii deosebit de importante acestei regiuni însă, din nefericire, constat că, în momentul de față, există anumite probleme majore.
Pentru a fructifica pe deplin oportunitățile oferite de Dunăre și pentru a asigura coeziunea socială, economică și teritorială în bazinul dunărean, trebuie în primul rând să beneficiem de bugete substanțiale. Numai astfel această zonă vitală pentru Europa va deveni un motor important al economiei noastre și va contribui în mod substanțial la creșterea bunăstării europene, fiind un factor de stabilitate, dezvoltare și prosperitate.
Având în vedere că resursele comunitare sunt limitate și, în plus, absorbția fondurilor continuă să fie foarte scăzută în această regiune, aș dori să întreb Comisia ce măsuri va lua în parteneriat cu statele membre, atât pentru îmbunătățirea gradului de absorbție, cât și pentru atragerea de capital din surse private.
Răspuns dat de dl Hahn în numele Comisiei
(8 ianuarie 2013)
După 18 luni de implementare, strategia UE pentru regiunea Dunării a produs deja rezultate, atât în direcția ajutării țărilor să utilizeze fondurile UE în mod eficient, cât și prin îmbunătățirea ratei de absorbție. 
De asemenea, ea a contribuit la atragerea capitalului privat. De exemplu, cooperarea indusă de strategie a accelerat implementarea unui proiect de cercetare finanțat de UE de îmbunătățire a condițiilor de navigație pe sectorul comun Romania-Bulgaria al Dunării. Un alt exemplu este „Dialogul pentru finanțare în regiunea Dunării”, care pune în comun fonduri publice și private pentru sprijinirea investițiilor IMM-urilor în regiune. La prima sa întâlnire din martie 2012, această platformă a facilitat contactul dintre IMM-uri și instituții financiare, cu peste 200 de părți interesate care au discutat idei concrete de proiecte. Al doilea dialog va avea loc la Belgrad pe 24-25 ianuarie 2013. 
Pentru perioada 2014-2020, Comisia, cele opt state membre ale UE și cele șase țări din afara UE se vor asigura că obiectivele strategiei sunt pe deplin luate în considerare în programarea fondurilor UE pentru regiune. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-009996/12
to the Commission
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: EU strategy for the Danube region
On 25 October 2012, the Commission presented a statement at the plenary session of the European Parliament on the progress made under the Danube Strategy. As a Member of the European Parliament and a national of a country in the Danube region, I believe that the Danube Strategy can offer that region a range of significant benefits but note that, at this juncture, there are unfortunately some major problems.
Substantial funding is needed in order to fully harness the possibilities offered by the Danube Strategy and to ensure social, economic and territorial cohesion in the Danube basin. Only that will enable this area, which is of crucial importance to Europe, to become a major driver for our economy and to contribute meaningfully to improving European welfare, by contributing to stability, development and prosperity.
Since Community resources are limited and, moreover, the funding absorption rate remains very low in this region, can the Commission state what measures it will take, in partnership with the Member States, not only to improve that absorption rate, but also to attract private capital to the region?
Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
After 18 months of implementation, the EU Strategy for the Danube Region has already produced results, both in helping the countries to use EU funds efficiently and through improving absorption rates. 
It has also assisted in attracting private capital. For example, the cooperation induced by the strategy has accelerated the implementation of an EU-funded project improving navigation conditions on the shared Romania-Bulgarian sector of the Danube. Another example is the ‘Danube Financing Dialogue’, matching private and public funds to support SME investments in the Region. At its first meeting in March 2012, this platform facilitated SME-financial institutions contact, with over 200 stakeholders discussing concrete project ideas. The second Dialogue will be held in Belgrade on 24-25 January 2013. 
For the 2014-2020 period, the Commission, the eight EU Member States and the six non-EU countries will ensure that the objectives of the strategy are fully taken into account in the programming of EU funds for the Region. 
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-009997/12
adresată Comisiei
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)
(5 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: IMM-uri: competitivitate și oportunități de afaceri
IMM-urile reprezintă coloana vertebrală a economiei, fiind un factor determinant pentru dezvoltarea cercetării și a inovării, promovarea ocupării forței de muncă și contribuția la competitivitatea UE la nivel global. Comunicarea Comisiei intitulată „Politica industrială: Creșterea competitivității” [COM(2011)0642 final], precizează că utilizarea la maximum a întregului potențial al întreprinderilor mici și mijlocii necesită acțiuni coerente la nivelul UE.
Din păcate, IMM-urile sunt cele mai afectate de lipsa competitivității, ca urmare a adaptabilității reduse la nevoile pieței, precum și a accesului limitat la capital, tehnologie și infrastructură. Tocmai de aceea trebuie să le acordăm prioritate și principala măsură pe care trebuie să o luăm este facilitarea accesului acestora la o finanțare substanțială.






1.


În acest sens, doresc să întreb Comisia sub ce formă se poate modifica legislația europeană, astfel încât rolul IMM-urilor să crească și acestea să fie considerate parteneri eligibili pentru investițiile finanțate prin fondurile de coeziune?










2.


De asemenea, pentru următoarea perioadă de programare 2014-2020, are în vedere Comisia să recomande statelor membre ca în planurile naționale de dezvoltare să includă axe de programe și fonduri suplimentare destinate IMM-urilor, elemente esențiale pentru dezvoltarea acestora?




Răspuns dat de dl Hahn în numele Comisiei
(19 decembrie 2012)






1.


Întreprinderile mici și mijlocii (IMM-urile) sunt în centrul politicii de coeziune, în perioada 2014-2020, deoarece Comisia a propus cerințe de concentrare tematică ambițioase, asigurându-se astfel că o mare parte a sprijinului acordat de UE este dedicat acestora. În plus, vor fi introduse condiționalități ex-ante legate de punerea în aplicare a pachetului „Small Business Act” în vederea asigurării condițiilor-cadru corespunzătoare. Comisia a propus, de asemenea, ca sprijinul pentru investiții productive generice în întreprinderi să se limiteze la IMM-uri, care își pot îmbunătăți accesul la un astfel de sprijin. 










2.


Alocarea fondurilor depinde în mare măsură de nevoile specifice de dezvoltare ale regiunilor în cauză. Cu toate acestea, având în vedere rolul important al IMM-urilor pentru creștere economică și crearea de locuri de muncă și cerințele de concentrare tematică propuse, Comisia este convinsă că o parte importantă a finanțării va fi dedicată dezvoltării IMM-urilor pe întreg teritoriul UE.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-009997/12
to the Commission
Petru Constantin Luhan (PPE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: SMEs: competitiveness and business opportunities
SMEs are the backbone of the economy and play a decisive role in developing research and innovation, promoting employment and helping to make the EU competitive on the global stage. The Commission communication entitled ‘Industrial Policy: Reinforcing competitiveness’ (COM(2011)0642 final) states that ‘to fully unleash the potential of small and medium-sized enterprises requires coherent actions across the EU’. 
Unfortunately, its is SMEs that are suffering most from a lack of competitiveness owing to their lesser ability to adapt to the needs of the market and their limited access to capital, technology and infrastructure. That is precisely why we must award them priority, and why the main thing we must do is to facilitate their access to meaningful financing.






1.


Can the Commission state, in this respect, how the relevant EU legislation can be amended to boost the role of SMEs and ensure they qualify as eligible partners for investment financed through cohesion funding?










2.


At the same time, does the Commission intend, for the next programming period (2014-2020), to recommend that Member States include, in their national development plans, programming axes and additional financing for SMEs, which are factors key to their development?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)






1.


Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) are at the heart of cohesion policy in 2014-2020, as the Commission has proposed ambitious thematic concentration requirements ensuring that a large part of EU support is dedicated to them. Moreover, 




ex-ante
 conditionalities related to the implementation of the Small Business Act will be introduced in order to ensure suitable framework conditions. The Commission has also proposed that support to generic productive investment in enterprises be limited to SMEs, which can improve their access to such support. 






2.


The allocation of funding depends largely on the particular development needs of the regions concerned. However, given the important role of SMEs for growth and job creation and the thematic concentration requirements proposed, the Commission is confident that a substantial share of funding will be dedicated to SME development across the EU.




(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009998/12
an die Kommission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Personal der Generaldirektion Wirtschaft und Finanzen der Kommission






1.


War die Fluktuation bei den Mitarbeitern in der Generaldirektion Wirtschaft und Finanzen (GD ECFIN) im Zeitraum von 2009 bis 2012 höher als im Zeitraum von 2005 bis 2008?










2.


Wie viele Mitarbeiter der Länderreferate haben die GD ECFIN von 2005 bis 2012 insgesamt und jeweils in jedem Jahr verlassen?










3.


Ist die Kommission der Ansicht, dass das Gehaltsniveau in der GD ECFIN der Vergütung sowie der entsprechenden Arbeitsbelastung und Verantwortung in vergleichbaren Einrichtungen entspricht?










4.


Wie hoch liegen der Frauen‐ und der Männeranteil bei den Mitarbeitern der GD ECFIN auf Verwaltungsebene oder höherer Ebene insgesamt und in den jeweiligen Länderreferaten?










5.


Kann die Kommission Angaben darüber machen, welche Position die GD ECFIN im Vergleich zu allen Generaldirektionen bei den Erhebungen zur Arbeitszufriedenheit der Mitarbeiter aus den Jahren 2000, 2004, 2008 und 2012 einnahm?










6.


Wie hoch war der Anteil der Bediensteten auf Zeit in der GD ECFIN in den jeweiligen Zeiträumen von 2009 bis 2012 sowie von 2005 bis 2008?










7.


Wie viele Arbeitstage verwenden die Mitarbeiter der GD ECFIN für die Erstellung von Arbeitsdokumenten und länderspezifischen Empfehlungen, die Teil des Europäischen Semesters sind (durchschnittliche Zahl der Tage von der Veröffentlichung des nationalen Reformprogramms und des Stabilitäts‐ und Konvergenzprogramms für das jeweilige Land bis zur endgültigen Frist für die Erstellung des entsprechenden Arbeitsdokuments durch die Mitarbeiter der GD ECFIN)?










8.


In diesem Jahr hat die GD ECFIN keinen Länderfokusbericht erstellt, von 2004 bis 2005 gab es hingegen 20 solcher Berichte. Hat die GD ECFIN die Ausarbeitung länderspezifischer Analysen abgesehen von den verwaltungs‐ und verfahrenstechnisch notwendigen Dokumenten, die als Teil des Europäischen Semesters veröffentlicht werden, eingestellt?




Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission
(5. Februar 2013)
1.+2. Die Personalfluktuation in der Kommission fiel im Zeitraum 2009-2012 insgesamt stärker aus als im Zeitraum 2005-2008. Die erhöhte Mobilität in der GD ECFIN spiegelt auch die interne Umstrukturierung wider, die in Anbetracht der Krise und der Notwendigkeit einer verstärkten Überwachung erforderlich wurde.






3.


Die Kommission verweist darauf, dass die Einstellung hoch spezialisierter Experten aus einigen Mitgliedstaaten immer schwieriger wird.










4.


Knapp über 30 % der ECFIN-AD-Beamten sind Frauen und dieser Anteil nimmt stetig zu. Auch bemüht sich die GD ECFIN weiterhin, verstärkt Frauen auf AD-Ebene einzustellen und zu gewährleisten, dass sie in Positionen gut repräsentiert sind, bei denen sie Erfahrungen sammeln können, die für künftige Middle-Management-Funktionen von Bedeutung sind.











5.


Die letzte Personalumfrage










5.


Die letzte Personalumfrage




 (91) bei der Kommission zeigte eine im Vergleich zu anderen Dienststellen niedrige Arbeitszufriedenheit in der GD ECFIN, die im Laufe der Zeit gesunken ist. Allerdings wurden die Fragen anders gestellt, was die vergleichende Zeitanalyse erschwert.





6.


Der Anteil der Bediensteten auf Zeit in der GD ECFIN stieg von 3,6 % des Personals im Zeitraum 2005-2008 auf 4,8 % im Zeitraum 2009-2012. Grund dafür waren Einstellungen auf Zeit für Posten, die rasch mit Experten besetzt werden mussten.











7.


Die EU-Mitgliedstaaten haben der Kommission bis zum 30. April










7.


Die EU-Mitgliedstaaten haben der Kommission bis zum 30. April




 (92) jeden Jahres Stabilitäts‐ und Konvergenzprogramme sowie nationale Reformprogramme zu übermitteln. Die Bewertung dieser politischen Pläne durch die Kommissionsdienststellen (Arbeitsunterlagen der Kommissionsdienststellen) wird von der Kommission zusammen mit den länderspezifischen Empfehlungen Ende Mai angenommen. Sie stützen sich auf die während des gesamten Jahres vorgenommene Überwachung und Beobachtung der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklungen in den Mitgliedstaaten, des Reformprozesses und der Analyse der Auswirkungen dieser Reformen.






8.


Im Zeitraum 2006-2011 hat die GD ECFIN 61 neue Analysen in den Länderfokusberichten










8.


Im Zeitraum 2006-2011 hat die GD ECFIN 61 neue Analysen in den Länderfokusberichten




 (93) veröffentlicht. Im gleichen Zeitraum hat die GD ECFIN mehr als 200 „Economic Papers“ und zahlreiche „Occasional Papers“ publiziert.(English version)
Question for written answer E-009998/12
to the Commission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Commission DG ECFIN staff






1.


Has staff turnover in DG ECFIN been higher over the 2009-2012 period than over the 2005-2008 period?










2.


How many members of country desk staff left DG ECFIN between 2005 and 2012 (please specify the number for each year)?










3.


Does the Commission believe the level of pay in DG ECFIN matches remuneration and the corresponding workload and responsibilities in comparable institutions?










4.


How many DG ECFIN staff at administrator level or above are women, and how many are men (please also specify the breakdown for each country desk)?










5.


Could the Commission indicate where DG ECFIN ranked among all its DGs in staff work satisfaction surveys in 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2012 respectively?










6.


What was the share of temporary agent recruitments in DG ECFIN over the 2009-2012 and 2005-2008 periods respectively?










7.


How many working days do DG ECFIN staff have to draft the staff working papers and country-specific recommendations which are part of the European Semester (number of days on average between the publication of the National Reform Programme and the Stability and Convergence Programme for the country in question, on the one hand, and the final deadline for DG ECFIN staff to produce the relevant staff working paper, on the other)?










8.


DG ECFIN has not published any Country Focus reports this year, whereas it produced 20 per year in 2004-2005. Has DG ECFIN stopped producing country‐specific analyses aside from the administrative and procedurally necessary documents published as part of the European Semester?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(5 February 2013)
1 and 2. Staff turnover overall in the Commission has been higher in 2009-2012 compared to 2005-2008. Within DG ECFIN increased mobility also reflects the internal reorganisation to respond to the crisis and the need for enhanced surveillance.






3.


The Commission notes that it has become increasingly difficult to recruit highly skilled staff from certain Member States.










4.


Just over 30% of ECFIN AD staff are women and it has been growing steadily. Efforts continue to recruit higher numbers of women at AD level and ensure they are well represented in positions providing experience for future middle management responsibilities.











5.


The last Commission Staff Opinion survey










5.


The last Commission Staff Opinion survey




 (94) showed low job satisfaction in DG ECFIN compared to other services, that had declined over time. But questions were different which makes the comparative time analysis difficult.





6.


The share of temporary agents in DG ECFIN increased from 3.6% of staff in 2005-2008 to 4.8% in 2009-2012 due to temporary recruitments to rapidly fill positions requiring specialist profiles. 











7.


Member States are expected to submit Stability and Convergence Programmes and National Reform Programmes to the Commission by 30 April










7.


Member States are expected to submit Stability and Convergence Programmes and National Reform Programmes to the Commission by 30 April




 (95). The assessment by the Commission services's of these policy plans (the Staff Working Documents) is adopted at the same time as the country-specific recommendations adopted by the Commission in May. These are underpinned by a year-round surveillance and monitoring of the economic developments in the Member States, the reform process and the analysis of the impact of these reforms. 






8.


In 2006-2011 ECFIN has published 61 new issues in the Country Focus series










8.


In 2006-2011 ECFIN has published 61 new issues in the Country Focus series




 (96). In the same period, DG ECFIN has published more than 200 Economic Papers, and a large number of Occasional Papers. (Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-009999/12
an die Kommission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Personal der Generaldirektion Wirtschaft und Finanzen (II)






1.


Wie oft gab es im Zeitraum von 2009 bis 2012 bei den Wachstums‐ und Defizitprognosen für das laufende Jahr und das Folgejahr (bei der Frühjahrsprognose) und für das Folgejahr (bei der Herbstprognose) eine Abweichung um mindestens 0,2 Prozentpunkte des BIP? Bei welchen Mitgliedstaaten war dies wann der Fall?










2.


Wie viele abgeordnete nationale Sachverständige sind bzw. waren an den seit 2009 veröffentlichten Prognosen mit einer Tätigkeit zu ihrem Land beteiligt. Um welche Länder und welche Zeiträume handelt es sich dabei? Gibt es interne Regeln, mit denen Interessenkonflikte verhindert werden sollen? Kann die Kommission Angaben zu diesen Regeln machen?










3.


Wie hoch liegt bei den Länderreferenten der Direktionen F, G und H der Anteil derjenigen unter ihnen, die zumindest über einen Master-Abschluss in Wirtschaftswissenschaften verfügen, die mindestens zwei Jahre die gegenwärtige Tätigkeit ausüben und die die Sprache des Landes, für das sie zuständig sind, fließend beherrschen? Wie hoch liegt dieser Anteil insbesondere im Falle von Spanien und Italien?










4.


Wie hoch liegt der Anteil bei den Verwaltungsbeamten des Referats D1 des Generalssekretariats (zuständig für die Koordinierung der Empfehlungen zu Europa 2020), die zumindest über einen Master-Abschluss in Wirtschaftswissenschaften verfügen?










5.


Mit welchen Methoden werden die strukturellen Defizite in den Mitgliedstaaten bewertet? Welche Änderungen wurden dabei seit 2009 vorgenommen? Wie haben sich die Änderungen bei der Bewertung des strukturellen Defizits des jeweiligen Mitgliedstaats ausgewirkt?










6.


Hat die Generaldirektion Wirtschaft und Finanzen bei den externen Annahmen, die die Hauptgrundlage für die Prognosen bilden, jemals ihre Prognosen für den EU-externen Handel und für das BIP-Wachstum in den USA, Japan und China mit den entsprechenden Prognosen des IWF und der OECD verglichen?










7.


Welche Makromodelle verwendet die Kommission bei ihren Prognosen für die 27 EU-Mitgliedstaaten, das Eurowährungsgebiet und die einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten? Sind diese Modelle miteinander vereinbar?










8.


Warum werden von manchen Länderreferaten bei ihrer Prognose Modelle verwendet und von anderen nicht?










9.


Gemäß dem 




„Sechserpack“ und dem „Zweierpack“, über den derzeit verhandelt wird, haben die Mitgliedstaaten dafür zu sorgen, dass bestimmte Aufgaben zur Überwachung der Wirtschaft zumindest teilweise von der politischen Entscheidungsfindung unabhängig sind. Befürwortet die Kommission eine Trennung zwischen der Wirtschaftsprognose und den politischen Empfehlungen? Tritt sie dafür ein, dass eine unabhängige Stelle mit der Erstellung von Prognosen betraut wird?
Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission
(5. Februar 2013)







1)


Eine umfassende Bewertung der Genauigkeit der europäischen Wirtschaftsprognosen findet sich auf der Website der Kommission










1)


Eine umfassende Bewertung der Genauigkeit der europäischen Wirtschaftsprognosen findet sich auf der Website der Kommission




 (97).






2)


Die Kommission wählt abgeordnete nationale Sachverständige aufgrund ihres besonderen Fachwissens aus. Sie unterliegen strengen Verpflichtungen in Bezug auf etwaige Interessenkonflikte und Vertraulichkeit










2)


Die Kommission wählt abgeordnete nationale Sachverständige aufgrund ihres besonderen Fachwissens aus. Sie unterliegen strengen Verpflichtungen in Bezug auf etwaige Interessenkonflikte und Vertraulichkeit




 (98).3), 4) Länderreferenten der GD ECFIN sind Wirtschaftswissenschaftler, die in der Regel über einen ausgeprägten makroökonomischen Hintergrund oder eine gleichwertige Ausbildung verfügen. Neues Personal, das infolge der Krise zur Verstärkung der geografisch gegliederten Referate eingestellt wurde, wird von erfahrenen Bediensteten angeleitet.







5)


Die Konsolidierungsanstrengungen im Rahmen der fiskalpolitischen Überwachung auf EU-Ebene werden auf der Grundlage der Veränderung des strukturellen Saldos bewertet. Der Bewertung des strukturellen Haushaltssaldos liegt ein auf EU-Ebene vereinbartes Verfahren mit zwei Hauptelementen zugrunde: der Produktionslücke










5)


Die Konsolidierungsanstrengungen im Rahmen der fiskalpolitischen Überwachung auf EU-Ebene werden auf der Grundlage der Veränderung des strukturellen Saldos bewertet. Der Bewertung des strukturellen Haushaltssaldos liegt ein auf EU-Ebene vereinbartes Verfahren mit zwei Hauptelementen zugrunde: der Produktionslücke




 (99) und den Haushaltselastizitäten (100). Änderungen am Verfahren zur Berechnung der strukturellen Haushaltssaldi werden im Jahresbericht „Public finances in EMU“ (101) (Öffentliche Finanzen in der WWU) erläutert.





6)


Den Prognosen der Länderreferate liegen gemeinsame 




„externe Annahmen“ zugrunde. Der Informationsaustausch mit Prognostikern anderer Organe und der Mitgliedstaaten gehört zum Vorbereitungsprozess, wobei keine konkreten Angaben ausgetauscht werden.
7), 8) Die europäischen Wirtschaftsprognosen für die 38 Länder und Ländergruppen werden nach allgemeinen Leitlinien von den jeweiligen Länderreferaten erstellt. Ein Koordinierungsteam analysiert die Wirtschaftsaussichten für die EU/das Euro-Währungsgebiet und prüft die Kohärenz vorläufiger Prognosen  (102).






9)


Die Anforderung der Trennung zwischen der Erstellung der Prognosen und den politischen Entscheidungen ist erfüllt, da die europäischen Wirtschaftsprognosen von Bediensteten der GD ECFIN unabhängig erstellt werden. Im Gegensatz zu Strategiepapieren müssen sie nicht durch die politische Ebene angenommen werden.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-009999/12
to the Commission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject:  DG ECFIN staff (II)






1.


Over the 2009-2012 period, in forecasting exercises, how often have the growth and deficit levels projected for the Member States for the current year and the year after (in the case of the Spring Forecast) and for the year after (in the case of the Autumn Forecast) deviated by at least 0.2 percentage points of GDP? For which Member States has this been the case, and when?










2.


How many seconded national experts were / have been involved in the forecasting exercises published since 2009, working on their own countries? Which were the countries concerned, and when? Are there internal rules to prevent conflicts of interest? Could the Commission indicate what those rules are?










3.


Among country desk officers working in Directorates F, G and H, what is the proportion of country desks with officers holding at least a master’s degree in economics, having at least two years of seniority in their current position, and fluent in the language of the country they are monitoring? In particular, what is this proportion in the cases of Spain and Italy?










4.


In Unit D1 of the Secretariat-General (responsible for coordinating Europe 2020 recommendations), what is the proportion of administrators with at least a master’s degree in economics?










5.


What is the methodology used to assess structural deficits in the Member States? What changes have been made since 2009? What has been the impact of those changes in the assessment of the structural deficit in each Member State?










6.


Regarding external assumptions (which are the main input into the forecast process), has DG ECFIN ever compared its forecasts for non-EU trade and for GDP growth for the US, Japan and China with those presented at the same time by the IMF and the OECD?










7.


Which macro models does the Commission use in its forecasts for the EU-27, the eurozone and the individual Member States, if any? Are those models consistent with one another?










8.


Why do some country desks use models in their forecasting while others do not?










9.


The 




‘six-pack’ and the ‘two-pack’ (under negotiation) require the Member States to ensure that certain economic monitoring functions are at least partially independent from policymaking. Does the Commission support the separation of economic forecasting functions from policy recommendations? Does it support the idea of entrusting an independent body with the forecasting function?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(5 February 2013)







1.


A comprehensive assessment of the accuracy of European Economic Forecasts (EEF) is found on the Commission website










1.


A comprehensive assessment of the accuracy of European Economic Forecasts (EEF) is found on the Commission website




 (103). 






2.


The Commission selects seconded national experts for their specific expertise. They are subject to strict obligations on potential conflicts of interest and confidentiality










2.


The Commission selects seconded national experts for their specific expertise. They are subject to strict obligations on potential conflicts of interest and confidentiality




 (104). 3, 4. Country desk officers in DG ECFIN are economists, usually with a pronounced macroeconomic background or equivalent training. New staff recruited to reinforce geographical units due to the crisis is supervised by experienced staff. 







5.


The fiscal consolidation effort in the context of the EU fiscal surveillance is assessed based on the change in the structural balance. The assessment of the structural budget balance is based on a methodology commonly agreed at EU level with two main components: the output gap










5.


The fiscal consolidation effort in the context of the EU fiscal surveillance is assessed based on the change in the structural balance. The assessment of the structural budget balance is based on a methodology commonly agreed at EU level with two main components: the output gap




 (105) and the budgetary elasticities (106). Changes to the methodology for calculating structural budget balances are presented in the annual Public Finances in EMU report (107). 





6.


Country desks provide forecast figures working on the basis of a common set of 




‘external assumptions’. Exchanges with forecasters of other institutions and Member States are part of the forecast preparation process. Forecast numbers are not exchanged. 
7, 8. Forecasts for the 38 countries and country groups covered by the EEF are produced by country desks with central guidance. A coordination team analyses the EU/euro area economic outlook and examines the consistency of preliminary country-level forecast figures (108). 






9.


The requirement of separation between the forecast function and the policy decisions is fulfilled, as European Economic Forecasts are produced independently by DG ECFIN staff. Contrary to policy documents, they are not subject to adoption by the political level. 




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010001/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Sir Graham Watson (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — SV Estelle

On 20 October 2012, the Finnish-flagged boat SV Estelle was surrounded by six Israeli naval vessels and boarded by the Israeli military whilst at coordinates N31 26 E33 45. The Finnish vessel was around 38 nautical miles off the Gaza coast at the time. It had around 30 persons aboard and the naval contingent escorted the vessel to the port of Ashdod.






1.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of this incident?










2.


With the events taking place beyond Israel’s 12-nautical mile territorial limit, and its 24-nautical mile contiguous zone as defined by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of Israel’s attempt to extend its legal jurisdiction beyond these well-defined international limits?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
The HR/VP is aware of this incident. The EU has clearly expressed its position as regards the sailing of flotillas to Gaza, including in the framework of the Quartet. In June 2010 the Quartet stated that all those wishing to deliver goods should do so through established channels so that their cargo can be inspected and transferred via land crossings into Gaza. It also stated there is no need for unnecessary confrontations, and all parties should act responsibly in meeting the needs of the people of Gaza. In April 2011 the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee (AHLC) Chair’s Conclusions reiterated a call on all international actors to make use of the existing land crossings to channel their support to Gaza, and to abstain from provocations.
At the same time, Israel must abide by international law when dealing with any incoming flotilla. The EU continues to call on Israel to lift its blockade of Gaza, including the naval blockade. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010002/12
to the Commission
Sir Graham Watson (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Sales tax and Amazon
Spanish businesses are required to submit sales tax returns to the Ministerio de Hacienda (the Spanish treasury) on both a quarterly and an annual basis. The purpose of these quarterly and annual returns is to allow the ministry to cross-check the veracity of the inputs and outputs for each company, and to do this it requires a registered address in Europe for each business, as well as the fiscal identity of other businesses in their respective supply chains that collect sales tax. Businesses unable to supply this information are liable to a statutory fine of EUR 300 for each infraction.
I have been contacted by businesses concerned at the reticence of online retailer Amazon to come forward with this simple information. This places an unnecessary financial liability on small businesses in Spain, and presents them with bureaucratic obstacles.
Is the Commission aware of this issue, and what steps will be taken to ensure that businesses supply the relevant information to other businesses?
Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The Commission understands the question as relating to the obligation to submit VAT recapitulative statements on intra-Community transactions. Against this background, the Commission confirms that it is aware of the issue as there are clear rules concerning the submission of recapitulative statements pursuant to Art. 262-271 of the VAT Directive. Member States may indeed require recapitulative statements to be submitted on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis under the conditions laid down in those provisions. 
The VAT Directive lays down that businesses concerned are — inter alia — required to include the VAT identification numbers of their clients to whom they supplied particular goods and services. 
Moreover, the VAT Directive (Art. 266) allows Member States to require certain additional information in the recapitulative statement where they consider it necessary. The details to be given in the recapitulative statement are indeed needed to enable the tax authorities of the Member States to exchange the relevant information in order to monitor and cross check certain intra-Community transactions and thus to ensure their duly taxation. 
The VAT Directive (Art. 268) also allows Member States to require similar statements concerning intra-Community acquisitions. Each Member State is responsible for the transposition of those EU provisions into national legislation and their correct application within its territory. It remains a national competence of Member States to choose the respective means to assert the correct application of their national rules, which may also be done by imposing fines. This includes cases where businesses do not meet their legal obligation to supply the relevant information.
The Commission has no competencies to impose a mandatory exchange of information between businesses in the case referred to by the Honourable Member.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010003/12
to the Commission
Catherine Bearder (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Ash tree dieback
The UK Government has said that 100 000 trees have been felled in an effort to prevent the spread of ash dieback disease, while ministers have also announced a ban on imports of ash trees.
This outbreak is of major concern, since the Chalara fraxinea fungus which causes the disease has killed 90% of ash trees in Denmark. Meanwhile, there have also been outbreaks in other Member States, such as Germany, the Netherlands, Romania and Belgium.
It appears that the UK outbreak may have been caused by spores carried by the wind from mainland Europe, or by movements of contaminated soil and plant material.






1.


Can the Commission state whether there is there a body responsible for monitoring the state of flora and fauna across the EU and sharing information about issues such as diseases?










2.


If not, does the Commission have any systems or processes in place for the sharing between Member States of information on such diseases, with a view to preventing a recurrence?










3.


Would the Commission consider introducing a Europe-wide alert system on the spread of diseases, in an effort to trigger faster action?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(3 January 2013)






1.


Under the EU plant health regime, surveillance is only foreseen for a limited number of regulated harmful organisms. The results of these surveys are shared with the Commission and the competent authorities of the Member States.




Plant health legislation (109) requires Member States to notify the Commission and all other Member States of outbreaks of these regulated harmful organisms and any new harmful organism as soon as they are aware of their presence in their territory.






2.


As soon as the Commission receives these notifications they are communicated to the competent authorities of the Member States through Commission electronic communication tool.










3.


In the framework of the development of a proposal for a new plant health legislation, the Commission is considering to propose an EU wide annual surveillance regime in all Member States for all regulated harmful organisms and harmful organisms which are found for the first time in an area of the EU.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010004/12
to the Commission
Catherine Bearder (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Cobblestones
I have recently been contacted by a constituent who has informed me that cobblestones present a real inconvenience for some members of society. Those requiring a wheelchair or travelling with a pushchair, for instance, find cobblestones an insurmountable obstacle which prevents them from visiting numerous tourist attractions or places of interest across Europe.
I have been informed that Trinity College Dublin has recently replaced some of its main walkways with metre-wide paths laid with large, smooth paving stones. Antique and hallowed cobblestones still surround the now smooth main pathways. This makes the college completely accessible to less abled members of the public whilst retaining its original look and features.
With Europe’s population ageing, in time more and more of us will have mobility problems, and smooth paths will become ever more welcome for wheelchair users.
In the light of this, does the Commission have any plans to legislate or provide any guidance in this area, making historic sites of interest accessible to everyone?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
The Commission, to the extent of its competence, pays due attention to the specific needs of people with disabilities and their families in its legislative and policy initiatives. The Commission is fully committed to the implementation of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (to which the EU is a full party since January 2011) through the actions of the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 (110). 
A list of those actions, ongoing and to be developed, can be found in the annex that accompanies the communication on the strategy (111). In particular, the Commission is committed to mainstream accessibility in tourism through several soft-law initiatives (112).
Furthermore, the Commission recognises and celebrates cities with over 50.000 inhabitants which take exemplary initiatives to improve accessibility in the urban environment through the annual competition of the ‘Access City Award’ (113).
Beyond the competence of the European Union, the competence for the issue raised lies mainly with the Member States. We inform you that Ireland is among the three Member States which have not yet ratified the abovementioned UN Convention.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης P-010005/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Takis Hadjigeorgiou (GUE/NGL)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Κούρδοι απεργοί πείνας στην Τουρκία
Σύμφωνα με δημοσιεύματα του έντυπου και ηλεκτρονικού Τύπου, 680 πολιτικοί κρατούμενοι σε 58 φυλακές σε όλη την Τουρκία πραγματοποιούν επ’ αόριστον απεργία πείνας από τις 12 Σεπτεμβρίου 2012. Κάθε μέρα συμμετέχουν όλο και περισσότεροι κρατούμενοι στην απεργία. Την παρούσα περίοδο πολλοί κρατούμενοι πλησιάζουν στην κρίσιμη φάση που οδηγεί στον θάνατο. Απαιτούν — μεταξύ άλλων — την επίσημη αναγνώριση της χρήσης της κουρδικής γλώσσας, την απελευθέρωση όλων των πολιτικών κρατούμενων στην Τουρκία, μια μόνιμη λύση στο κουρδικό ζήτημα, τον εκδημοκρατισμό της Τουρκίας και την πλήρη αναγνώριση και τον σεβασμό των θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων του κουρδικού λαού.
— Γνωρίζει η Επιτροπή τις δηλώσεις αυτές και ποια μέτρα προτίθεται να λάβει προκειμένου να διερευνηθούν οι ισχυρισμοί των πολιτικών κρατουμένων και να εξασφαλιστεί ότι η Τουρκία, η οποία είναι υποψήφια προς ένταξη στην ΕΕ, σέβεται τα θεμελιώδη δικαιώματα όλων των πολιτών της;
Απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(6 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί εκ του σύνεγγυς το ζήτημα που θίγει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος. Η Επιτροπή εκφράζει την ικανοποίησή της για το γεγονός ότι δόθηκε τέλος στην απεργία πείνας στις 18 Νοεμβρίου 2012.
Ως γενική αρχή, η Επιτροπή επαναλαμβάνει τη σημασία να δοθεί κατάλληλη λύση στο κουρδικό ζήτημα. Το νοτιοανατολικό τμήμα της χώρας έχει ανάγκη από ειρήνη, δημοκρατία και σταθερότητα, καθώς και από κοινωνική, οικονομική και πολιτιστική ανάπτυξη. Τούτο μπορεί να επιτευχθεί μόνο με συναίνεση για τη λήψη συγκεκριμένων μέτρων τα οποία επεκτείνουν τα κοινωνικά, οικονομικά και πολιτιστικά δικαιώματα των λαών που ζουν στην περιοχή.
Η εξεύρεση λύσης στο κουρδικό ζήτημα και σε όλα τα προβλήματα της νοτιοανατολικής Τουρκίας απαιτεί την ευρύτερη δυνατή συμβολή όλων των δημοκρατικών δυνάμεων, καθώς και ανοικτό και ειλικρινή δημόσιο διάλογο με πλήρη σεβασμό των θεμελιωδών ελευθεριών.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010005/12
to the Commission
Takis Hadjigeorgiou (GUE/NGL)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Kurdish hunger strikers in Turkey
According to print and online press reports, 680 political prisoners in 58 prisons across Turkey have been on indefinite hunger strike since 12 September 2012. More prisoners are joining the strike with each passing day. At the current moment many prisoners are approaching the critical phase leading to the point of death. They are demanding — inter alia — official recognition of the use of the Kurdish language, the release of all political prisoners in Turkey, a permanent solution to the Kurdish question, the democratisation of Turkey and the full recognition of and respect for the fundamental rights of the Kurdish people.
— Is the Commission aware of these statements, and what steps will it take to investigate the claims of the political prisoners and ensure that Turkey, a candidate for EU membership, respects the fundamental rights of all its citizens?
Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(6 December 2012)
The Commission has been closely following the issue raised by the Honourable Member. The Commission has welcomed the end of the hunger strike on 18 November 2012.
As a general principle, the Commission reiterates the importance of adequately addressing the Kurdish issue. The South-East needs peace, democracy and stability as well as social, economic and cultural development. This can only be achieved via consensus over concrete measures expanding the social, economic and cultural rights of the people living in the region. 
Finding a solution to the Kurdish issue and to all the problems in the South-East requires the widest possible contribution of all democratic forces, and an open and frank public discussion that can be conducted with full respect for fundamental freedoms.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010006/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Takis Hadjigeorgiou (GUE/NGL)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Καταστροφή του περιβάλλοντος στο Δέλτα του Νίγηρα
Σύμφωνα με δημοσιεύματα του έντυπου και ηλεκτρονικού τύπου, εταιρείες πετρελαίου προκαλούν ανεπανόρθωτη ζημία στο δέλτα του Νίγηρα. Το θέμα βρίσκεται σήμερα ενώπιον της βουλής της Νιγηρίας ώστε να τεθεί τέρμα στην καταστροφή του περιβάλλοντος. Συγκεκριμένα, οι βουλευτές της Νιγηρίας συζητούν το ενδεχόμενο ψήφισης νόμου για τον έλεγχο των δράσεων που αναπτύσσουν οι εταιρείες πετρελαίου, καθώς και το ενδεχόμενο επιβολής προστίμου 5 δισεκατομμυρίων δολαρίων σε εταιρεία πετρελαίου, της οποίας η δράση συνέβαλε στην καταστροφή της ζωής εκατομμυρίων ανθρώπων. Είναι εις γνώσιν της Επιτροπής το εν λόγω θέμα;
Απάντηση του κ. Piebalgs εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(8 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί στενά την κατάσταση στο Δέλτα του Νίγηρα. To Δέλτα του Νίγηρα σημαδεύτηκε όχι μόνο από τη ρύπανση, αλλά και από εμφύλιες ταραχές και γενικότερη αστάθεια που συνδέονται με την εκμετάλλευση πετρελαίου και τη συνεπακόλουθη ρύπανση στην περιοχή.
Η Επιτροπή έλαβε επίσης υπόψη τα δημοσιεύματα του τύπου σχετικά με την πιθανή επιβολή προστίμου 5 δισεκατ. δολαρίων ΗΠΑ σε εταιρείες πετρελαίου, παρόλο που αυτό το ποσό δεν εμφανίζεται στο νέο νομοσχέδιο για το πετρέλαιο που αναφέρει ότι θα επιβάλλονται κυρώσεις επί του αερίου που καίγεται χωρίς άδεια μετά την καταληκτική ημερομηνία καύσης. Ο Υπουργός είναι εξουσιοδοτημένος να χορηγήσει αυτήν την άδεια για περίοδο ισχύος που δεν υπερβαίνει τις 100 ημέρες. Δεδομένου ότι τα εν λόγω πρόστιμα «δεν πρέπει να είναι κατώτερα από την αξία του αερίου που καίγεται ή εκλύεται» (τμήμα 277 (3) και 281), αυτό θα πρέπει να είναι και η βάση του εκτιμώμενου ποσού των 5 δισεκατ. δολαρίων ΗΠΑ.
Οι κάτοχοι αδειών εκμετάλλευσης πετρελαίου θα κληθούν επίσης να συνεισφέρουν σε ένα ταμείο περιβαλλοντικής αποκατάστασης (τμήματα 201, 203) ως προϋπόθεση για την χορήγηση άδειας, παρόλο που το ποσό που θα πρέπει να καταβάλλεται δεν αναφέρεται στο νομοσχέδιο. Οι εταιρείες πετρελαίου θα είναι υπεύθυνες για την προστασία του περιβάλλοντος, σύμφωνα με τις ορθές πρακτικές εξόρυξης κοιτασμάτων πετρελαίoυ, και για την απορρύπανση πετρελαιοκηλίδων εφόσον ευθύνονται.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010006/12
to the Commission
Takis Hadjigeorgiou (GUE/NGL)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Environmental destruction of the Niger Delta
According to articles published in the printed and online press, oil companies are causing irreparable damage in the Niger Delta. This question has been tabled before the Nigerian parliament, in a bid to put a stop to this environmental destruction. In fact, the Nigerian parliament is debating the possibility of passing a law to control the activities of oil companies and the possibility of imposing a USD 5 billion fine on an oil company whose activities were in part responsible for destroying the lives of millions of people. Is the Commission aware of this issue?
Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The Commission is closely following the situation in the Niger Delta. The Niger Delta has been marred by not only pollution but also by civil unrest and general instability linked to oil exploitation and the resulting pollution in the region.
The Commission has also noted the press reports of a possible USD 5 billion fine on oil companies, although this figure does not appear in the new petroleum bill which states that penalties will be imposed on gas flared without a permit after the flare-out date. The Minister is empowered to give this permit with a validity period not exceeding 100 days. Since these fines ‘shall not be less than the value of gas flared or vented
’
(section 277 (3) and 281), this could be the source of the estimated figure of USD 5 billion. 
Oil licence holders will also be required to contribute to an environmental remediation fund (sections 201, 203) as a pre-condition to being issued a lease, although the amount to be contributed is not stated in the bill. The oil companies will be responsible for protecting the environment, in line with good oil-field practices, and for cleaning up oil spills where liable. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010007/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Takis Hadjigeorgiou (GUE/NGL)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Δικαίωμα εξακρίβωσης της τύχης των αγνοουμένων
Σε ποιες ενέργειες προβαίνει η Επιτροπή προκειμένου να πιέσει την Τουρκία, μια υποψήφια προς ένταξη χώρα, να παράσχει τη συνδρομή της στις προσπάθειες για την εξακρίβωση της τύχης των αγνοουμένων που εξαφανίστηκαν το 1974. Μήπως γνωρίζει η Επιτροπή πότε η κατοχική Τουρκία θα επιτρέψει την πρόσβαση στα τουρκικά αρχεία, τα οποία ο τουρκικός στρατός κατακρατεί από το 1974;
Απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(18 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει στην απάντησή της στην προηγούμενη γραπτή ερώτηση E-009074/2012 που υπεβλήθη από τον κ. Σαλαβράκο (114).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010007/12
to the Commission
Takis Hadjigeorgiou (GUE/NGL)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: The right to verify the fate of missing persons
What action is the Commission taking to exert pressure on Turkey, a candidate country for accession, in order to contribute to the efforts to verify the fate of missing persons who disappeared in 1974? Does the Commission know when the Turkish occupiers will allow access to the Turkish archives, kept by the Turkish army since 1974?
Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
The Commission refers to its answer given to previous Written Question E-009074/2012 by Mr Salavrakos (115).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010008/12
to the Commission
Derek Roland Clark (EFD)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Electronic log — fishing






1.


Can the Commission please explain why fishermen in Boston (Lincolnshire, UK) are now required to log their returns by way of an electronic log, continuously operated while at sea, whereas the previous system was a simple paper log to be presented when returning to harbour?










2.


Can the Commission also explain why some boats in this fleet, which were registered as measuring no more than 12 metres and were thus exempt from this new regulation, have been re-measured to include the rudder stock, thereby bringing them over the 12-metre threshold?










3.


Can the Commission explain the reason for this discrimination?




Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission
(21 January 2013)
Article 15 (Paragraph 1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 (116) on fisheries control obliges masters of certain Union fishing vessels to record and transmit by electronic means fishing logbook data. This obligation entered into force on 1 January 2012 for all Union fishing vessels of 12 metres length overall or more and less than 15 metres length overall. These measures have been introduced by the Council because vessels equipped with Electronic Reporting Systems (ERS) can be monitored and controlled in a more efficient manner by the relevant authorities. A system, chosen by the United Kingdom (UK) authorities allows both to record vessel location (obligatory) and to transmit electronically logbook data. This system is currently being rolled out for smaller vessels in the UK fleet in order to comply with Articles 9 and 15 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 on fisheries control. It can be considered as cost effective in particular because it allows the fulfilling of two obligations simultaneously. The same obligations apply without discrimination to all other EU vessels of the same size. 
Recent audits by the Commission's inspectors have shown that a total of 170 English registered vessels greater than or equal to 12m and less than 15m in length are scheduled to have ERS systems installed and operational by the end of March 2013. 
In the UK, the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) is the competent authority for the classification, registration and inspection of fishing vessels. Fishing vessels in the UK are classified according to their length in metres. The verification of vessel length remains a matter for the UK's competent authority to undertake in the first instance.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010009/12
an die Kommission
Britta Reimers (ALDE)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Insekten als Futtermittel
Insekten und andere Wirbellose werden nach der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1069/2009 als Material der Kategorie 3 betrachtet. Als dieses sind sie geeignet für die Verfütterung an Nutztiere, speziell an Fisch, Geflügel und Schweine. Zudem stellen Insekten und andere Wirbellose einen natürlichen Nahrungsbestandteil von Schweinen und Geflügel dar.
Behörden verschiedener Verwaltungsstufen verweisen auf die BSE-Verordnung (EG) Nr. 999/2001 und vertreten ein Verfütterungsverbot von Insektenprotein an Nutztiere. Eine Verfütterung wäre ausschließlich nach erfolgter Hydrolyse möglich.
Die BSE-Verordnung in ihrer ursprünglichen Fassung beinhaltet jedoch lediglich ein Verbot der Verfütterung von Säugetier-Proteinen. Dieser Bezug ist auch in der aktuellen Fassung noch in den Erwägungsgründen und in Artikel 7 Absatz 4 ersichtlich.
Die EU fördert die Freilandhaltung von Schweinen und Geflügel. Dabei wird die Aufnahme von Wirbellosen nicht nur toleriert, sondern als artgerechte Haltung und Futteraufnahmeverhalten interpretiert. Jedoch erfolgt keinerlei Kontrolle der aufgenommenen „Naturnahrung“ auf Schadstoffe wie Schwermetalle, PCB/Dioxine oder Pflanzenschutzmittel.






1.


Ist die Verfütterung von kontrolliert erzeugten Insekten ohne vorherige Hydrolyse nach EU-Recht tatsächlich verboten?










2.


Falls ja, wie begründet die Kommission das Verfütterungsverbot mit Verweis auf alle einschlägigen Rechtsakte einschließlich einer Aussage zu deren Gültigkeit (z.B. wurde die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1774/2002 durch die Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1069/2009 ersetzt)?










3.


Falls ja, wie rechtfertigt die Kommission den bestehenden Ausnahmetatbestand und Verstoß gegen geltendes Recht im Bereich der Freilandhaltung von Schweinen und Geflügel?




Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010010/12
an die Kommission
Britta Reimers (ALDE)
(5. November 2012)

Betrifft: Fütterung von Insekten, die zur Erzeugung von Futtermitteln für Nutztiere gehalten werden
Nach der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1069/2009 sind Insekten, die zur Produktion von Futtermitteln gehalten werden, als Nutztiere einzustufen.
Die Einstufung als „Nutztier“ zieht starke Einschränkungen in der Verfügbarkeit von Ausgangssubstrat zur Insektenproduktion nach sich, da „Nutztiere“ nur mit „Futtermitteln“ ernährt werden dürfen.
Dies führt zu einer verstärkten Konkurrenz um die verfügbaren Futtermittel. Naturnahe Substrate, die einer natürlichen Nahrungsquelle der Insekten entsprechen (Speise‐ und Küchenabfälle, Lebensmittelrückläufer mit Anteilen tierischen Proteins), dürfen nicht genutzt werden.
Eine Nutzung von Substraten, die nicht unter den Begriff „Futtermittel“ fallen, würde die Nährstoffkreisläufe ergänzen sowie die angestrebte Kreislaufwirtschaft stärken.
Aufgrund ihrer Stellung im Ökosystem und der Nahrungskette sind Insekten und andere Wirbellose eher den Primärproduzenten von Protein zuzuordnen und aus diesem Grund geeignet, Substrate, welche nicht als Futtermittel deklariert sind, zu verwerten.






1.


Wie wird die Kommission die besondere Stellung von Insekten (Nahrungskette, Primärproduzent von Protein) bei der Zulassung von Substraten zur Insektenerzeugung berücksichtigen?










2.


Welche Bedingungen müssen diese Substrate erfüllen, um zur Aufzucht von Insekten zugelassen zu werden, ohne unter die Deklaration 




„Futtermittel“ zu fallen?
Gemeinsame Antwort von Herrn Borg im Namen der Kommission
(4. Januar 2013)
Nach den geltenden Bestimmungen des vollständigen Verfütterungsverbots (Artikel 7 und Anhang IV der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 999/2001 (117)) ist die Verfütterung von aus Nichtwiederkäuern, einschließlich Wirbellosen, gewonnenen Futtermitteln an Nutztiere verboten. Diese Bestimmungen gelten auch für Schweine und Geflügel in Freilandhaltung. Die Freilandhaltung von Geflügel oder Schweinen verstößt nicht gegen diese Vorschriften, da die von Schweinen oder Geflügel in Freilandhaltung aufgenommenen Insekten nicht als Futtermittel gelten. 
Die Kommission erörtert derzeit die mögliche erneute Zulassung von verarbeitetem tierischem Nichtwiederkäuer-Protein zur Fütterung von Nichtwiederkäuern, wie etwa Schweine oder Geflügel, wobei das Verbot der Verfütterung innerhalb derselben Tierart weiterhin gelten würde. Sollte die genannte Verordnung dergestalt geändert werden, kann die Verfütterung von verarbeitetem tierischem Insekten-Protein an Schweine und Geflügel zugelassen werden. Eine solche Änderung ist nicht vor 2014 zu erwarten.
Nach der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1069/2009 (118) gelten für die Herstellung von verarbeitetem tierischem Protein bestimmte Insekten als Nutztiere; sie dürfen als solche nicht mit Küchen‐ und Speiseabfällen verfüttert werden, damit die Ausbreitung von auf Mensch oder Tier übertragbaren Krankheiten verhindert wird.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010009/12
to the Commission
Britta Reimers (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Insects as animal feed
Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 classifies insects and other invertebrates as Category C material. As such they are suitable as feed for livestock, especially fish, poultry and pigs. Insects and other invertebrates are also a natural food source for pigs and poultry.
Referring to Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 (‘BSE’ regulation), authorities at various levels support a ban on feeding insect protein to farmed animals. Only the use of hydrolysed protein as feed would be possible.
However, in its original version, the BSE regulation only contained a ban on the use as feed of protein from mammals. This is still evident in the current version in the preamble and in Article 7(4).
The EU promotes free-range farming of pigs and poultry. Here, the consumption of invertebrates is not merely tolerated, but seen as correct procedure in terms of both animal welfare and feed intake. However, ‘natural feed’ is subject to no checks whatsoever for pollutants such as heavy metals, PCBs/dioxins or pesticides.






1.


Is the use of insects farmed under controlled conditions but not hydrolysed indeed prohibited under EC law? 










2.


If so, how does the Commission substantiate the feed ban in the light of all the relevant legislation and what is the validity of this (e.g., does Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 replace Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002)?










3.


If so, does the Commission justify the current exemption and breach of the law in force in the case of free-range farming of pigs and poultry?




Question for written answer E-010010/12
to the Commission
Britta Reimers (ALDE)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Feeding of insects which are kept for the production of feed for farmed animals
According to Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009, insects which are kept for the production of feed are to be classified as ‘farmed animals’.
The classification as ‘farmed animals’ places severe constraints on the availability of the starting substratum for insect production as such, since ‘farmed animals’ may only be fed with ‘feed’.
This leads to increased competition for available feed. Natural substrata which represent a natural food source for insects (food and kitchen waste, food past its sell-by date containing portions of animal protein) may not be used.
The use of substrata that are not covered by the term ‘feed’ would add another cycle of nutrients and enhance circulation within the economy, which is desirable.
Because of their position in the ecosystem and the food chain, insects and other invertebrates should rather be classified as primary producers of protein and therefore able to utilise substrata which are not declared to be feed.






1.


How will the Commission take into account the special position of insects (food chain, primary producer of protein) in the approval of substrata for insect production?










2.


What conditions must these substrata fulfil in order for their use to be permitted for the breeding of insects without being declared to be 




‘feed’?
Joint answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
Under the current total feed ban provisions (Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 999/2001 (119) and Annex IV thereof), the feeding of farmed animals with feed derived from non-ruminants, including invertebrates, is not allowed. These provisions also apply to free-range farming of pigs and poultry. The free-range farming of poultry or pigs is not a breach from these rules since the insects picked up by pigs or poultry kept out-doors is not seen as feeding.
The Commission is currently discussing the possible re-authorisation of non-ruminant processed animal proteins (PAP) to be used for the feeding of non-ruminants e.g. pigs and poultry, while respecting the prohibition of cannibalism. In case the aforementioned Regulation is revised in this way, feeding of PAP derived from insects to pigs and poultry may be authorised. Such a revision is not expected before 2014.
According to provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 (120), insects intended for the production of PAP are considered as farmed animals and, as such, cannot be fed with catering waste in order to prevent the spread of diseases transmissible to humans or animals.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010011/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Καταπολέμηση της μεγάλης φοροδιαφυγής στην Ελλάδα
Σε ερώτησή μου (Ε-009010/2011) για την φορολόγηση των μεγάλων εισοδημάτων στην Ελλάδα, η Επιτροπή είχε απαντήσει ότι: «Τα μέχρι στιγμής αποτελέσματα δεν είναι ικανοποιητικά» … «συγκροτήθηκε μεγάλη μονάδα φορολογουμένων και διεύθυνση για την είσπραξη των οφειλών» … «η ελληνική κυβέρνηση θα είναι σύντομα σε θέση να εξετάζει την απόδοση των διαχειριστικών στελεχών όσον αφορά την εφαρμογή του σχεδίου πάταξης της φοροδιαφυγής» … και σημειώνει ότι «το τμήμα φορολογικού ελέγχου … έχει ξεκινήσει ελέγχους για 1 700 άτομα με μεγάλα περιουσιακά στοιχεία». Σήμερα, βρίσκονται σε εξέλιξη ανακριτικές διαδικασίες στην Ελλάδα, προκειμένου να αποδοθούν ευθύνες για την «απώλεια» τμήματος της λίστας Falciani, το οποίο είχε παραδώσει το 2010 η τότε Υπουργός Οικονομικών της Γαλλίας κυρία Λαγκάρντ στον Έλληνα ομόλογό της, χωρίς έκτοτε να υπάρξει, καμία επεξεργασία και αξιοποίηση της λίστας εκ μέρους των ελληνικών φορολογικών αρχών. Η αποκάλυψη αυτού του γεγονότος, προκάλεσε μια ορισμένη «κινητικότητα» σχετικά με την λίστα των 1 700 ατόμων με μεγάλα περιουσιακά στοιχεία, στην οποία αναφέρεται η απάντηση της Επιτροπής. Εκδόθηκαν κάποιες υπουργικές αποφάσεις (11.10.2012 — Εφημερίδα της Κυβερνήσεως), οι οποίες αναμιγνύουν «Διαπεριφερειακά Ελεγκτικά Κέντρα» (ΔΕΚ) και «Ειδικά Συνεργεία Ελέγχου» (ΕΣΕ) προκαλώντας εν τέλει «νέα χρονοτριβή στη διενέργεια των κρίσιμων ελέγχων», όπως σχολιάζει ο ελληνικός Τύπος, στις 19.10.2012. Μετά από όλα αυτά, είναι εδραιωμένη η πεποίθηση της ελληνικής κοινωνίας ότι ούτε η ελληνική κυβέρνηση, ούτε η ΕΕ, ούτε το ΔΝΤ, έχουν πρόθεση να προβούν στην φορολόγηση και την πάταξη της φοροδιαφυγής των μεγάλων εισοδημάτων.
Με δεδομένα τα παραπάνω, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Τι στοιχεία διαθέτει για την έρευνα για τα 1 700 πρόσωπα με μεγάλα περιουσιακά στοιχεία τα οποία μνημονεύει η Επιτροπή στην απάντησή της; Πόσα από αυτά έχουν ελεγχθεί; Τι ποσά έχουν εισπραχθεί από τις αρχές; Από πόσα φυσικά ή νομικά πρόσωπα της λίστας των 1 700;











Θεωρεί η Επιτροπή ότι θα πρέπει να υπάρξει έρευνα και για τα 2 059 πρόσωπα της λίστας Φαλτσιάνι-Λαγκάρντ ή δεν μπορούν οι ελληνικές αρχές να επεξεργαστούν τα δεδομένα αυτής της λίστας γιατί είναι προϊόν υποκλοπής; Αν είναι προϊόν υποκλοπής, ήταν παράνομη η ενέργεια της Γαλλίδας υπουργού να προωθήσει την εν λόγω λίστα στον Έλληνα ομόλογό της ή ήταν σύμφωνη με το άρθρο 13 παράγραφος ε της οδηγίας 95/46/EK για τα προσωπικά δεδομένα;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn  εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής 
(21 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Σύμφωνα με το δελτίο Παρακολούθησης της Φορολογικής Διοίκησης που έχει καθιερώσει η ελληνική φορολογική διοίκηση, οι ελληνικές αρχές ολοκλήρωσαν (περί τα τέλη Οκτωβρίου του 2012) 871 ελέγχους ατόμων με μεγάλη περιουσία (404 άτομα «μεγάλου πλούτου» το 2011, 467 κατά τους πρώτους δέκα μήνες του 2012) και εισέπραξαν συνολικά 69,5 εκατ. ευρώ (35,1 εκατ. ευρώ το 2011, 34,4 εκατ. ευρώ κατά τους πρώτους δέκα μήνες του 2012). Η παρακολούθηση της φορολογικής διοίκησης ενημερώνεται μηνιαία και μπορεί να ανακτηθεί στην ακόλουθη διαδικτυακή διεύθυνση, με στοιχεία που αντικατοπτρίζουν την κατάσταση στα τέλη του Οκτωβρίου του 2012 (μόνο στα Ελληνικά) (121).
Εναπόκειται στις ελληνικές αρχές να αποφασίσουν, βασιζόμενες στο ελληνικό νομοθετικό πλαίσιο, την ενδεχόμενη εκμετάλλευση της αποκαλούμενης «λίστας Falciani-Lagarde». Η Επιτροπή δεν δικαιούται εν προκειμένω να λάβει απόφαση σχετικά με τις λεπτομερείς εκτελεστικές διαδικασίες για την αξιοποίησή της.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010011/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Combating extensive tax evasion in Greece
In response to an earlier question (E-009010/2011) on the taxation of high-income individuals in Greece, the Commission had answered that: ‘Results so far are not satisfactory’; ‘a large taxpayers’ unit and a directorate for debt collection have been established’; ‘the Greek Government will be soon able to review the performance of managers in implementing the anti-evasion plan’; and notes that ‘the tax audit department … has initiated audits of 1 700 high-wealth individuals’. Investigations are currently under way in Greece in order to identify where responsibility lies for the ‘misplacement’ of part of the Falciani list delivered in 2010 by the then Finance Minister of France Mrs Lagarde to her Greek counterpart, a list which has not been processed or used by the Greek tax authorities ever since. The disclosure of this fact has led to some ‘mobilisation’ concerning the list of 1 700 high-wealth individuals mentioned in the Commission’s answer. Some ministerial decisions have been issued (11 October 2012 — Greek Official Journal) involving ‘Inter-regional audit centres’ (DEK) and ‘Special Audit Teams’ (ESE), thus causing ‘a new delay in the completion of the critical audits’, as reported by the Greek Press on 19 October 2012. All this has strengthened Greek society’s conviction that neither the Greek Government nor the EU, nor the IMF intend to impose taxes and combat tax evasion by high-income individuals.
In view of the above, will the Commission answer the following:







What information does it have on the investigation concerning the 1 700 high-wealth individuals mentioned in the Commission’s answer? How many of these individuals have been audited? What are the amounts collected by the authorities and from how many of the natural or legal persons included in the list of the 1 700 entities?











Does the Commission think that the 2 059 individuals on the Falciani-Lagarde list should also be investigated — or are the Greek authorities not allowed to process the data on this list on the grounds that it is stolen property? If it is stolen property, was it illegal on the part of the French minister to deliver this list to her Greek counterpart or was it in conformity with Article 13(e) of Directive 95/46/EC on personal data?




Answer given by Mr Rehn  on behalf of the Commission 
(21 December 2012)
According to the Tax Administration Monitor established by the Greek tax administration, the Greek Authorities completed (end-October 2012) 871 audits of high-wealth individuals (404 in 2011, 467 in the first ten months of 2012) and collected a total of EUR 69.5 million (EUR 35.1 million in 2011, EUR 34.4 million in the first ten months of 2012). The Tax Administration Monitor is updated on a monthly basis and can be retrieved under the following link, reflecting the state of play at the end of October 2012 (in Greek) (122).
The exploitation of the so-called Falciani-Lagarde list is to be decided by the Greek authorities according to the Greek legislative framework ; it is not up to the Commission to decide on the precise modalities of this work. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010012/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Προτάσεις εκ μέρους της τρόικα για την άρση της αναστολής πλειστηριασμών πρώτης κατοικίας
Σύμφωνα με πληροφορίες του Τύπου, υπάρχουν προτάσεις εκ μέρους της τρόικα για την άρση της αναστολής πλειστηριασμών πρώτης κατοικίας που ισχύει για κατοικίες αντικειμενικής αξίας κάτω των 200 000 για τα υπερχρεωμένα νοικοκυριά, τα οποία αδυνατούν λόγω της οικονομικής κρίσης να πληρώσουν τις δόσεις των στεγαστικών τους δανείων.
Με δεδομένα α) την ραγδαία πτώση των εισοδημάτων της πλειονότητας των Ελλήνων, πολλοί εκ των οποίων αδυνατούν πλέον να αντεπεξέλθουν στα βάρη των δανείων που είχαν συνάψει με καλή πίστη πριν την κρίση, β) την κατακόρυφη πτώση των τιμών των ακινήτων και σε ορισμένες περιοχές πολύ κάτω από την αντικειμενική τους αξία γ) ότι ο νόμος που ισχύει και προβλέπει την αναστολή πλειστηριασμών πρώτης κατοικίας προστατεύοντας, οριακά, φτωχές και άνεργες οικογένειες να μην πεταχτούν στον δρόμο, ισχύει μέχρι το τέλος του 2012, καθώς όταν συντάχθηκε προβλεπόταν σύμφωνα με τις εκτιμήσεις της τρόικα, αντιστροφή της ύφεσης που υπάρχει στην ελληνική οικονομία ως το 2012 και δ) ότι η ανακεφαλαιοποίηση των τραπεζών πραγματοποιείται λαμβάνοντας υπόψη και τις επισφάλειες που έχουν σχέση με την στεγαστική πίστη,
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







τι στοιχεία μπορεί να δώσει για την εξέλιξη των επισφαλειών που συνδέονται με την στεγαστική πίστη στην Ελλάδα;











συναινεί πράγματι η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή στην ολική η μερική άρση της αναστολής των πλειστηριασμών που ισχύει και η οποία θα προκαλέσει τεράστια κοινωνικά προβλήματα σε εκατοντάδες χιλιάδες οικογένειες;











προτίθεται, με αύξηση των αντικειμενικών αξιών ή με μείωση του υφιστάμενου ορίου των 200 000 ευρώ, να εξαιρέσει μέρος των ακινήτων από τις ευεργετικές διατάξεις του νόμου;











τι μέρος της ανακεφαλαιοποίησης που θα πραγματοποιηθεί στις τράπεζες αφορά τις παντός είδους επισφάλειες που υπάρχουν στις τράπεζες και οι οποίες έχουν προκληθεί εξαιτίας της αυστηρής δημοσιονομικής και εισοδηματικής πολιτικής που έχει επιβάλλει η τρόικα στην Ελλάδα;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(21 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Ενημερώνουμε το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Ευρωπαϊκού Κοινοβουλίου ότι η Επιτροπή δεν σχολιάζει τις δημοσιογραφικές πληροφορίες.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010012/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL)
(5 November 2012)

Subject: Troika proposes reversal of freeze on repossession of primary residences
According to reports in the press, the Troika has proposed that the government reverse the freeze on the repossession of primary residences worth less than EUR 200 000 for over-indebted households which are unable to pay their mortgage due to the economic crisis. 
Given that a) most Greeks have seen their income plummet and many are now unable to repay loans taken out in good faith before the crisis; b) property prices have plummeted, in certain areas to well below their loan value; c) the law freezing repossession of primary residences, thereby preventing crucially poor and unemployed families from being turned out onto the street, applies until the end of 2012 because, when it was drafted, the Troika estimated that the recession in Greece would bottom out in 2012; and d) the recapitalisation of the banks takes account of bad debts in the mortgage sector.
Will the Commission answer the following:







What information does it have on bad mortgage debts in Greece?











Has the European Commission really consented to the full or partial reversal of the freeze on repossessions, given that this will cause massive social problems for hundreds of thousands of families?











Does it intend to exempt some properties from the beneficial provisions of the law, either by revising property values upwards or reducing the current EUR 200 000 threshold?











Which part of the bank recapitalisation programme relates to any type of bad debt held by banks as a result of the strict budgetary and income policy imposed on Greece by the Troika?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(21 January 2013)
We would like to inform the Honourable Member that the Commission does not comment on press reportings.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010014/12
to the Commission
Catherine Stihler (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Scottish independence — Commission's position
In written evidence submitted to the UK’s Foreign Affairs Committee, Graham Avery, an honorary Director-General of the Commission, is quoted as saying: ‘From the political point of view Scotland has been in the EU for 40 years; and its people have acquired rights as European citizens. If they wish to remain in the EU they could hardly be asked to leave and then reapply for membership in the same way as the people of a non-member country such as Turkey’.
Is this the official view of the Commission?
Question for written answer E-010041/12
to the Commission
David Martin (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Honorary Directors-General of the Commission
Can the Commission explain the role of the Honorary Directors-General of the Commission and explain what status and authority they have to speak on behalf of the Commission?
Joint answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)
As regards the matter raised in Question P-10014/2012, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Written Question E-8133/2012 (123).
It is not the general policy of the Commission to be represented by retired officials. In the instance referred to in Question P-10014/2012, the honorary Director General did not speak for the Commission. All retired officials may express personal views or analysis without prejudice to their obligation not to disclose information of the kind covered by the obligation of professional secrecy (See Article 339 of the TFEU and Article 17 of the Staff Regulations) (124).
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010015/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Κρίση χρέους και δημοσιονομικοί πολλαπλασιαστές στην Ελλάδα
Σε πρόσφατη έκθεση του ΔΝΤ (125) και παλαιότερες αναφορές (126)
 (127), διαπιστώνεται πως ο «δημοσιονομικός πολλαπλασιαστής» που χρησιμοποιείται στις προβλέψεις κατά το σχεδιασμό μοντέλων δημοσιονομικής προσαρμογής από το ΔΝΤ έχει υποεκτιμηθεί σημαντικά. Σε πρόσφατη έκθεση της Επιτροπής (128), εκτιμάται για την Ελλάδα πως οποιοδήποτε μέγεθος «δημοσιονομικού πολλαπλασιαστή» μεγαλύτερο του 0,5 προκαλεί αύξηση του χρέους ακόμη και σε «υγιείς» δημοσιονομικά περιόδους (129). Σύμφωνα με πρόσφατη μελέτη (130), ο δημοσιονομικός πολλαπλασιαστής για την Ελλάδα κατά την περίοδο της κρίσης εκτιμάται ως 1,32. Ερωτάται η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή:







Υιοθετεί την άποψη που παρουσιάζεται στην έκθεση του ΔΝΤ για το ύψος των δημοσιονομικών πολλαπλασιαστών;











 Έχει εκτιμηθεί το πραγματικό μέγεθος του δημοσιονομικού πολλαπλασιαστή για την Ελλάδα για τα έτη μετά την έναρξη εφαρμογής των προγραμμάτων δημοσιονομικής προσαρμογής;











 Σχετικά με το νέο πακέτο μέτρων που πρόκειται να εισαχθούν προς ψήφιση στο Ελληνικό Κοινοβούλιο, ποιο είναι το μέγεθος του πολλαπλασιαστή που χρησιμοποιείται στο βασικό σενάριο προβλέψεων; Έχει ληφθεί υπόψη κατά την πρόσφατη διαβούλευση μεταξύ τρόικας και Ελληνικής Κυβέρνησης η ανάλυση του ΔΝΤ για υποεκτιμήσεις πολλαπλασιαστών;











Πολλοί αναλυτές (131)
 (132)
 (133), υποστηρίζουν πως έχει αποδειχθεί ότι η επιλογή της λιτότητας για μείωση του χρέους φέρνει τα αντίθετα αποτελέσματα και οδηγεί σε — όχι μόνο προσωρινά — αύξηση της ανάγκης δανεισμού. Θεωρεί η Επιτροπή πως η αυστηρή λιτότητα παραμένει η ενδεδειγμένη επιλογή στοχεύοντας στη μείωση του χρέους στην Ελλάδα; Αν ναι, σε τι βάθος χρόνου;











Πού οφείλονται οι αποκλίσεις επίτευξης στόχων στο ελληνικό πρόγραμμα; Προτίθεται η Επιτροπή να εισηγηθεί εισαγωγή εγγυήσεων υπέρ της Ελλάδας για περιπτώσεις αποδεδειγμένων σημαντικών αστοχιών στο σχεδιασμό της προσαρμογής από την τρόικα;




Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης P-000835/13
προς την Επιτροπή
Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE)
(28 Ιανουαρίου 2013)

Θέμα: Δηλώσεις διευθυντή του ερευνητικού τμήματος του ΔΝΤ για τους υπολογισμούς των πολιτικών λιτότητας
Σε έκθεση που δόθηκε στη δημοσιότητα και αποτελεί εσωτερικό έγγραφο του ΔΝΤ, με ημερομηνία 3.1.2013, ο οικονομολόγος και διευθυντής του ερευνητικού τμήματος του ΔΝΤ, κ. Ολιβιέ Μπλανσάρ αναφέρει ότι το ΔΝΤ και μαζί του το σύνολο των Ευρωπαίων ηγετών, των υπουργών οικονομίας, της Επιτροπής και της ΕΚΤ έκαναν σοβαρό λάθος στους υπολογισμούς τους, υποτιμώντας την έκταση των συνεπειών των πολιτικών δημοσιονομικής πειθαρχίας στα υπερχρεωμένα κράτη. Αναφέρει μάλιστα ότι το λάθος αφορά σε έναν συντελεστή, γνωστό στην οικονομία με την ονομασία δημοσιονομικός «πολλαπλασιαστής» (multiplicateur). Συγκεκριμένα, μεταξύ του 1970 και του 2007, οι ασχολούμενοι με τις προβλέψεις είχαν διαπιστώσει ότι η μείωση κατά 1% στις δημόσιες δαπάνες, ή τα κατά 1% επιπλέον έσοδα από τη φορολογία, οδηγούσαν, κατά μέσο όρο, σε 0,5% μείωση της ανάπτυξης στις προηγμένες χώρες. Εξ αυτού διαμόρφωσαν τον πολλαπλασιαστή 0,5, τον οποίο και χρησιμοποίησαν στις προκαταρκτικές εργασίες τους για τα προγράμματα σε Ελλάδα και Πορτογαλία. Το πρόβλημα είναι ότι τα δεδομένα αυτά ίσχυαν πριν από την κρίση, η οποία με την ανασφάλεια που έφερε στις χώρες, επηρέασε τη συμπεριφορά των καταναλωτών.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


 Καθώς η έκθεση, στην οποία η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή κατονομάζεται, αποτελεί επίσημο έγγραφο εταίρου της ΕΕ, είναι σε θέση να σχολιάσει κατά πόσο πράγματι η ίδια υπέπεσε σε σφάλμα όσον αφορά τον δημοσιονομικό πολλαπλασιαστή;










—


 Σκοπεύει να έλθει σε συνδιαλλαγή με τον εταίρο της, το ΔΝΤ, ως προς τις επιπτώσεις αυτού του υπολογισμού και ενδεχομένως να τον αναθεωρήσει;




Κοινή απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(1 Μαρτίου 2013)
Η σημασία των πρόσφατων μελετών σχετικά με τον δημοσιονομικό πολλαπλασιαστή είναι περιορισμένη λόγω του βραχυπρόθεσμου ορίζοντά τους και άλλων παραγόντων που ενδεχομένως επηρέασαν την ανάπτυξη σε σχέση με τα αναμενόμενα αποτελέσματα. Περιλαμβάνουν τα αποτελέσματα στο κλίμα εμπιστοσύνης τα οποία υλοποιούνται τώρα και από τα οποία επωφελούνται οι ευάλωτες χώρες. Αν ληφθεί υπόψη η απώλεια εμπιστοσύνης εκ μέρους των επενδυτών, όπως εκφράζεται από τα αυξανόμενα επιτόκια των κρατικών ομολόγων, προκύπτει (134) ότι τα στοιχεία δεν είναι ασύμβατα με ένα μέσο πολλαπλασιαστή κατώτερο της μονάδας, όπως χρησιμοποιείται στην περίπτωση των κοινών μακροοικονομικών μοντέλων.
Οι πρόσφατες μελέτες έχουν πολύ περιορισμένη χρηστικότητα ιδιαίτερα στην περίπτωση της Ελλάδας, άποψη η οποία εκφράστηκε σε άρθρο που δημοσιεύθηκε στον ελληνικό τύπο από τον επικεφαλής οικονομολόγο του ΔΝΤ (135). 
Το δημοσιονομικό έλλειμμα έφθασε το 15,6% του ΑΕΠ το 2009 και οι αγορές δεν ήταν πλέον πρόθυμες να χρηματοδοτούν το υψηλό ελληνικό χρέος. Το γεγονός αυτό οδήγησε στη δρομολόγηση του προγράμματος χρηματοδοτικής συνδρομής την άνοιξη του 2010. Ωστόσο, η αβεβαιότητα και τα προβλήματα υλοποίησης εξακολουθούσαν να είναι παρόντα κατά τα πρώτα έτη του προγράμματος. Από το περασμένο καλοκαίρι το ελληνικό πρόγραμμα επανήλθε με αποφασιστικότητα στη σωστή πορεία. Η συμφωνία που επιτεύχθηκε τον προηγούμενο Δεκέμβριο στο πλαίσιο της Ευρωομάδας ήρε την επιζήμια αβεβαιότητα που επικρατούσε στην Ελλάδα για υπερβολικά μεγάλο χρονικό διάστημα και σηματοδότησε την επιστροφή του κλίματος εμπιστοσύνης. Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, οι εταίροι της ζώνης του ευρώ συμφώνησαν να παρατείνουν κατά δύο έτη την χρονική περίοδο δημοσιονομικής προσαρμογής.
Εναπόκειται πλέον στις ελληνικές αρχές να διασφαλίσουν ότι η εμπιστοσύνη αυτή θα συνεχίσει να αυξάνεται μέσω της αποφασιστικής εφαρμογής του προγράμματος μεταρρυθμίσεων. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010015/12
to the Commission
Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Debt crisis and fiscal multipliers in Greece
According to a recent IMF report (136) and previous reports (137)
 (138), the ‘fiscal multiplier’ used in forecasts by the IMF when planning fiscal adjustment models has been seriously underestimated. According to a recent Commission report (139), any ‘fiscal multiplier’ over 0.5 for Greece increases its debt, even in ‘healthy’ fiscal periods (140). A recent study (141) estimated the fiscal multiplier for Greece to be 1.32 during the crisis. Given this, will the Commission answer the following:







Does it endorse the opinion in the IMF report on the size of fiscal multipliers?











Has it estimated the actual size of the fiscal multiplier for Greece for the years since the start of the fiscal consolidation programmes?











What is the size of the multiplier used in the base scenario for the new package of measures due to be tabled before the Greek Parliament? Was the IMF analysis of underestimated multipliers taken into account during recent consultations between the Troika and the Greek government?











Numerous analysts (142)
 (143)
 (144) maintain that the austerity option has been shown to increase, rather than reduce debt and cause a more than passing increase in borrowing requirements. Does the Commission believe that strict austerity is still the right option in terms of reducing Greece’s debt and, if so, for how long?











What has caused the slippages in the Greek programme? Does the Commission intend to recommend that guarantees should be introduced for Greece where there is evidence of significant errors in the Troika’s adjustment schedule?




Question for written answer P-000835/13
to the Commission
Georgios Papanikolaou (PPE)
(28 January 2013)

Subject: Disclosures by Director of IMF Research Unit regarding calculations behind the austerity measures 
In an internal IMF document of 3 January 2013, which has now come to light, Olivier Blanchard, IMF Chief Economist and Director of its Research Unit, acknowledges that the IMF, together with all European leaders, finance ministers, the Commission and the ECB, seriously miscalculated the repercussions of the financial discipline imposed on over-indebted countries, underestimating their impact.
He attributes the mistake to what is known in economic circles as the ‘fiscal multiplier’. Between 1970 and 2007 forecasters had concluded that a one percent cut in public expenditure or a one percent increase in tax revenue meant a 0.5% drop in growth figures on average in advanced industrialised countries. A fiscal multiplier of 0.5 was accordingly taken as the basis for preliminary calculations in drawing up programmes for Greece and Portugal. The problem is, however, that the data in question were applicable before the onset of the crisis, which has now created a climate of uncertainty in these countries, thereby affecting consumer purchasing patterns.
In view of this:







Can the Commission say to what extent it was in fact mistaken with regard to the fiscal multiplier, given that it is mentioned by name in an official report drawn up by an official EU partner?











Will it discuss the repercussions of this miscalculation with the IMF and make any appropriate adjustments?




Joint answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(1 March 2013)
The robustness of recent studies on the fiscal multiplier is limited by their short time horizon and other factors that may have impacted on growth compared with what was expected. They include the confidence effects that are materialising now and from which the vulnerable countries are benefiting. If one takes into account the loss of investor confidence expressed by rising government bond yields, it has been shown (145) that the evidence is not inconsistent with an average multiplier smaller than one, as used in common macroeconomic models.
Recent studies are of particularly limited use when it comes to Greece, a view which was echoed in an opinion piece published in the Greek press by the IMF Chief Economist (146). 
In 2009, the fiscal deficit had reached 15.6% of GDP and markets were no longer willing to finance Greece's high debt levels. It led to the launch of the financial assistance programme in the spring of 2010. However, uncertainty and problems with implementation persisted in the first years of the programme. Since last summer, the Greek programme has been brought decisively back on track. The agreement in the Eurogroup last December has removed the damaging uncertainty that had been hanging over Greece for too long, and paved the way for a return of confidence. In this context, the Euro area partners agreed to extend the timeline for fiscal adjustment by two years.
It is now up to the Greek authorities to ensure through determined implementation of the reform programme that this confidence continues to grow. 
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-010016/12
till kommissionen (Vice-ordföranden / Höga representanten)
Marita Ulvskog (S&D)
(6 november 2012)

Angående: VP/HR – Försämringar av situationen för mänskliga rättigheter i Turkiet
Det blir allt mer uppenbart att situationen för de mänskliga rättigheterna i Turkiet snabbt försämras. Nyligen kom beskedet att en styrelsemedlem i BDP-partiet i Mardin-provinsen skjutits till döds. Den turkiska statens massarresteringar av kurdiska BDP-politiker, fackligt aktiva, studenter, journalister och MR-aktivister har pågått under flera år och nu sitter över 9 000 personer fängslade. Situationen har blivit så desperat att 700 fängslade personer sedan en tid tillbaka hungerstrejkar som protest mot det sätt de behandlats på.
Mot bakgrund av följande vill jag be den höga representanten om följande klargöranden:







EU bedriver sedan länge ett arbete för att stärka situationen för mänskliga rättigheter i Turkiet. Vilka ytterligare åtgärder avser den höge representanten vidta för att hantera den försämring av situationen för de mänskliga rättigheterna som ägt rum under de senaste veckorna?











Vad gör den höge representanten för att de som utan godtagbara skäl fängslats av den turkiska staten omedelbart ska friges?




Svar från Štefan Füle på kommissionens vägnar
(17 december 2012)
Kommissionen har noga följt de händelser som tas upp av parlamentsledamoten. Den noterade med tillfredsställelse slutet på hungerstrejken den 18 november 2012.
Som en allmän princip vill kommissionen på nytt betona hur viktigt det är att kurdfrågan löses. Sydöstra delen av Turkiet behöver fred, demokrati, stabilitet och social, ekonomisk och kulturell utveckling. Detta kan uppnås endast genom konsensus om konkreta åtgärder som utvidgar regionens befolknings sociala, ekonomiska och kulturella rättigheter.
För att finna en lösning på kurdfrågan och problemen i sydöstra delen av Turkiet krävs ett så stort bidrag som möjligt från alla demokratiska krafter och en öppen och rättfram offentlig diskussion, som kan föras endast om de grundläggande friheterna samtidigt respekteras till fullo.
Kommissionen har vid många tillfällen framhållit att de terrorismrelaterade bestämmelserna i den turkiska lagstiftningen och den vida definitionen av terrorism i lagen om bekämpande av terrorism är mycket oroväckande och tillämpas på ett sätt som leder till inskränkningar i de grundläggande friheterna, bl.a. yttrandefriheten. Detta måste ändras snarast, och kommissionen hoppas att problemets kärna kommer att angripas i samband med antagandet av ett fjärde reformpaket på rättsväsendets område.
Kommissionen kommer att fortsätta att ta upp kurdfrågan på alla lämpliga nivåer med de turkiska myndigheterna.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010016/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Marita Ulvskog (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Deteriorating human rights situation in Turkey
It is becoming increasingly obvious that the situation regarding human rights in Turkey is rapidly deteriorating. News broke recently of an executive member of the BDP party in Mardin province being shot dead. Over a number of years, there have been mass arrests by the Turkish State of Kurdish BDP politicians, trade union activists, students, journalists and human rights activists and over 9 000 are currently sitting in detention. The situation has become so desperate that 700 detainees have been on hunger strike for a while now in protest at how they are being treated.
In light of the above, I would ask the High Representative for the following clarifications:







The EU has been working for some time to strengthen the human rights situation in Turkey. What further action does the High Representative intend to take to tackle the deterioration in the human rights situation that has occurred in recent weeks?











What is the High Representative doing to secure the immediate release of those imprisoned without good reason by the Turkish State?




Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(17 December 2012)
The Commission has been closely following the issue raised by the Honourable Member. The Commission has welcomed the end of the hunger strike on 18 November 2012.
As a general principle, the Commission reiterates the importance of addressing the Kurdish issue. The South-East needs peace, democracy and stability as well as social, economic and cultural development. This can only be achieved via consensus on concrete measures, expanding the social, economic and cultural rights of the people living in the region. 
Finding a solution to the Kurdish issue and to all the problems in the South-East requires the widest possible contribution of all democratic forces, and an open and frank public discussion that can be only conducted in the full respect of fundamental freedoms.
Moreover, the Commission has underlined at many occasions that terrorism-related provisions of Turkish legislation and the wide definition of terrorism under the Anti-Terror Law remain a cause for serious concern and are applied in a way which leads to restrictions on fundamental rights, including freedom of expression. This needs to be changed urgently, and the Commission is looking forward to the adoption of a fourth judicial reform package to address the core of the problem
The Commission will continue to raise this issue with the Turkish authorities at all appropriate levels. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010017/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Ζήτημα συμβατότητας των περικοπών στις συντάξεις με το ελληνικό Σύνταγμα και την προστασία θεμελιωδών δικαιωμάτων των Ελλήνων πολιτών
Η Ολομέλεια του Ελεγκτικού Συνεδρίου (ένα από τα τρία ανώτατα δικαστήρια της Ελλάδας με αρμοδιότητες, μεταξύ άλλων, την εκδίκαση ζητημάτων αναφορικά με την απονομή συντάξεων), με απόφασή της — σχεδόν ομόφωνη — έκρινε ως αντισυνταγματικές τις προωθούμενες διατάξεις για τις νέες περικοπές στις συντάξεις. Συγκεκριμένα στο πλαίσιο της εν λόγω απόφασης επισημάνθηκαν τα εξής:






—


 Αντισυνταγματική η πέμπτη κατά σειρά μείωση των συντάξεων σε τόσο μικρό χρονικό διάστημα.










—


 Αντισυνταγματική η νέα περικοπή των επιδομάτων Χριστουγέννων, Πάσχα και θερινής αδείας, η οποία εκτός των άλλων εγείρει σημαντικά ζητήματα αναλογικότητας και άνισης κατανομής των «βαρών», καθώς δεν χρησιμοποιήθηκαν κριτήρια και ορθή κλιμάκωση.










—


 Αντισυνταγματική η αύξηση του ορίου ηλικίας (από το 60ό στο 65ο έτος) όσων δικαιούνται το ΕΚΑΣ.




Η εφαρμογή των παραπάνω διατάξεων, σύμφωνα με το Ελεγκτικό Συνέδριο, θα αποτελέσει παραβίαση θεμελιωδών αρχών του ελληνικού Συντάγματος (άρθρα 2, 4, 22 & 25), όπως ο σεβασμός και η προστασία της αξίας του ανθρώπου, η ισότητα δικαιωμάτων και υποχρεώσεων (αρχή ισότητας και αναλογικότητας), η προστασία της εργασίας αλλά και η εγγύηση του κράτους για την προστασία των δικαιωμάτων του ανθρώπου, ως μέλους του κοινωνικού συνόλου.
Σε αυτήν την κατεύθυνση και με δεδομένη την συμμετοχή της στην τρόικα, ερωτάται η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή:







Έχει λάβει γνώση της συγκεκριμένης απόφασης;











Έχει ενημερωθεί από τους εκπροσώπους της στην τρόικα ότι τα προωθούμενα μέτρα αντίκεινται στην εθνική νομοθεσία και συνιστούν — βάσει ελληνικού Συντάγματος — παραβιάσεις ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων;











Πώς αξιολογεί την πιθανότητα εφαρμογής αυτών των μέτρων, που πλήττουν άνισα συγκεκριμένες κοινωνικές ομάδες;











Προτίθεται να ζητήσει σχετική έκτατη ενημέρωση από τους εκπροσώπους της στην τρόικα γι’ αυτό ιδιαίτερα σοβαρό ζήτημα; Αν ναι, τι κατευθύνσεις σκοπεύει να τους δώσει ως προς την διασφάλιση της εθνικής έννομης τάξης;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(1 Φεβρουαρίου 2013)
Η Επιτροπή είναι ενήμερη για τη θέση που διατύπωσε η Ολομέλεια του Ελεγκτικού Συνεδρίου. Η ελληνική κυβέρνηση υποχρεούται να διασφαλίσει τη συμμόρφωση της εθνικής νομοθεσίας προς το Ελληνικό Σύνταγμα. 
Στο πλαίσιο των ήδη καταβαλλόμενων προσπαθειών για την αντιμετώπιση των συσσωρευμένων μακροοικονομικών ανισορροπιών, το προγράμμα προσαρμογής για την Ελλάδα περιλαμβάνει μέτρα για τη δικαιότερη κατανομή του κόστους του. Οι περικοπές στις συντάξεις πραγματοποιούνται προοδευτικά, προστατεύοντας, στο πλαίσιο των μεταρρυθμίσεων του συνταξιοδοτικού συστήματος, τους χαμηλοσυνταξιούχους μέσω της θέσπισης ενιαίας κατώτατης σύνταξης, ενώ τα κοινωνικά προγράμματα αναθεωρήθηκαν ώστε να καταστούν πιο εύστοχα και να διασφαλίσουν την αποτελεσματικότερη προστασία των ευάλωτων ομάδων.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010017/12
to the Commission
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Compatibility of pension cuts with the Greek Constitution and protection of fundamental rights of Greek citizens
The Grand Chamber of the Court of Audit (one of the three supreme courts in Greece responsible, inter alia, for trying pension cases) adjudicated almost unanimously that the provisions being tabled to introduce further pension cuts are unconstitutional.
In its decision, the Court stated that:







—


 a fifth consecutive cut in pensions in such a short space of time is unconstitutional;










—


 the new cuts to Christmas, Easter and summer vacation pay, which also raise important questions in terms of the disproportionate and unfair allocation of the ‘burden’, as no criteria or proper scale were applied, is unconstitutional;










—


 the increase in the age threshold (from 60 to 65) for the Pensioner’s Social Solidarity Benefit is unconstitutional.




The Court of Audit stated that application of the above provisions will contravene fundamental principles of the Greek Constitution (Articles 2, 4, 22 and 25), such as respect and protection for human worth, equal rights and obligations (principle of equality and proportionality), protection of work and the State’s guarantee of the protection of human rights in society.
Given this and its involvement in the Troika, will the Commission answer the following:







Is it aware of this particular judgment?











Have its representatives in the Troika advised it that the measures being tabled conflict with national legislation and, under the Greek Constitution, violate human rights?











How likely does it rate the application of these measures, which unfairly hurt certain social groups?











Does it intend to request specific information from its representatives in the Troika on this very serious issue? If so, what instructions does it intend to give them in order to safeguard the national legal system?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(1 February 2013)
The Commission is aware of the position expressed by the Grand Chamber of the Court of Auditors. The Greek Government has the obligation to ensure compliance of national law with the Greek Constitution. 
Against the background of ongoing adjustment of accumulated macroeconomic imbalances, the adjustment programme for Greece includes measures to make the adjustment costs more equitable. Pension cuts are progressive, pension reforms have been protecting the lowest income pensioners through the introduction of a universal minimum pension and the social programmes were reviewed with the aim to ensure better targeting and more effective protection of the vulnerable groups.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010018/12
an die Kommission
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(6. November 2012)

Betrifft: Projekte zur Anonymität im Internet
Die Hohe Vertreterin für Außenpolitik betonte bei der Budapester Konferenz zum digitalen Raum (Budapest Conference on Cyberspace) erneut die Selbstverpflichtung der EU, die Redefreiheit und andere Grundrechte auch im Internet schützen zu wollen. In einigen Staaten außerhalb der EU werden diese Grundrechte von den nationalen Regierungen vielfach nicht anerkannt und teilweise aktiv beschränkt. Im Zuge der Proteste des Arabischen Frühlings hat sich die Möglichkeit, Informationen sicher und anonym aus dem Internet abzurufen und zu verbreiten, als wesentliches Mittel zur Organisation von Protesten und Widerstand gegen autoritäre Regime herausgestellt.






1.


Welche Projekte, die (1) Anonymität, (2) die Überwindung von Zensurmechanismen oder (3) Redefreiheit im Internet ermöglichen sollen, fördert die Kommission derzeit?










2.


Welche Projekte, die (4) die persönliche Identifikation von Internetnutzern, (5) die Zensur von Inhalten des Internet oder (6) die Kontrolle des Internet ermöglichen sollen, fördert die Kommission derzeit?




Antwort von Frau Kroes im Namen der Kommission
(13. Dezember 2012)
Zur ersten Frage des Herrn Abgeordneten: Die Kommission lancierte im Dezember 2011 die „No Disconnect Strategy“ (NDS), mit der die Nutzung von IKT unterstützt werden soll, um die Menschenrechte in nichtdemokratischen Ländern zu stärken und zu verteidigen. Im Rahmen dieser Strategie finanziert die Kommission eine Reihe von Projekten zur Bekämpfung der Zensur im Internet über das Europäische Instrument für Demokratie und Menschenrechte (EIDHR) sowie Projekte zur Entwicklung von vermaschten/ dezentralisierten Netzen und zur Erprobung von Anonymisierungswerkzeugen in großmaßstäblichen Versuchseinrichtungen (7. Rahmenprogramm). Die Kommission erwägt ferner die Finanzierung einer Plattform, die in Fast-Echtzeit Informationen über Verletzungen der Menschenrechte im IKT-Umfeld liefern soll. Die Kommission unterstützt also eine Reihe von Aktivitäten, aber die vollständige Liste von Projekten zur Ermöglichung (1) der Anonymität, (2) der Überwindung von Zensurmechanismen oder (3) der Redefreiheit im Internet kann leider nicht offen gelegt werden, da einige dieser Projekte vertraulich sind und die Verbreitung von Informationen darüber die persönliche Sicherheit Dritter gefährden könnte. 
Zur zweiten Frage des Herrn Abgeordneten: die Kommission unterstützt keine Projekte, die eine direkte Kontrolle des Internets ermöglichen sollen. Einige der von der Kommission unterstützten Projekte könnten die persönliche Identifizierung von Internetnutzern oder die Begrenzung des Zugangs zu Internetinhalten ermöglichen, dies allerdings nur im Rahmen des geltenden internationalen und EU-Rechts.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010018/12
to the Commission
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Projects concerning Internet anonymity
At the Budapest Conference on Cyberspace, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs reaffirmed the EU’s commitment to protecting freedom of speech and other fundamental rights on the Internet. Those fundamental rights are often not recognised, and sometimes actively restricted, by national governments in some non-EU countries. During the protests of the Arab Spring, the ability to retrieve information securely and anonymously from the Internet and to disseminate it proved to be an essential means of organising protests and resistance against authoritarian regimes.






1.


What projects is the Commission currently supporting that will enable: (1) anonymity (2) the defeat of censorship mechanisms or (3) freedom of speech on the Internet?










2.


What projects is the Commission currently supporting that will enable: (4) personal identification of Internet users (5) censorship of Internet content or (6) control of the Internet?




Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)
In response to the first question of the Honourable Member, the Commission launched in December 2011 the No Disconnect Strategy, the purpose of which is to support the use of ICTs to promote and defend human rights in non-democratic countries. As part of this Strategy, the Commission is funding a number of projects to fight cyber-censorship under the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights, as well as projects to develop mesh / decentralised networks and test anonymisation tools on large-scale experimental facilities under the 7th Framework Programme. The Commission is also considering to fund a platform that would provide near real-time situational awareness on human rights violations connected to the ICT environment. While the Commission is thus supporting some activities it is not possible to provide a full list of projects that will enable (1) anonymity (2) the defeat of censorship mechanisms or (3) freedom of speech on the Internet, because some of the projects are confidential in nature as their dissemination could compromise the personal security of third parties. 
In response to the second question of the Honourable Member, the Commission does not support projects that would directly enable control of the Internet. Some of the projects supported by the Commission could enable personal identification of Internet users or limitations in accessing Internet content, but only in the framework of applicable international and EC law.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010019/12
an die Kommission
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(6. November 2012)

Betrifft: Effekte von Luftverkehrsabkommen auf kleinere Fluglinien
Dem MEMO/12/714 vom 27. September 2012 zufolge arbeitet die Kommission auf den Abschluss von Luftverkehrsabkommen mit Drittländern hin. In der EU gibt es viele kleine und mittelgroße Fluglinien.






1.


Welche Konsequenzen erwartet die Kommission durch den Abschluss von neuen Luftverkehrsabkommen für kleine und mittelgroße Fluglinien?










2.


Ist die Kommission der Ansicht, dass kleinere EU-Fluglinien weiterhin profitabel existieren können, wenn sie in einem globalen Wettbewerb mit staatlich unterstützten Großfluglinien stehen?










3.


Erwartet die Kommission durch den Abschluss von Luftverkehrsabkommen eine Zunahme oder eine Verringerung der Zahl des in der EU beschäftigten Fluglinienpersonal?




Antwort von Herrn Kallas  im Namen der Kommission 
(8. Januar 2013)






1.


Die Luftverkehrsbeziehungen der EU zu den meisten Drittländern beruhen auf bilateralen Luftverkehrsabkommen zwischen einzelnen EU-Mitgliedstaaten und diesen Ländern. Im Rahmen dieser Abkommen stehen Luftfahrtunternehmen aus der EU in Wettbewerb zu Fluglinien aus Drittländern. Die Kommission geht davon aus, dass auf EU-Ebene ausgehandelte Luftverkehrsabkommen positive Auswirkungen für EU-Luftfahrtunternehmen einschließlich kleiner und mittelgroßer Fluglinien mit sich bringen würden, da die EU besser in der Lage sein wird, durch Angleichung der Rechtsvorschriften faire Wettbewerbsbedingungen zu gewährleisten. 











2.


Wie in der kürzlich angenommenen Mitteilung der Kommission zur Luftfahrtaußenpolitik 










2.


Wie in der kürzlich angenommenen Mitteilung der Kommission zur Luftfahrtaußenpolitik 




 (147) dargelegt, befinden sich die EU-Luftfahrtunternehmen in einer kritischen finanziellen Lage und stehen vor erheblichen Herausforderungen. Die EU muss energisch auf diese Herausforderungen reagieren, da das Überleben einiger EU-Luftverkehrsunternehmen bedroht ist. Nach Ansicht der Kommission können EU-Luftfahrtunternehmen im globalen Luftverkehrsmarkt wettbewerbsfähig sein und dort auch profitabel arbeiten. Dies erfordert sowohl Anstrengungen vonseiten der Luftverkehrsunternehmen als auch Maßnahmen auf nationaler und auf EU-Ebene. Nachhaltiger Wettbewerb ist von fairen Wettbewerbsbedingungen abhängig. Dies kann am besten durch umfassende Luftverkehrsabkommen zwischen der EU und Drittländern erreicht werden, vor allem, wenn diese Länder über staatliche Fluglinien verfügen.





3.


Weitere umfassende Luftverkehrsabkommen auf EU-Ebene mit Nachbarländern und maßgeblichen Partnern, vor allem in schnell wachsenden und/oder beschränkten Märkten, brächten wesentliche wirtschaftliche Vorteile (auch in Bezug auf Arbeitsplätze in der europäischen Luftverkehrsbranche) mit sich. Die aus diesen Abkommen erwachsenden potenziellen wirtschaftlichen Vorteile werden auf über 12 Mrd. EUR jährlich geschätzt.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010019/12
to the Commission
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Impact of air transport agreements on smaller airlines
According to MEMO/12/714 of 27 September 2012, the Commission is working to conclude air transport agreements with third countries. There are a large number of small and medium-sized airlines in the EU.






1.


What consequences does the Commission expect the conclusion of new air transport agreements to have for small and medium-sized airlines?










2.


Does the Commission believe that smaller EU airlines can survive and be profitable in global competition with large state-supported airlines?










3.


Does the Commission expect the conclusion of air transport agreements to lead to an increase or a reduction in the number of airline staff employed in the EU?




Answer given by Mr Kallas  on behalf of the Commission 
(8 January 2013)






1.


The EU's aviation relations with most third countries are based on bilateral air services agreements between individual EU Member States and these countries. Under these agreements, EU carriers compete with airlines from the third countries. The Commission expects that air transport agreements negotiated at EU level would have a positive effect for EU carriers including small and medium-sized carriers as the EU will be in a better position to ensure conditions for fair competition through regulatory convergence. 











2.


As outlined in the Commission's recent Communication on external Aviation Policy










2.


As outlined in the Commission's recent Communication on external Aviation Policy




 (148), EU airlines are in a critical financial situation and faced with very serious challenges. The EU must respond robustly to these challenges as the very survival of some EU carriers is threatened. The Commission does believe that EU carriers can be competitive and profitable in the global aviation market. This will require efforts both by the airlines themselves as well as action at both national and EU level. Sustainable competitiveness depends upon fair conditions of competition. This can best be achieved through comprehensive air transport agreements between the EU and third countries, notably when these countries have state-owned airlines.





3.


There would be very significant economic benefits (including more jobs in the European aviation sector) from further EU-level comprehensive air transport agreements with neighbouring countries and key partners particularly in fast-growing and/or restricted markets. The potential economic benefits from these agreements have been estimated to be more than EUR12 billion per year.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010020/12
to the Commission
Sir Graham Watson (ALDE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing
Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 establishing a Community system to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing attempts to deter pirate fishing by requiring all consignments of fish imported into the EU to be accompanied by a catch certificate, validated by the vessel’s flag state. The regulation provides for the imposition of import restrictions on fishing vessels that operate illegally and on countries that fail to effectively monitor and control their fishing fleets. 
Notwithstanding the Commission’s reply of 24 August 2012 to Question E-006141/2012, there remains a lack of communication and coordination between the EU and coastal states in West Africa. 






1.


What steps is the Commission taking to:










—


ensure that fish that have been caught legally can be backed up by a robust vessel monitoring system (VMS) and by electronic logbook data?










—


improve communications with coastal states across the world in order to verify catch certificates, fishing licences and other flag state assurances?










—


blacklist companies that are shown to have repeatedly fished illegally and countries that fail to cooperate in the fight against IUU fishing?










2.


Can the Commission state:










—


how many vessels are currently on the EU IUU blacklist?










—


which countries have had their seafood exports to the EU restricted as a result of IUU fishing?




Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The regulation to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing (149) foresees that fishing activities conducted in maritime waters of a coastal State without its permission or in contravention of its laws and regulations is IUU fishing. In case of infringements detected, the port Member State shall cooperate with the Flag State and the coastal State to conduct investigations and take sanctions. 
In order to promote compliance with these provisions, the Commission has amongst others carried out missions in five West African coastal States in order to assess the implementation of the IUU Regulation and to improve monitoring in their waters. In parallel, the Commission took the initiative to conduct evaluation missions in several flag States whose fleets operate in West Africa in order to reinforce their monitoring and control measures. Under the IUU Regulation, verifications on the legality of the catches can only be requested by Member States to the flag States concerned. The IUU Regulation does not foresee blacklisting process of companies, but allows for the listing of vessels involved in IUU activities. Moreover, the Member States have to take all appropriate measures to identify and sanction their nationals engaged in IUU fishing.
At present, 88 vessels are on the IUU vessels list corresponding to all vessels identified under the RFMOs. The Commission is currently investigating other cases which depending on factual and legal assessment might lead to listing. In parallel, eight third countries have been notified of the possibly of being considered as non-cooperative in the fight against IUU fishing. At this stage this decision does not trigger any commercial sanctions.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010021/12
alla Commissione
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)
(6 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Possibile violazione dei regolamenti (CE) n. 1069/2009 e (UE) n. 142/2011 per l'utilizzo a fini di produzione di «biocarburanti» dei sottoprodotti animali «di categoria 1».
L’articolo 33 del decreto legislativo italiano n. 28, del 3 marzo 2011, prevede al nuovo comma 5-ter (150), forme di incentivazione per la produzione di «biocarburanti» a partire, tra gli altri, anche da prodotti (grassi) derivati da sottoprodotti animali di «categoria 1» (151). Le condizioni ivi previste per ottenere gli incentivi consistono nel rispetto della disciplina UE su questi materiali e nella qualifica degli stessi quali sottoprodotti «non rifiuti» (152). 
Tale qualifica escluderebbe in realtà questi sottoprodotti animali dall’applicazione della normativa comunitaria prevista per i medesimi, ovvero dalle condizioni e procedure autorizzative stabilite per il loro utilizzo energetico, finora esclusivamente nell’ambito di attività di smaltimento ovvero di incenerimento — e quest’esclusione opererebbe qualunque fossero le caratteristiche degli impianti di trattamento/trasformazione — nonché dall’applicazione della direttiva comunitaria 2000/76/CE sull’incenerimento dei rifiuti, per sottoporli esclusivamente al regime dei combustibili, peraltro quale fonte rinnovabile (nonostante non possano essere considerati tali (153)). Questa qualifica aggirerebbe quindi ogni vincolo tecnico e sanitario sulle modalità di trattamento di questi materiali, come pure l’obbligo di valutazione preventiva dei nuovi metodi, da effettuarsi a cura di EFSA (154); non appare poi verificabile nel concreto, date le condizioni poste dall’articolo 5 della direttiva 2008/98/CE, pressoché impossibili a realizzarsi tutte contemporaneamente.
La giurisprudenza della Corte di cassazione italiana tende a classificare i sottoprodotti animali di categoria 1 quali rifiuti in quanto destinati a incenerimento, a meno che essi non siano —classificazione come detto più sopra ardua a concretizzarsi — «effettivamente classificabili come sottoprodotti non rifiuti».
La Commissione, pertanto:







è a conoscenza dell’introduzione di tale norma o comunque ritiene opportuno chiedere chiarimenti al Ministero della salute della Repubblica italiana?











se ritiene che la norma italiana sia in contrasto con quella comunitaria in materia di utilizzo dei sottoprodotti animali di categoria 1 e dei prodotti derivati (regolamenti (CE) n. 1069/2009 e (UE) n. 142/2011), quali iniziative intende mettere in atto per reagire a tali violazioni da parte dell’Italia?




Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione
(11 gennaio 2013)







1.


Spetta alle autorità competenti italiane decidere se il materiale in questione è da ritenersi un rifiuto o un non rifiuto, a seconda delle circostanze di fatto e della legislazione applicabile (Articolo 3.1 — definizione di rifiuto; articolo 5 — sottoprodotti di cui alla direttiva 2008/98/CE










1.


Spetta alle autorità competenti italiane decidere se il materiale in questione è da ritenersi un rifiuto o un non rifiuto, a seconda delle circostanze di fatto e della legislazione applicabile (Articolo 3.1 — definizione di rifiuto; articolo 5 — sottoprodotti di cui alla direttiva 2008/98/CE




 (155) sui rifiuti). Pertanto, la Commissione non prevede di contattare il ministero della Salute italiano per chiarimenti.






2.


Il decreto legislativo italiano n. 29 del 3 marzo 2011 non è in contrasto con il regolamento sui sottoprodotti di origine animale (CE) n. 1069/2009 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio










2.


Il decreto legislativo italiano n. 29 del 3 marzo 2011 non è in contrasto con il regolamento sui sottoprodotti di origine animale (CE) n. 1069/2009 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio




 (156)
e con il regolamento (UE) n. 142/2011 della Commissione (157) e quindi la Commissione non intenterà un'azione contro l'Italia.(English version)
Question for written answer E-010021/12
to the Commission
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Possible violation of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 in connection with the use of Category C animal by-products to produce bio-fuels
Under paragraph 5b (new) of Article 33 of Italian Legislative Decree No 28 of 3 March 2011 (158), incentives can be provided for the production of biofuels from, among other things, products (fats) derived from Category C animal by‐products (159). Under that Article, incentives can be provided if the EU rules governing those substances are met and the substances are classified as ‘non‐waste’ by‐products (160). 
Classifying animal by‐products in this way would in reality exempt them from the scope of the applicable Community rules, or in other words from the conditions and procedures applicable to their use in energy production, which to date has solely been in the field of waste treatment — i.e. incineration. That exemption would be applicable regardless of the characteristics of the waste treatment/processing facility. Such animal by‐products would also be exempted from the scope of Community Directive 2000/76/EC on waste incineration. They would now solely be governed by the arrangements applicable to fuels and, moreover, renewable energy sources (even if they cannot be considered ‘renewables’ (161)). Such classification would therefore bypass all technical and health requirements as regards the processing methods for those substances, as well as the mandatory prior assessment of new methods carried out by EFSA (162). This classification would therefore seem impossible to verify in practice, given the conditions set out in Article 5 of Directive 2008/98/EC, which would be almost impossible to fulfil simultaneously.
The case law of the Italian Court of Cassation has tended to classify Category C animal by‐products as waste when these are intended for incineration, except where they have been classified as non‐waste products — which, as mentioned above, is difficult to establish in practice.
Can the Commission therefore indicate:







Whether it is aware that this decree has been adopted, and whether it does not feel it should ask the Italian Ministry of Health for clarifications?











Whether it considers this Italian decree to conflict with Community legislation on the use of Category C animal by‐products and their derivatives (Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EU) No 142/2011) and, if so, what action it will take in respect of the violation thereof by Italy?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)







1.


It is up to the Italian competent authorities to decide whether the subject matter is waste or non-waste depending on the factual circumstances of the case and the legislation applicable (Article 3.1 — waste definition; Article 5 — by-products laid down in Directive 2008/98/EC










1.


It is up to the Italian competent authorities to decide whether the subject matter is waste or non-waste depending on the factual circumstances of the case and the legislation applicable (Article 3.1 — waste definition; Article 5 — by-products laid down in Directive 2008/98/EC




 (163) on waste). Hence, the Commission does not envisage contacting the Italian Ministry of Health for clarifications. 






2.


Italian legislative decree No 29 of 3 March 2011 is not in conflict with Animal by-products Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council










2.


Italian legislative decree No 29 of 3 March 2011 is not in conflict with Animal by-products Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council




 (164)
and Commission Regulation (EU) No 142/2011 (165) and therefore the Commission will take no actions against Italy. (Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita P-010025/12
a la Comisión
Eva Ortiz Vilella (PPE)
(6 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Incendio en la Comunidad Valenciana y Fondo de Solidaridad de la UE
El pasado 29 de agosto el Gobierno español solicitó formalmente a la Comisión Europea la activación del Fondo de Solidaridad de la UE para paliar los daños causados por un incendio forestal que a finales del mes de junio asoló la Comunidad Valenciana.
El Gobierno solicitó la cantidad de 97,9 millones de euros para paliar los daños producidos por esta catástrofe que afectó a una extensión de 50 000 hectáreas en 22 municipios y cuya estimación de daños directos totales es de 140,4 millones de euros.






1.


Ante la importancia de las ayudas provenientes del Fondo de Solidaridad para restablecer las condiciones habituales de vida de los ciudadanos, la reactivación de la actividad económica de las zonas afectadas y la recuperación del medio natural, ¿podría informar la Comisión sobre el estado actual de la tramitación de este expediente?










2.


¿Cuándo prevé la Comisión que España reciba estas ayudas?




Respuesta del Sr. Hahn en nombre de la Comisión
(11 de diciembre de 2012)
La Comisión recibió el 30 de agosto de 2012 la solicitud española de ayuda del Fondo de Solidaridad de la UE tras el incendio producido en la Comunidad Valenciana. El 5 de septiembre y el 10 de octubre se recibió amplia información adicional; en esta última fecha se comunicó además la ampliación del ámbito geográfico de la solicitud y del número de incendios. La cuantía total de los daños declarada asciende a 156 millones de euros. El umbral de daños normal aplicable a España para activar el Fondo de Solidaridad es de 3 600 millones de euros. Se espera que antes de que acabe 2012 haya concluido la evaluación de una posible intervención excepcional conforme a los criterios aplicables a las llamadas «catástrofes regionales».
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010025/12
to the Commission
Eva Ortiz Vilella (PPE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Forest fire in the Valencian region and the EU Solidarity Fund
On 29 August 2012, the Spanish Government formally asked the European Commission to activate the EU Solidarity Fund with a view to alleviating the damage caused by a forest fire that devastated the Valencian region of Spain at the end of June.
The government requested EUR 97.9 million to deal with the damage caused by the fire, which affected 50 000 hectares of land in 22 municipalities. The total cost of the direct damage is estimated to be EUR 140.4 million.






1.


Given the importance of funding from the Solidarity Fund to help people return to normality, to re‐boost economic activity in the affected areas and to restore the natural environment, can the Commission say what stage the proceedings have reached for granting the support?










2.


When does the Commission expect that Spain will receive the funding?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(11 December 2012)
The Commission received the Spanish application for EU Solidarity Fund aid following the wildfires in Valencia on 30 August 2012. Extensive additional information was received on 5 September and 10 October, the latter extending the geographic scope of the application and the number of individual fires included. Total damage is presented as amounting to EUR 156 million. The normal damage threshold applicable to Spain for activating the Solidarity Fund is EUR 3.6 billion. The assessment of whether the Fund could be activated exceptionally under the criteria for so-called regional disasters is expected to be completed before the end of 2012. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010026/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Νέα αναδιάρθρωση του ελληνικού χρέους
Το θέμα της αναδιάρθρωσης του ελληνικού χρέους που κατέχει η Ευρωπαϊκή Κεντρική Τράπεζα συζητείται πολύ συχνά το τελευταίο χρονικό διάστημα, τόσο από εκείνους που πιστεύουν ότι αυτό είναι επιτακτική ανάγκη όσο και από εκείνους που αμφισβητούν κατά πόσο είναι εφικτή μια τέτοια κίνηση.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:
Πως αντιμετωπίζει η EE το ενδεχόμενο της αναδιάρθρωσης του ελληνικού χρέους που κατέχει η ΕΚΤ, δεδομένου ότι η Ελλάδα είναι αντιμέτωπη με τον κίνδυνο να αυξηθεί το χρέος της το 2020 στο 140% του ΑΕΠ αντί για 120% που είναι ο στόχος των δανειστών της;
Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(14 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Από τις πλέον πρόσφατες προβλέψεις των εταίρων της «Τρόικας» ( ΕΕ, ΕΚΤ και ΔΝΤ) προκύπτει ότι το ύψος του ελληνικού χρέους ως ποσοστό του ΑΕΠ θα εκτοξευθεί στο 144% το 2020 (θα είναι σημαντικά υψηλότερο από τον αρχικό στόχο του 120% έως το 2020), εάν δεν ληφθούν μέτρα για την περαιτέρω μείωση του χρέους (166). 
Τα κράτη μέλη της ζώνης του ευρώ συμφώνησαν να αναλάβουν σειρά από πρωτοβουλίες οι οποίες, από κοινού με την επαναγορά του χρέους και την πλήρη εφαρμογή του προγράμματος προσαρμογής, θα βοηθήσουν να γίνει βιώσιμο το δημόσιο χρέος της Ελλάδας επαναφέροντάς το στο 124% του ΑΕΠ το 2020 (167). 
Οι κύριες πρωτοβουλίες περιλαμβάνουν:






—


τη μείωση του επιτοκίου για την Ελληνική Δανειακή Διευκόλυνση (ΕΔΔ), 










—


την ακύρωση της προμήθειας του EFSF για τη χορήγηση εγγυήσεων.




Εξάλλου, τα κράτη μέλη δεσμεύτηκαν να διαθέσουν στην Ελλάδα ποσό ίσο με τα έσοδα από το χαρτοφυλάκιο SMP (πρόγραμμα αγοράς κινητών αξιών), σύμφωνα με την εθνική κεντρική τους τράπεζα, από το οικονομικό έτος 2013 (168). 
Οι ανάγκες χρηματοδότησης θα αμβλυνθούν με την επέκταση των προθεσμιών εξόφλησης των δανείων του EFSF και τον ετεροχρονισμό της καταβολής των τόκων.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010026/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: New Greek debt restructuring
Restructuring of the Greek debt held by the European Central Bank has been a frequent topic of discussion recently, both among those who believe that it is urgently needed and those who question the feasibility of such a move.
Does the Commission believe there is any likelihood that the Greek debt held by the European Central Bank will be restructured, given that Greece is facing the risk of its debt rising to 140% of GDP in 2020, compared with the 120% target set by its lenders?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)
The most recent projections by the Troika partners (EC, ECB and IMF) imply that the Greek debt to GDP ratio would be as high as 144% in 2020 (substantially above the original target of 120% by 2020) without further debt-reducing measures (169). 
The euro area Member States agreed a number of initiatives that together with the debt-buy-back (DBB) of new DBB's end full implementation of the adjustment programme, should bring Greece's public debt back on a sustainable path to 124% of GDP in 2020 (170).
The key initiatives include:






—


Reduction of Greek Loan Facility (GLF) interest margin










—


Cancellation of the EFSF guarantee commitment fee




Moreover, Member States committed to pass on to Greece an amount equivalent to the income on the SMP portfolio according to their national central bank as from budget year 2013 (171). 
Financing needs will be alleviated by an extension in EFSF loan maturities and an interest deferral. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010027/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Νέο κύμα προσφύγων από τη Συρία
Ο εμφύλιος στη Συρία, η τουρκική εμπλοκή και τα νέα κύματα προσφύγων κάνουν επιτακτική την ανάγκη καλύτερου συντονισμού των χωρών μελών της ΕΕ όσον αφορά την πολιτική τους έναντι των προσφύγων/λαθρομεταναστών αλλά και την ανάγκη υποστήριξης της Ελλάδος, της οποία τα σύνορα περνούν τα τελευταία χρόνια τη μεγαλύτερη δοκιμασία. Σύμφωνα με στοιχεία του ελληνικού υπουργείου Εξωτερικών, το 2011 διέσχιζαν τα ελληνοτουρκικά σύνορα καθημερινά περίπου 500 μετανάστες. Η κατάσταση αναμένεται να επιδεινωθεί ακόμη περισσότερο. Σύμφωνα με εκτιμήσεις του ΟΗΕ, λόγω του εμφυλίου στη Συρία αναμένεται να εγκαταλείψουν τη χώρα μέχρι τα τέλη του έτους περίπου 700 000 άνθρωποι. Μέχρι στιγμής έχουν εγκαταλείψει τις εστίες τους περίπου 300 000 Σύριοι με κατεύθυνση, ως επί το πλείστον, το γειτονικό Ιράκ, τον Λίβανο, την Ιορδανία και την Τουρκία, από όπου πολλοί προσπαθούν να περάσουν τα ελληνικά σύνορα για να πατήσουν ευρωπαϊκό έδαφος.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:
Πως προτίθεται η ΕΕ να αντιμετωπίσει αυτό το κύμα προσφύγων και, κυρίως, με ποιό τρόπο θα στηρίξει την Ελλάδα δεδομένου ότι, όπως αναφέρει και η ειδικός της Διεθνούς Αμνηστίας σε θέματα ασύλου, Ανελίζε Μπαλτασίνι, οι ελληνικές αρχές δεν είναι σε θέση να καλύψουν τις βασικές ανάγκες αυτών των προσφύγων;
Απάντηση της κας Malmström εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(19 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί την κατάσταση των προσφύγων από τη Συρία. Για να προετοιμαστεί για το ενδεχόμενο αυξανόμενης εισροής, η Επιτροπή ενεργοποίησε μια συνεχή άσκηση παρακολούθησης, στην οποία συμμετέχουν σχετικοί οργανισμοί της ΕΕ (Ευρωπαϊκή Υπηρεσία Υποστήριξης για το Άσυλο — ΕΥΥΑ, FRONTEX, ΕΥΡΩΠΟΛ) και άλλοι παράγοντες. Επιπλέον, η ΕΥΥΑ βρίσκεται προς το παρόν σε κατάσταση ετοιμότητας για να παράσχει βοήθεια σε κράτη μέλη που αντιμετωπίζουν ιδιαίτερη πίεση, εφόσον καταστεί αναγκαίο.
Η Επιτροπή είναι έτοιμη να παράσχει ή να συντονίσει βοήθεια σε όσα κράτη μέλη θεωρήσουν ότι βρίσκονται υπό πίεση. Η ΕΕ και τα κράτη μέλη έχουν στη διάθεσή τους μια σειρά ευέλικτων μέσων αλληλεγγύης, μεταξύ των οποίων, χρηματοδοτική βοήθεια και στήριξη από εμπειρογνώμονες. Αυτά τα μέτρα ενεργοποιούνται κατόπιν αιτήσεως του ενδιαφερόμενου κράτους μέλους. Ειδικότερα, θα μπορούσε να διατεθούν στην Ελλάδα 4 εκατ. ευρώ στο πλαίσιο του μηχανισμού έκτακτης ανάγκης του Ευρωπαϊκού Ταμείου για τους Πρόσφυγες του 2013.
Η Επιτροπή γνωρίζει πλήρως την απαράδεκτη κατάσταση των αιτούντων άσυλο στην Ελλάδα. Η Ελλάδα έχει δεσμευθεί πλήρως για την εκτεταμένη μεταρρύθμιση του συστήματος της παροχής ασύλου βάσει του εθνικού σχεδίου δράσης. Η Επιτροπή, οι οργανισμοί στον τομέα της ΔΕΥ και άλλοι εταίροι, όπως διεθνείς οργανώσεις, υποστηρίζουν τη μεταρρύθμιση με χρηματοδοτική βοήθεια και με την παροχή εμπειρογνωσίας επιτόπου.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010027/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Fresh influx of refugees from Syria
The civil war in Syria, Turkish involvement in it and the fresh waves of refugees leaving the country mean that there is an urgent need for a better coordination of EU Member States' policies towards refugees / illegal immigrants and for assistance for Greece, whose borders have been under very great strain over the last few years. According to figures published by the Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs, in 2011 about 500 immigrants crossed the Greek-Turkish border every day. The situation is expected to deteriorate further. According to UN estimates, because of the civil war in Syria, approximately 700 000 people are expected to leave the country by the end of the year. So far about 300 000 Syrians have left their homes, mostly heading for the neighbouring countries Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey, whence many try to cross the Greek borders so as to reach European territory.
In view of the above, will the Commission say:
How does the EU intend to tackle this influx of refugees and, in particular, how will it support Greece, since, as Amnesty International asylum expert Anneliese Baldaccini has said, the Greek authorities are unable to meet the basic needs of these refugees?
Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
The Commission is following the situation of refugees from Syria. In order to prepare for the possibility of a rising influx, a constant monitoring exercise was activated by the Commission, involving relevant EU Agencies (EASO, Frontex, Europol) and stakeholders. Moreover, EASO is currently in stand-by mode to be ready to provide assistance to Member States facing particular pressure, if needed. 
The Commission stands ready to provide or coordinate assistance to those Member States that could find themselves under pressure. A number of flexible solidarity tools are at the disposal of the EU and Member States, including financial assistance and expert support. Such measures are activated at the request of the Member States concerned. In particular, EUR 4 million could be made available to Greece under the 2012 European Refugee Fund emergency mechanism.
The Commission is fully aware of the unsatisfactory situation for asylum-seekers in Greece. Greece is engaged in a full-scale reform of its migration and asylum system on the basis of a national Action Plan. The Commission, JHA Agencies and other partners such as international organisations are supporting the reform through financial assistance and by providing expertise on the ground. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010028/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Το πρόβλημα της ατμοσφαιρικής ρύπανσης
Η τελευταία έκθεση του Ευρωπαϊκού Οργανισμού Περιβάλλοντος επισημαίνει ότι, παρά τη μείωση της ατμοσφαιρικής ρύπανσης στην Ευρώπη την προηγούμενη δεκαετία, συγκεκριμένοι ρύποι όπως τα μικροσωματίδια και το όζον, παραμένουν σε πολλές πόλεις πάνω από τα ανώτατα όρια για σημαντικό αριθμό ημερών κάθε έτος, με σοβαρές επιπτώσεις στη δημόσια υγεία αλλά και στα οικοσυστήματα από τα οποία εξαρτιόμαστε. Ένας στους τρεις Ευρωπαίους εκτίθεται σε υψηλές συγκεντρώσεις μικροσωματιδίων, τον πιο επικίνδυνο από τους ατμοσφαιρικούς ρύπους. Η ίδια έκθεση αναφέρει ότι το 97% των πολιτών των ευρωπαϊκών πόλεων εκτέθηκε το 2010 σε υψηλές τιμές όζοντος. Η Αθήνα είναι μεταξύ των πόλεων όπου συχνά καταγράφονται υπερβάσεις των κατώτατων επιπέδων ασφαλείας. Επίσης το 22% της καλλιεργήσιμης γης εκτέθηκε σε καταστροφικές συγκεντρώσεις όζοντος το 2009, με συνέπεια να χαθεί μέρος της παραγωγής.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:
Δεδομένου ότι το πρόβλημα της ατμοσφαιρικής ρύπανσης παραμένει μεγάλο για την ευρωπαϊκή οικογένεια, ποιες πρακτικές προωθούνται για την αντιμετώπιση της και ποιες είναι οι προβλέψεις για τη μείωση της στο μέλλον;
Κοινή απάντηση του κ. Potočnik εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(17 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί στενά την επίτευξη από τα κράτη μέλη των περιβαλλοντικών στόχων που ορίσθηκαν με τη νομοθεσία της ΕΕ για την ποιότητα του αέρα και για τα αιωρούμενα σωματίδια (ΑΣ). Οι αντίστοιχες εργασίες λαμβάνουν πλήρως υπόψη την τελευταία έκθεση του Ευρωπαϊκού Οργανισμού Περιβάλλοντος. Η Επιτροπή έχει ήδη ασκήσει προσφυγή κατά των κρατών μελών που δεν τηρούν τις νομοθετικά θεσπισμένες οριακές τιμές για τα ΑΣ. Η Επιτροπή, στην προσπάθεια να προωθήσει την καλύτερη εφαρμογή της κείμενης νομοθεσίας, προσφέρει παράλληλα αρωγή στα κράτη μέλη, παραδείγματος χάριν με την ανάπτυξη κατευθυντήριων γραμμών για την εφαρμογή, την υποστήριξη έργων συνεργασίας μεταξύ των ευρωπαϊκών πόλεων και περιφερειών, καθώς και μέσω της δημιουργίας βάσεων δεδομένων με παραδείγματα των μέτρων για την ποιότητα του αέρα. 
Επί του παρόντος η Επιτροπή επανεξετάζει την πολιτική της ΕΕ για την ποιότητα του αέρα ώστε να αντιμετωπιστούν στην ΕΕ οι προκλήσεις όσον αφορά την ποιότητά του και να προσδιορισθούν τα περιθώρια περαιτέρω αποδοτικής μείωσης της ρύπανσης. Ειδική ιστοσελίδα (172) συνοψίζει την πλέον πρόσφατη ανάλυση, ενόσω διαμορφώνεται. Η επανεξέταση προβλέπεται να περατωθεί το 2013.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010167/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Koncentrácia tuhých častíc v ovzduší
Európska environmentálna agentúra nedávno zverejnila správu, z ktorej je zrejmé, že v početných európskych regiónoch je závažným problémom vysoká koncentrácia tuhých častíc v ovzduší. Tuhé častice pritom predstavujú jedno z najzávažnejších rizík, ktoré je spojené so znečistením ovzdušia, pretože závažne poškodzujú dýchaciu sústavu a môže viesť k predčasným úmrtiam. Európskej únii sa v uplynulej dekáde síce podarilo znížiť emisie a podiel látok znečisťujúcich ovzdušie, v mnohých krajinách je však ich koncentrácia stále nad povolenými normami. Autori správy odhadujú, že v roku 2010 bolo celkovo 21 % obyvateľov miest vystavených vyššej koncentrácii tuhých častíc než sú stanovené najprísnejšie – denné – limity v EÚ.






1.


Bude sa Komisia touto varovnou správou Európskej environmentálnej agentúry zaoberať?










2.


Ak áno, aké konkrétne opatrenia plánuje prijať na zlepšenie situácie v tejto oblasti?




Spoločná odpoveď pána Potočnika v mene Komisie
(17. januára 2013)
Komisia podrobne monitoruje členské štáty, pokiaľ ide o dosahovanie environmentálnych cieľov stanovených v právnych predpisoch EÚ týkajúcich sa kvality ovzdušia vrátane tuhých znečisťujúcich látok (particulate matter, PM). V tejto práci sa plne zohľadňuje najnovšia správa Európskej environmentálnej agentúry. Komisia už podnikla právne kroky voči členským štátom z dôvodu nesplnenia hraničných hodnôt tuhých znečisťujúcich látok stanovených v právnych predpisoch. S cieľom napomáhať lepšiemu vykonávaniu Komisia podporuje aj členské štáty, napríklad prostredníctvom vypracovania usmernení pre vykonávanie, podporou projektov spolupráce medzi európskymi mestami a regiónmi a vypracovaním databáz s príkladmi opatrení na zlepšenie kvality ovzdušia. 
Komisia v súčasnosti uskutočňuje prieskum politík EÚ v oblasti kvality ovzdušia s cieľom zamerať sa na výzvy spojené s kvalitou ovzdušia v EÚ a identifikovať rozsah budúceho nákladovo efektívneho zníženia. Na osobitnej webovej stránke sa uvádzajú najnovšie analýzy, ktoré boli vyvinuté. Prieskum sa má ukončiť v roku 2013.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010028/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Atmospheric pollution
The most recent report of the European Environment Agency points out that, despite a reduction in atmospheric pollution in Europe over the last decade, maximum levels for certain pollutants, such as microparticles and ozone, are still being exceeded in many cities for a significant number of days each year, which has serious implications for public health and the ecosystems on which we depend. One-third of Europeans are currently being exposed to high concentrations of microparticles, the most dangerous of atmospheric pollutants. The same report indicates that, in 2010, 97% of the residents of European cities were exposed to high ozone levels and that in a number of them, including Athens, the relevant safety thresholds are frequently exceeded. In addition, 22% of cultivable land was exposed to extremely harmful ozone concentrations in 2009, causing part of the harvest to be lost.
In view of this:
Can the Commission indicate what action is being taken in response to atmospheric pollution, which continues to be a major problem in Europe? To what extent does it anticipate that atmospheric pollution levels can be reduced in the future?
Question for written answer E-010167/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Concentration of Solid Particles in the Air
The European Environment Agency has recently published a report which indicates that the high concentration of solid particles in the air is a serious problem in numerous EU regions. At the same time, solid particles represent one of the most serious risks with regard to air pollution because they severely damage the respiratory system and may cause premature death. In the last decade, the EU succeeded at lowering emissions and the amounts of air-polluting substances, but the concentration of such pollution is still above the approved norm in many Member States. The authors of the report estimate that in 2010, as many as 21% of city inhabitants were exposed to higher concentrations of solid particles than the strictest — daily — EU limits allow. 






1.


Will the Commission take the European Environment Agency’s warning report into consideration? 










2.


If so, what concrete measures is the Committee planning to adopt in order to improve the situation in this area? 




Joint answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
The Commission closely monitors the Member States' attainment of the environmental objectives set in EU air quality legislation, including for particulate matter (PM). This work takes full account of the latest report from the European Environment Agency. The Commission has already taken legal action against Member States for failure to comply with the PM limit values established in legislation. In order to encourage better implementation, the Commission also supports Member States, for example by developing guidelines for implementation, supporting cooperation projects between European cities and regions, and developing databases with examples of air quality measures. 
The Commission is currently conducting a review of EU air quality policy to address the air quality challenges in the EU and to identify the scope for further cost-effective reduction. A dedicated webpage (173) presents the latest analysis as it is developed. The review is to be finalised in 2013.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010029/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Μεταρρυθμίσεις στον τραπεζικό τομέα
Πολύ πρόσφατα παρουσιάστηκαν οι προτάσεις του Φινλανδού Κεντρικού Τραπεζίτη, Έρικ Λίκανεν, σχετικά με τον διαχωρισμό των πρωτογενών τραπεζικών λειτουργιών από τις επενδυτικές δραστηριότητες, προκειμένου, όπως υποστήριξε, να μην καλούνται οι φορολογούμενοι να πληρώνουν το κόστος διάσωσης των τραπεζών, ιδιαίτερα όταν οι τελευταίες απειλούνται με κατάρρευση εξαιτίας ριψοκίνδυνων επενδυτικών αλλαγών. Ταυτόχρονα, οι τράπεζες αντιδρούν και κάνουν λόγο για προσπάθεια διάλυσης τους.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:
Είναι αποφασισμένη η ΕΕ να προχωρήσει με αυτή την μεταρρύθμιση και, αν ναι, ποιός είναι ο χρονικός ορίζοντας για την ολοκλήρωσή της;
Απάντηση του κ. Barnier εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(7 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η έκθεση της ομάδας εμπειρογνωμόνων υψηλού επιπέδου για την αναδιάρθρωση του τραπεζικού τομέα στην ΕΕ υποβλήθηκε στην Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή στις 2 Οκτωβρίου 2012. Με βάση την έκθεση αυτή η Επιτροπή ξεκίνησε δημόσια διαβούλευση ενδιαφερομένων με θέμα την έκθεση και τις συστάσεις της, που ολοκληρώθηκε στις 13 Νοεμβρίου 2012. Η Επιτροπή μελετά ήδη τα αποτελέσματα της διαβούλευσης και τα μέτρα που ενδείκνυται να ληφθούν. Κάθε πιθανή νομοθετική πρόταση θα συνοδεύεται από αξιολόγηση επιπτώσεων και θα συνεκτιμά τις συνέπειες για τις ευρωπαϊκές τράπεζες και την ανταγωνιστικότητα του ευρωπαϊκού χρηματοπιστωτικού τομέα.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010029/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Reform of the banking sector
A presentation took place very recently of the proposals put forward by the Finnish central banker, Erkki Liikanen, to separate primary banking operations from investment activities. The aim of these proposals is to ensure that taxpayers are not required to bear the cost of bailing out banks, especially where the latter are threatened with collapse due to risky investments. The banks, for their part, have responded, claiming that these proposals are an attempt to break them up.
In view of the above, will the Commission say:
Is the EU is determined to push ahead with this reform and, if so, what is the timeframe for its completion?
Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The report of the High-level Expert Group on reforming the structure of the EU banking sector was presented to the European Commission on 2 October 2012. On this basis, the Commission launched a public stakeholder consultation on the report and its recommendations, which closed on 13 November 2012. The Commission is currently reflecting on the results of the consultation and the appropriate way forward. Any possible legislative proposal would be accompanied by an impact assessment, including assessing the effects on European banks and on competitiveness of the European financial sector.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010030/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Charalampos Angourakis (GUE/NGL)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Χιλιάδες απολύσεις στο εργοστάσιο Ford της Γκενκ Βελγίου
Στις 24 Οκτωβρίου 2012 η πολυεθνική εταιρεία Ford ανακοίνωσε την αναστολή της λειτουργίας των εργοστασίων της στο Βέλγιο και την Βρετανία. Μόνο στη βελγική πόλη Γκενκ, της επαρχίας του Λιμβούργου, 4 300 εργάτες πετιούνται στην ανεργία, ενώ υπολογίζεται ότι θα χαθούν και άλλες 6 200 θέσεις εργασίας σε βιομηχανίες που δραστηριοποιούνταν σε εργολαβικές εργασίες του εργοστασίου της Ford. Την ίδια στιγμή, η εταιρεία Ford δημοσίευσε λειτουργικά κέρδη 8,8 δισ. δολάρια μόνο για το 2011, με αύξηση καθαρών εσόδων 1 δισ. δολάρια από το 2010. Το 2010 η επιχείρηση είχε λάβει ενίσχυση 50 εκατ. ευρώ από την βελγική κυβέρνηση, έπειτα από το κλείσιμο και άλλου εργοστασίου της στην πόλη της Αμβέρσας, προκειμένου να διατηρήσει το εργοστάσιό της στη Γκενκ. Στα πλαίσια της ενιαίας αγοράς και της ελεύθερης κίνησης των κεφαλαίων, που συνιστούν τις θεμελιώδεις αρχές της ΕΕ, η εταιρεία Ford μεταφέρει την βελγική γραμμή παραγωγής της στην Γερμανία και την Ισπανία, με φθηνότερο εργατικό δυναμικό κι έτσι το πολυεθνικό μονοπώλιο να εξασφαλίζει ακόμη μεγαλύτερη κερδοφορία.
Αυτά είναι τα αποτελέσματα από την επίθεση των μονοπωλίων, της ΕΕ και των αστικών κυβερνήσεων των κρατών μελών της ενάντια στην εργατική τάξη, για να της φορτώσουν τα βάρη της καπιταλιστικής κρίσης, διασώζοντας έτσι την κερδοφορία των μονοπωλιακών ομίλων.
Τι έχει να πει η Επιτροπή στις στρατιές των ανέργων που μεγαλώνουν καθημερινά για τη στρατηγική της ΕΕ και των κυβερνήσεων των κρατών μελών, που μειώνει με όλα τα μέσα την τιμή της εργατικής δύναμης, που την καταδικάζει στο περιθώριο της ανεργίας, της φτώχειας και της εξαθλίωσης για να διατηρήσει τα κέρδη των μονοπωλιακών επιχειρηματικών ομίλων;
Απάντηση του κ. Andor εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(4 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Όσον αφορά τα μέσα που θα συμβάλλουν στο μετριασμό των επιπτώσεων που προκύπτουν από τις απολύσεις που ανακοινώθηκαν στην Γκενκ, η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει τον κ. βουλευτή στην απάντησή της στην ερώτηση P-9753/2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010030/12
to the Commission
Charalampos Angourakis (GUE/NGL)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Thousands of job losses at the Ford car plant in Genk (Belgium)
On 24 October 2012, the Ford Motor Company revealed its intention to halt operations at its plants in Belgium and the United Kingdom, resulting in 4300 job losses in the Belgian city of Genk (situated in the province of Limburg) alone, with an estimated additional 6200 job losses among its suppliers. At the same time, it announced operating profits of USD 8.8 billion for 2011 alone and a USD 1 billion increase in net receipts from 2010. Moreover, in 2010 it received USD 50 million from the Belgian Government, following the closure of another Ford plant in Antwerp, in order to keep open the Genk plant. However, under Single Market arrangements and provisions for the free movement of capital, which are fundamental EU principles, Ford is now transferring its Belgian production line to Germany and Spain where manpower is cheaper, thereby allowing this multinational monopoly to boost its profit margins still further.
This is the outcome of the offensive being launched by monopolies, the EU and the bourgeois Member State governments at the expense of the working class, forcing them to bear the burden of the capitalist crisis, while preserving monopolistic profit margins.
What does the Commission have to say to the daily swelling ranks of the unemployed regarding the strategy being adopted by the EU and Member State governments to cut the cost of manpower in any way possible, thereby marginalising workers and condemning them to unemployment and poverty, simply in order to maintain monopolistic profit margins?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
As regards the means to mitigate the consequences of the announced job losses in Genk, the Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answer to Question P-9753/2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010031/12
to the Commission
Daniel Hannan (ECR)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: EIB loans to the BBC
What loans (type and amount) did the European Investment Bank (EIB) make available to the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in 2010, 2011 and 2012?
Answer given by Mr Rehn  on behalf of the Commission 
(15 January 2013)
The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that no EIB loans were granted to BBC in 2010, 2011 and 2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010032/12
to the Commission
Marta Andreasen (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Effects of a financial transaction tax (FTT)
A press release dated 23 October 2012 quotes the President of the Commission, Mr Barroso, as saying:
‘I am delighted to see that 10 member states have indicated their willingness to participate in a common FTT along the lines of the Commission’s original proposal. This tax can raise billions of euros of much-needed revenue for member states in these difficult times. This is about fairness: we need to ensure the costs of the crisis are shared by the financial sector instead of shouldered by ordinary citizens.’
However, according to the Commission’s own impact paper on the proposed FTT, dated 28 September 2011, the modelling of the impact of an FTT suggests that such a tax, levied at a rate of 0.1%, would result in a long-run drop in GDP of 1.76%, more than wiping out any alleged gains.






1.


Would the Commission agree that where Mr Barroso refers to 




‘much needed revenue for member states’, he should have referred to ‘the governments of the member states’, as the Member States are demonstrably going to become less well off, as the Commission’s own impact paper freely admits.






2.


Would the Commission also agree that the projected fall in GDP would in any case result in a net decrease in overall tax revenue for the Member States, even after FTT income is taken into account?










3.


Would the Commission also agree that to try to contrast the 




‘financial sector’ and ‘ordinary citizens’, as Mr Barroso does, is disingenuous? Although the cheques for an FTT would be written by institutions, the costs of an FTT would be borne entirely by people, whether by shareholders through lower returns, by employees through lower remuneration or by customers through higher charges, the only issue being in what proportions. The customers referred to in this instance are in large measure pensioners in the Member States.






4.


Finally, would the Commission agree that as the financial transaction tax is intended to be an 




‘own resource’ of the European Union, beyond the control of the Member States, the net effect of all the above would be to reduce GDP and overall tax take in the Member States as well as to reduce salaries and returns, and increase fees, in the financial services industry, in the interests of producing an income stream for the European Union which would be considerably smaller than the costs imposed on the governments and citizens of the Member States?
Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)






1.


No.











2.


No. The figure the Honourable Member refers to is a cumulative effect over several decades, and it had been generated by a model that assumed that all investment activities in an economy, be it the buying of a house by a private household or the purchase of an oven by a small bakery shop is financed with the help of issuing shares and bonds. The financing of such investment with the help of bank loans or mortgage loans was not foreseen in that model. Using a model version with more realistic assumptions










2.


No. The figure the Honourable Member refers to is a cumulative effect over several decades, and it had been generated by a model that assumed that all investment activities in an economy, be it the buying of a house by a private household or the purchase of an oven by a small bakery shop is financed with the help of issuing shares and bonds. The financing of such investment with the help of bank loans or mortgage loans was not foreseen in that model. Using a model version with more realistic assumptions




 (174) showed that the FTT's impact would amount to a cumulative deviation of 0.28% of GDP, not taking into account the potential positive effects from the use of the FTT revenues. 





3.


No. The Commission in particular considers that the tax burden would largely remain with the persons liable to pay the tax, i.e. the financial institutions, which carry out more than 85% of the financial transactions among themselves.










4.


No. The Commission proposal on own resources also foresaw a reduction in the GNI contributions of Member States in return for the FTT revenues accruing to the EU budget. In other terms, the use of FTT as own resource will not increase the overall burden on European taxpayers attributable to that budget. .




(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-010033/12
an die Kommission
Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE)
(6. November 2012)

Betrifft: Nachnominierung der Isel als Natura-2000-Gebiet durch die Republik Österreich
Die Isel in Osttirol zählt neben dem Lech in Nordtirol und dem Tagliamento im Friaul/Italien zu den letzten großen alpinen Wildflüssen Mitteleuropas. Im Gegensatz zum Lech (Natura-2000-Gebiet) und dem Tagliamento ist die Isel jedoch ein Gletscherfluss. Als solcher besitzt die Isel über weite Strecken noch einen dynamischen Flussraum mit regelmäßig umgelagerten Sand-, Kies‐ und Schotterbänken. Die dadurch immer wieder neu gebildeten Pionierstandorte sind ihrerseits die Voraussetzung für bestimmte Lebensformen und Lebensgemeinschaften, die sich an diese ständige Veränderung angepasst haben und sie für ihren weiteren Bestand benötigen.
Solche Lebensgemeinschaften nach Anhang I der Flora-Fauna-Habitatrichtlinie sind an der Isel: „Alpine Flüsse und ihre krautige Ufervegetation“ (Code 3220), „Alpine Flüsse und ihre Ufervegetation mit Myricaria germanica“ (Code 3230), „Alpine Flüsse und ihre Ufergehölze mit Salix eleagnos“ (Code 3240). Tierarten nach Anhang II sind Cottus gobio (Koppe), Hucho hucho (Huchen) und Bombina variegata (Gelbbauchunke). Speziell die Deutsche Tamariske (Myricaria germanica), die als einzige ihrer Gattung in Mitteleuropa vorkommt, ist heute eine ausgesprochene Rarität. An der Isel (in Osttirol/Österreich), dem letzten frei fließenden, ökologisch funktionsfähigen Gletscherfluss der gesamten Alpen, gibt es die größten inneralpinen Bestände der Deutschen Tamariske überhaupt, wissenschaftlich und naturschutzfachlich von internationaler Bedeutung, und die Isel gilt daher als ein unersetzlicher Referenzfluss Europas.






1.


Wird daher die Kommission Österreich auffordern, die Isel in Osttirol als Natura-2000-Gebiet nachzunominieren?










2.


Wann ist mit einer Entscheidung über die vorliegenden Beschwerden in diesem Zusammenhang zu rechnen?










3.


Teilt die Kommission die in den vorliegenden Gutachten vertretene Meinung, dass es sich bei der Isel aufgrund der naturnahen Flussdynamik um ein besonderes Schutzgebiet (Natura 2000) handelt?




Antwort von Herrn Potočnik im Namen der Kommission
(17. Dezember 2012)
Bei der Kommission sind mehrere Beschwerdeschreiben bezüglich der Notwendigkeit, weitere österreichische Gebiete als Natura-2000-Schutzgebiete auszuweisen, eingegangen, die zurzeit im Rahmen der allgemeinen Regelung von Fragen im Zusammenhang mit Natura 2000 in Österreich geprüft werden. Die Isel und ihre Nebenflüsse oberhalb der Stadt Lienz sind ebenfalls Teil dieser Prüfung.
Die Kommission plant, die österreichischen Behörden in den kommenden Wochen zu kontaktieren, d. h. sobald die den Beschwerden zugrunde liegenden Informationen ausgewertet wurden und die Prüfung abgeschlossen ist.
Die Kommission geht davon aus, dass sich die Frage der Ausweisung des Isel-Gebiets als Natura-2000-Schutzgebiet im Zuge dieser weiteren Kontakte mit den österreichischen Behörden klären wird.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010033/12
to the Commission
Eva Lichtenberger (Verts/ALE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Nomination by Austria, after the deadline, of the Isel as a Natura 2000 site
Along with the Lech in North Tyrol and the Tagliamento in Friuli, Italy, the Isel in East Tyrol is one of the last major wild Alpine rivers in central Europe. Unlike the Lech (Natura 2000 site) and the Tagliamento, however, the Isel is a glacier-fed river. As such, over large parts of its course the Isel still creates a dynamic river environment with sand and gravel banks whose position shifts regularly. The pioneer habitats which are repeatedly formed in this way are in turn the prerequisite for the presence of certain species and ecosystems which have adjusted to and indeed require this constant process of change in order to survive.
The Isel is home to the following ecosystems covered by Annex I to the Flora-Fauna-Habitats Directive: ‘Alpine rivers and the herbaceous vegetation along their banks’ (code 3220), ‘Alpine rivers and their ligneous vegetation with Myricaria germanica’ (code 3230), ‘Alpine rivers and their ligneous vegetation with Salix eleagnos’ (code 3240). Animal species covered by Annex II to the directive present in the river environment include Cottus gobio (European bullhead), Hucho hucho (huchen or Danube salmon) and Bombina variegata (yellow-bellied toad). The real rarity, however, is the German tamarisk (Myricaria germanica), the only member of its genus to grow in central Europe. The largest Alpine stands of this species, which are of international importance for research and nature conservation, can be found in East Tyrol, Austria, along the banks of the Isel, the last free-running, ecologically viable glacier-fed river in the entire Alps. For that reason, the Isel is an irreplaceable example of a particular type of river in Europe.






1.


In the light of the above, will the Commission call on Austria to nominate the Isel as a Natura 2000 site, even though the relevant deadline has passed?










2.


When is a decision likely to be taken on the complaints submitted in connection with this issue?










3.


Does the Commission share the view expressed in the expert reports drawn up on this issue that, given its natural, dynamic nature, the Isel should be granted the status of a special protection area under Natura 2000? 




Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(17 December 2012)
The Commission has received several complaints regarding the need to propose additional sites in Austria as Natura 2000 sites. These complaints are currently being assessed as part of a wider approach dealing with all issues relating to the Austrian Natura 2000 network. The river Isel and its tributaries above the city of Lienz are part of this assessment. 
The Commission plans to contact the Austrian authorities within the coming weeks, as soon as all the available information relating to the complaints and the assessment has been processed. 
The Commission expects the status of the Isel area under Natura 2000 to be dealt with in the light of these further contacts with the Austrian authorities.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita P-010034/12
à Comissão
Carlos Coelho (PPE)
(6 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Poder judicial e direitos humanos na Croácia
O Tratado da União Europeia prevê que qualquer país europeu pode pedir a adesão caso respeite os valores democráticos da UE e se comprometa a promovê-los.
O primeiro passo para tal país consiste em preencher os critérios fundamentais para a adesão. Esses critérios (os critérios de Copenhaga) foram definidos pelo Conselho Europeu em Copenhaga em 1993. Um dos critérios é que um país que pretenda aderir deve ter instituições estáveis, que garantam a democracia, o Estado de direito, os direitos humanos e o respeito e proteção das minorias.
Uma organização croata, JurisProtecta, publicou recentemente um relatório sobre a situação do poder judicial e dos direitos humanos na Croácia, acusando os governos croatas de patrocinarem o crime organizado e violações em massa dos direitos humanos, desde que a Croácia se tornou um Estado.
Um poder judicial eficaz, independente e de elevada qualidade é um dos requisitos prévios para o desenvolvimento bem sucedido da economia de mercado e de uma sociedade livre. No entanto, o dito relatório chama a atenção para a existência na Croácia de um sistema jurídico ineficaz e de baixa qualidade caracterizado por processos judiciais que se arrastam, pela falta de independência dos juízes (com corrupção e conflitos de interesse) e pela falta de regulamentação legal dos honorários dos advogados, o que significa que estes são muito elevados (sete vezes mais elevados que os praticados, por exemplo, na Alemanha), criando, assim, um verdadeiro obstáculo para os cidadãos que não disponham de recursos financeiros que lhes permitam exercer o seu direito à proteção da lei.
O relatório realça também a falta de independência dos meios de comunicação como um dos problemas mais significativos presentes na sociedade croata.






1.


A Comissão tem conhecimento dos factos acima descritos?










2.


Há bons fundamentos para as acusações que constam do relatório?










3.


Em caso afirmativo, que medidas pretende a Comissão tomar?




Resposta dada por Štefan Füle em nome da Comissão
(12 de dezembro de 2012)
Desde que a Croácia se candidatou à adesão à UE em 2003, a Comissão Europeia tem acompanhado de perto o cumprimento pela Croácia dos critérios de adesão fundamentais relacionados com o Estado de direito e o respeito dos direitos humanos, os quais fazem parte dos chamados «critérios políticos» e integram as negociações do capítulo 23 «Sistema Judiciário e Direitos Fundamentais».
A Croácia tem levado a cabo uma série de reformas que visam reforçar a independência, a responsabilização e o profissionalismo do poder judiciário. No que diz respeito à luta contra a criminalidade organizada e a corrupção, a Croácia tem melhorado os seus resultados em matéria de investigações, ações e condenações, incluindo dos processos de alto nível. 
Persistem, ainda assim, questões que exigem esforços redobrados. No seu relatório global de acompanhamento, publicado em 10 de outubro de 2012, a Comissão Europeia considera que a melhoria da eficiência do sistema judiciário, bem como a realização de progressos em matéria de prevenção, luta contra a corrupção e combate à criminalidade organizada constituem domínios a que a Croácia deve prestar particular atenção nos próximos meses. 
A liberdade de expressão, nomeadamente a liberdade e o pluralismo dos meios de comunicação social, está prevista no direito croata e é, em geral, respeitada. No entanto, são necessários esforços contínuos para assegurar a independência do organismo de radiodifusão de serviço público e melhorar a sua transparência.
A Comissão Europeia continua a acompanhar de perto estas questões e aborda sistematicamente estes temas nos seus contactos com as autoridades croatas. Apoia também os esforços de reforma, nomeadamente através da prestação de assistência financeira e técnica da UE. A Comissão fará novamente o ponto da situação dos preparativos da Croácia tendo para a sua adesão no seu mais recente relatório de acompanhamento, a ser publicado na primavera de 2013. 
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010034/12
to the Commission
Carlos Coelho (PPE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: The judiciary and human rights in Croatia
The Treaty on European Union states that any European country may apply for membership if it respects the democratic values of the EU and is committed to promoting them.
The first step is for the country to meet the key criteria for accession. These (the Copenhagen criteria) were defined by the European Council in Copenhagen in 1993. One of the criteria is that a country wishing to join must have stable institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities.
A Croatian organisation, Juris Protecta, has recently published a report on the situation of the judiciary and human rights in Croatia, accusing Croatian governments of sponsoring organised crime and mass human rights violations since Croatia become a state.
An efficient, independent and high-quality judiciary is one of the prerequisites for the successful development of the market economy and a free society. However, this report draws attention to the existence in Croatia of an inefficient and poor-quality legal system, characterised by: drawn-out court proceedings; lack of independence of the judges (with corruption and conflicts of interest); and lack of legal regulation of lawyers’ fees meaning that they are very high (seven times higher than those practised in, for example, Germany), thus creating a real obstacle to those citizens who lack the financial resources that would enable them to exercise their right to legal protection.
The report also points out the lack of freedom of the media as one of the most significant problems present in Croatian society.






1.


Is the Commission aware of the facts described above?










2.


Are there proper grounds for all the charges included in this report?










3.


If so, what action does the Commission intend to take?




Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(12 December 2012)
Since Croatia applied for EU membership in 2003, the European Commission has closely monitored Croatia's compliance with the key accession criteria related to rule of law and respect for human rights both under the so-called political criteria and during the negotiations on Chapter 23 on judiciary and fundamental rights.
Croatia has carried out a number of reforms to strengthen the independence, accountability, and professionalism of the judiciary. As regards the fight against organised crime and corruption, Croatia has developed a track record of investigations, prosecutions, and convictions, including on high-level cases. 
At the same time some issues remain for which increased efforts are required. In its Comprehensive Monitoring Report published on 10 October 2012, the European Commission considers improving the efficiency of the judiciary as well as further progress in the areas of prevention and suppression of corruption and the fight against organised crime as areas to which Croatia should pay particular attention in the coming months. 
Freedom of expression, including freedom and pluralism of the media is provided for in Croatian law and is generally respected. But continued efforts are needed to ensure the independence of the public service broadcaster and to increase its transparency.
The European Commission continues to monitor these issues very closely and consistently raises these matters with the Croatian authorities. It also supports reform efforts, including through the provision of EU financial and technical assistance. The Commission will again take stock of Croatia's preparations for accession in its last monitoring report to be published in spring 2013. 
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010035/12
to the Commission
Brian Simpson (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Follow-up to road safety report
Could the Commission outline how it is taking forward the recommendations presented in the Koch report on ‘European road safety 2011-2020’ (175), which calls for an eye test every 10 years for all drivers of vehicles in categories A and B, and every 5 years for drivers older than 65 years?
Furthermore, could the Commission confirm whether all Member States have now implemented the visual requirements set out in Annex III of Directive 2009/113/EC and, if not, whether it has initiated proceedings against those Member States which have not done so?
Answer given by Mr Kallas  on behalf of the Commission 
(10 December 2012)
Directive 2009/113/EC (176) amending Directive 2006/126/EC (177) on driving licences has only become applicable since 15 September 2010. The application of the limited periods of validity of driving licences will have the consequence that, overall, vision checks should be carried out more frequently when renewing driving licences as of 19 January 2013.The Commission will monitor the application of the new Directive. If the need appears for more stringent vision requirements, notably as regards the frequency of tests for older drivers, the Commission will take the appropriate initiatives.
All Member States have communicated to the Commission the provisions of national law implementing the requirements of Directive 2009/113/EC.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010036/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Αυξήσεις των τιμών εισιτηρίων στα Μέσα Μαζικής Μεταφοράς
Για κάποιες ευάλωτες κοινωνικές ομάδες, τα ΜΜΜ είναι ο μόνος τρόπος μετακίνησης. Ο περιορισμός του ιδιωτικού αυτοκινήτου και η αύξηση της χρήσης δημόσιων μέσων μεταφοράς συμβάλλει στην επίτευξη περιβαλλοντικών, αλλά και δημοσιονομικών στόχων. Η τρόικα έχει υποστηρίξει την ανάγκη μείωσης του κόστους ζωής. Σύμφωνα, όμως, με το νέο Μνημόνιο (6. Efficient Network Industries and Services), ως το Μάρτιο του 2013 θα αυξηθούν «τουλάχιστον κατά 25%» τα εισιτήρια αστικών λεωφορείων και τρένων (178), για ενίσχυση των εσόδων των συγκοινωνιακών φορέων κατά 40 εκατ. ευρώ την επόμενη διετία (179). Όμως, η μεγάλη αύξηση των εισιτηρίων ιδιαίτερα σε μια οικονομικά δύσκολη περίοδο μπορεί να οδηγήσει σε μείωση εσόδων λόγω αύξησης της εισιτηριοδιαφυγής ή μείωσης του αριθμού των επιβατών. Ο όμιλος ΟΑΣΑ ΑΕ (180) που περιλαμβάνει, μαζί με τις θυγατρικές του (ΣΤΑ.ΣΥ (181) και Ο.ΣΥ (182)), όλα τα δημόσια μέσα μαζικής μεταφοράς στην Αττική παρουσίασε στο πρώτο εξάμηνο του 2012 μείωση εσόδων από πωλήσεις εισιτηρίων κατά 3 921 217 ευρώ σε σχέση με το αντίστοιχο εξάμηνο του 2011 (183). Μετά από εντατικοποίηση, όμως, των ελέγχων το διάστημα 24 Σεπτεμβρίου — 28 Οκτωβρίου 2012 σημειώθηκε αύξηση εσόδων από πωλήσεις εισιτηρίων κατά 9,9% τον Οκτώβριο του 2012 σε σχέση με τον Οκτώβριο του 2011 (184). Χωρίς ελέγχους κι άλλα μέτρα καταπολέμησης της εισιτηριοδιαφυγής, οι απώλειες εσόδων για το σύνολο των εταιρειών τού ομίλου ΟΑΣΑ και του Προαστιακού, κυμαίνονται από 25 έως 37,5 εκατομμύρια ευρώ ετησίως (185)

Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


 Υποστήριξε ο εκπρόσωπός της στην τρόικα την αύξηση της τιμής των εισιτηρίων κατά 25%; Με βάση ποια αναλογιστική μελέτη; Εξετάστηκε σενάριο αύξησης της χρήσης των ΜΜΜ και περιορισμού της εισιτηριοδιαφυγής ως μέσο βελτίωσης των εσόδων τους;










—


 Έχει ενημερωθεί από την κυβέρνηση για τα αποτελέσματα από την καταπολέμηση της εισιτηριοδιαφυγής;










—


 Έχει συνυπολογιστεί η αδυναμία των πολιτών να πληρώσουν ακριβότερα εισιτήρια τη στιγμή που αυξάνεται η ανεργία και περιορίζεται το εισόδημά τους, γεγονός που ενδέχεται να οδηγήσει σε μείωση αντί για αύξηση των εσόδων;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής 
(21 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η κατά 25% αύξηση των εισιτηρίων στους ΟΑΣΑ και ΤΡΑΙΝΟΣΕ αποτελεί δέσμευση που ανέλαβε η ελληνική κυβέρνηση από τις αρχές του 2012. Το Αξιότιμο Μέλος παραπέμπεται στη σελίδα 127 του μνημονίου συμφωνίας του Μαρτίου του 2012: 
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/pdf/ocp94_en.pdf 
Η Επιτροπή γνωρίζει τις ενέργειες της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης για την καταπολέμηση της εισιτηριοδιαφυγής.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010036/12
to the Commission
Nikos Chrysogelos (Verts/ALE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Public transport fare increases
Public transport is the only means of transport for certain vulnerable social groups. A fall in the number of private cars and increased use of public transport are helping to achieve environmental and fiscal objectives. The Troika has stated that the cost of living needs to be reduced. However, under the new Memorandum (section 6 on Efficient Network Industries and Services), urban bus and train fares will rise ‘by at least 25%’ by March 2013 (186), in order to boost transport operators’ income by EUR 40 million over the next two years (187). However, large fare rises, especially in economically difficult times, may cause revenue to fall, due to increased fare-dodging or a reduction in passenger numbers. The OASA SA group (188) which, together with its subsidiaries (STA.SY (189) and O.SY (190)), covers all means of public transport in Attica, reported that earnings from ticket sales were down by EUR 3 921 217 in the first half of 2012, compared with the same period in 2011 (191). However, when ticket inspections were stepped up between 24 September and 28 October 2012, revenue from ticket sales rose by 9.9% in October 2012, compared with October 2011 (192). Without inspections and other action to combat fare-dodging, revenue lost across all OASA group and suburban companies fluctuates between EUR 25 and 37.5 million a year (193).
In view of the above, will the Commission answer the following:






—


 Does its representative in the Troika support the 25% fare rise and on the basis of which actuarial study? Has a scenario been considered based on increased use of public transport and action to limit fare-dodging as a means of increasing revenue?










—


 Has the government advised the Commission of the results of action to combat fare-dodging?










—


 Has account been taken of the fact that, with rising unemployment and falling incomes, the public cannot afford higher fares and that higher fares will probably cause revenue to fall rather than rise?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission 
(21 December 2012)
The 25% fare increase of both OASA and TRAINOSE features is a commitment undertaken by the Greek Government since early 2012. The Honourable Member is referred to page 127 of the March 2012 Memorandum of Understanding: 
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/pdf/ocp94_en.pdf 
The Commission is aware of the Greek Government's action to combat fare-dodging. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010037/12
to the Commission
Marta Andreasen (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Commissioners and ethics when it comes to meeting lobbyists
Two paragraphs of an article that appeared on the Times of Malta website on 27 October read as follows:
‘Admitting that OLAF had no proof of any criminal offences by Mr Dalli, Mr Kessler stressed it was evident that Mr Dalli had acted against the spirit of the Commissioners’ Code of Conduct and the framework Convention on Tobacco Control ‘which Mr Dalli was well aware of’.
‘According to this convention, public servants cannot have contacts with the tobacco industry unless they declare it. Mr Dalli met them several times and did not declare it. This is a breach of the convention’, Mr Kessler told MEPs’.
The Code of Conduct of Commissioners does not explicitly mention that Commissioners are to abstain from meeting business consultants (lobbyists) in their private offices and/or at home. However, it is believed that Mr Dalli’s meeting with a young lawyer in his private office, in the company of Mr Zammit, for a discussion of the draft tobacco directive and snus constituted ‘unofficial contacts with several tobacco companies’, to borrow the words of a Commission spokesperson.






1.


Can the Commission comment as to whether Mr Dalli broke any specific article of the Code of Conduct for Commissioners?










2.


Did Mr Dalli contravene the spirit of the Code of Conduct? If so, why was the Ad Hoc Ethical Committee not asked for an opinion?




Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)






1.


 The Commission fully respects the principle of the presumption of innocence and at this stage refrains from entering into any qualification of the events at stake, including with regard to the Code of Conduct for Commissioners. 










2.


According to paragraph 2.3 of the Code of Conduct for Commissioners, the Ad hoc Ethical Committee may be requested by the President to deliver opinions on any general ethical question concerning the interpretation of the Code of Conduct, but the appreciation of specific situations — other than those regarding post term-of office activities of Commissioners under paragraph 1.2‐ does not enter in the Ad hoc Ethical Committee's remit.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010038/12
to the Commission
Marta Andreasen (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Draft regulations stopped from going into the interservice phase
According to a letter which Mr Dalli wrote to MEPs on 22 October, ‘after passing through two impact assessments, the new tobacco directive was ready to be launched in interservice in late August 2012. This was stopped by the Secretary-General and the Legal Services. It was again to be launched early [October] and again it was postponed to today’.






1.


Since the start of the Barroso II Commission, how often has it happened that a draft regulation or directive that was ready to be 




‘launched in interservice’ was stopped by the Secretary-General or by anybody else ‘for further discussion’?






2.


For each of the cases identified, can the Commission explain why this happened, as the only reason reported in an interview with Mr Dalli has so far been that the Legal Service thought this was 




‘necessary’?






3.


Can the Commission publish the two letters signed by its Secretary-General and the Legal Service, that stopped the new tobacco regulation?




Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
Inter-service consultation is one of the steps in the internal decision-making process of the Commission. It is defined in Article 23 of Commission's rules of procedure. Article 23 also provides for the more general requirement for all services to ensure effective coordination at all stages of preparation. In this context, contacts between the lead service, the Secretariat-General and the Legal Service before the launch of formal inter-service consultation are a common feature of the preparation of a legislative proposal: it is not possible to itemise such a frequent occurrence. Such contacts do not imply that the proposal has been ‘stopped’. 
The Commission has granted partial access, under the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (194), to the note of its Secretary-General and Director-General of the Legal Service of 25 July 2012, a copy of which (in the format as disclosed) has been transmitted to the Secretary-General of the European Parliament.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010039/12
to the Commission
Marta Andreasen (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: The College of Commissioners following Estonia's example by cutting salaries
According to the article ‘Boom time for Estonia’ in the Autumn 2012 edition of Flybe Uncovered, Estonians ‘have endured some of the harshest austerity measures with barely a murmur. They even re-elected the politicians that imposed them.’
‘It was very difficult, but we managed it,’ explains Economy Minister and former Prime Minister Juhan Parts. ‘Everybody had to give a little bit. Salaries paid out of the budget were all cut, but we cut ministers’ salaries by 20% and the average civil servant’s by 10%.’






1.


Does the Commission recognise that slashing public sector wages encourages citizens in Member States to endure the austerity measures imposed on them?










2.


If a Treaty change is required to change a Commissioner’s salary, will the Commission advocate this in its talks with the Council, and, if not, why not?










3.


Even if the College of Commissioners does not intend to take any action to reduce its own salaries, will it present the estimated average salary cuts proposed for each of the salary groups AD 12 to AD 16, expressed as a percentage of salary?




Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)






1.


The austerity measures have to be assessed according to the economic and social situation in each particular Member State.










2.


The Treaty change is not required to change salaries of Members of the Commission. According to Article 243 of the TFEU, it is the Council that determines salaries, allowances and pensions of the President of the European Council, Members of the Commission, High Representative and Judges of the Court of Justice. The Treaty does not give the right of initiative to the Commission in this regard.




The Commission does not have either the right of initiative concerning the statute and salaries of Members of Parliament (Article 223 of the TFEU).






3.


Since 2004 the real salaries of EU civil servants, including officials in grades AD 12 to AD 16, have decreased by 7.6% due to adjustments below inflation, increases in the pension contributions and in the special levy.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010040/12
to the Commission
David Martin (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Living wage
The Commission will be aware of the campaign being conducted in Member States to persuade national governments to introduce a ‘living wage’. The living wage can make a significant contribution to the standard of living and quality of life of many low-paid workers.
Many local authorities would like to insist that the contractors they use pay their staff the living wage.
Can the Commission confirm that there is no EU legislation which would prevent local authorities from requiring their contractors to pay the living wage?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The regulating of wages does not fall within the European Union’s competence. Member States are consequently free to set the rates of pay to be paid by contractors performing work for public authorities, provided prevailing Union law obligations are met. 
Where such work involves cross-border posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, Directive 96/71/EC (195) must be respected. Article 3 of that directive provides that minimum rates of pay should apply to posted workers, on condition that such minimum rates of pay are set by law or by universally applicable collective agreements or arbitration awards. A ‘living wage’ must therefore be laid down by law or other instruments as referred to in the directive for it to apply to foreign service-providers posting workers, without prejudice to any voluntary agreement between the contractor and the service-provider to apply a higher rate of pay.
The current EU public procurement rules allow to take account of social considerations in the procurement process provided certain conditions are met (196). A requirement regarding the payment of a ‘living wage’ would probably be linked to the tasks necessary for the performance of the contract, and therefore could be used in the procurement process. However, such requirement would have to be known in advance (for transparency reasons), comply with the Treaty’s principles and any other relevant EU rules (197).
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010042/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Dimitrios Droutsas (S&D)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Ιδιωτικοποιήσεις στην Έλλαδα
Ένα από τα μέτρα που η ελληνική κυβέρνηση έχει συμφωνήσει με την τρόικα, προκειμένου να εξασφαλιστεί η συνέχιση της χρηματοδότησης του ελληνικού χρέους, είναι να αυξήσει τα έσοδα που προέρχονται από τις ιδιωτικοποιήσεις έως 19 δισ. ευρώ μέχρι το 2015.
Η σχετική νομοθετική πράξη, που υποβλήθηκε πριν από λίγες ημέρες από το Υπουργείο Οικονομικών στη Βουλή των Ελλήνων, πρόκειται να συζητηθεί και να ψηφιστεί σήμερα 30.10.2012. Συγκεκριμένα, η νομοθετική πρόταση, η οποία συμπληρώνει το Νόμο 3986/2011, προσδιορίζει τέσσερις κύριες κατηγορίες των περιουσιακών στοιχείων που πρέπει να ιδιωτικοποιηθούν: α) επιχειρήσεις του δημόσιου τομέα, β) υποδομές, γ) δικαιώματα κρατικού μονοπωλίου, και δ) πραγματική ιδιοκτησία.






—


Το πρόγραμμα ιδιωτικοποιήσεων περιλαμβάνει ένα μεγάλο αριθμό κρατικών υπηρεσιών και υποδομών, μερικές εκ των οποίων βρίσκονταν έως σήμερα στον πλήρη έλεγχο του ελληνικού κράτους, όπως λιμάνια, αεροδρόμια, το δίκτυο ύδρευσης, τμήματα του τομέα της ενέργειας, των ταχυδρομικών υπηρεσιών καθώς και άλλες, που επηρεάζουν την καθημερινή ζωή κάθε έλληνα πολίτη. Συνεπώς, είναι μείζονος σημασίας να εξασφαλισθεί ότι οι υπηρεσίες αυτές θα συνεχίσουν να είναι προσβάσιμες σε όλους τους πολίτες και να παρέχονται σε υψηλή ποιότητα και χαμηλή τιμή.




Συμφωνεί η Επιτροπή ότι η επιτυχία του προγράμματος των ιδιωτικοποιήσεων δεν πρέπει να κριθεί μόνο από το εάν θα επιτευχθεί ο χρηματικός στόχος;






—


Λόγω της δραματικής ανάγκης της χώρας για χρηματοδότηση και της υφιστάμενης πίεσης να ανταποκριθεί στις απαιτήσεις της τρόικας, η δυνατότητα ελιγμών της ελληνικής κυβέρνησης θα είναι σημαντικά μειωμένη κατά τη διάρκεια των αναμενόμενων σκληρών διαπραγματεύσεων με πιθανούς αγοραστές. Υπάρχει, ως εκ τούτου, η αυξημένη πιθανότητα, κρίσιμες υποδομές και υπηρεσίες να πουληθούν σε τιμή πολύ χαμηλότερη από την πραγματική τους αξία, πράγμα που θα προκαλέσει αναμφίβολα περισσότερα προβλήματα στο μέλλον για την ελληνική οικονομία από αυτά που υποτίθεται ότι θα λύσει.




Πιστεύει η Επιτροπή, ως μέλος της τρόικας, ότι μπορεί και οφείλει να βοηθήσει την ελληνική κυβέρνηση να αποφύγει ένα τέτοιο γεγονός; Αν ναι, πώς;






—


Πώς σκοπεύει η Επιτροπή, να διασφαλίσει, ως θεματοφύλακας των Συνθηκών της ΕΕ και αρμόδια για την ομαλή λειτουργία της ενιαίας αγοράς, και κυρίως του ανταγωνισμού, ότι το πρόγραμμα ιδιωτικοποιήσεων δεν θα έχει ως αποτέλεσμα την αντικατάσταση των κρατικών μονοπωλίων με νεοσύστατα ιδιωτικά και ότι θα αποφευχθούν εκτενείς περιπτώσεις αθέμιτου ανταγωνισμού;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(14 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η διεθνής πείρα έχει καταδείξει ότι η συμμετοχή του ιδιωτικού τομέα στον εκσυγχρονισμό του τομέα των υπηρεσιών κοινής ωφέλειας μπορεί να βελτιώσει την αποτελεσματικότητα, τη διαφάνεια και τη λογοδοσία και να οδηγήσει σε βελτιωμένες οικονομικές και λειτουργικές επιδόσεις, συμπεριλαμβανομένων των αυξημένων πωλήσεων, κερδών, επενδύσεων και απασχόλησης.
Εντούτοις, η θέση της Επιτροπής στο εν λόγω θέμα είναι ουδέτερη δυνάμει του άρθρου 345 της Συνθήκης για τη λειτουργία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης (ΣΛΕΕ). Η Επιτροπή θεωρεί ότι η δημιουργία κανονιστικής αρχής και κατάλληλου περιβάλλοντος με επίκεντρο την αγορά αποτελούν απαραίτητες προϋποθέσεις για επιτυχή ιδιωτικοποίηση προκειμένου να είναι εγγυημένη η λειτουργία της αγοράς, προστατεύοντας παράλληλα τα συμφέροντα των καταναλωτών σε περίπτωση που οι κυβερνήσεις επιλέξουν να μεταβούν σε ιδιωτικό ιδιοκτησιακό καθεστώς.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010042/12
to the Commission
Dimitrios Droutsas (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Greek privatisation programme
One of the measures agreed between the Greek Government and the Troika, in order to secure continued financing of the Greek debt, is to increase revenue from privatisations to EUR 19 billion by 2015.
The legislative act in question, which the Ministry for Finance tabled before the Greek Parliament a few days ago, is due to be debated and voted on today, 30 October 2012. This legislative proposal, which supplements Law 3986/2011, defines four main categories of assets that need to be privatised: a) public sector undertakings; b) infrastructures; c) State monopoly rights and d) real estate.
— The privatisation programme includes a large number of government services and infrastructures, some of which are still under the full control of the Greek State, such as ports, airports, the water supply system, parts of the energy sector, postal services and other services that affect the everyday life of all Greek citizens. It is therefore vital to ensure that these services will still be accessible to everyone and will be provided to high standards at low prices.
Does the Commission agree that the success of the privatisation programme should not be judged solely on whether or not the financial objective is achieved?
— Given the country’s dire need for funds and the pressure on it to respond to the Troika’s demands, the Greek government’s room for manoeuvre will be seriously restricted during what are expected to be stiff negotiations with potential buyers. This means that there is an increased likelihood of critical infrastructures and services being sold well below their actual value, which will doubtless cause more problems for the Greek economy in the future than it is supposed to solve.
As a member of the Troika, does the Commission believe that it can and must help the Greek Government prevent any such outcome and, if so, how?
— How, as the guardian of the EU Treaties responsible for the smooth operation of the single market in general and competition in particular, does the Commission intend to ensure that the privatisation programme will not result in State monopolies being replaced by newly-formed private monopolies, and that cases of massively unfair competition will be prevented?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)
International experience has shown that involving the private sector in the modernization of the utilities sector can improve efficiency, transparency and accountability and lead to improved financial and operating performance including increased sales, profits, investment, and employment.
Nevertheless, the Commission position on this is neutral in accordance with Art. 345 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The Commission considers that the creation of a regulatory authority and an appropriate market functioning environment are crucial prerequisites for successful privatising in order to guarantee the success of the market functioning process while protecting consumers' interests, should governments choose to move to a regime of private property. 
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-010043/12
till kommissionen
Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)
(6 november 2012)

Angående: Användningen av särskilda 301-rapporter som ett icke-bindande lagstiftningsinstrument i förhållande till medlemsstater
Mot bakgrund av kommissionens svar på fråga E-007816/2012, där den konstaterar att den inte känner till några konkreta situationer där särskilda amerikanska 301-rapporter eller liknande former av ”mjuk lagstiftning” hämmar utvecklingen av den inre marknaden eller harmoniseringen av immaterialrätten i EU, skulle jag vilja lyfta fram de uppgifter som fanns i ett telegram från den amerikanska ambassaden i Madrid till Washington 2008 och som medierna offentliggjorde 2010.
”Vi ämnar tala om för den nya regeringen att Spanien kommer att föras upp på bevakningslistan om landet inte fullgör tre saker före oktober 2008. För det första bör Spanien utfärda ett uttalande [från den spanska regeringen] att piratkopiering på internet är olagligt samt att upphovsrättsavgifter inte betalas ut till upphovsmännen om upphovsrättsskyddat material erhållits genom peer-to-peer fildelning. För det andra bör det ändra 2006 års ’cirkulär’ som i Spanien allmänt tolkas som att peer-to-peer-fildelning är lagligt. För det tredje bör det meddela att den spanska regeringen kommer att vidta åtgärder i likhet med de förslag som lagts fram av Frankrike och/eller Förenade kungariket och som syftar till att begränsa privatkopiering på internet fram till sommaren 2009”.
Vid den tidpunkten ansågs den spanska lagstiftningen vara förenlig med bestämmelserna på den inre marknaden. År 2010, då de spanska myndigheterna inte hade gett efter för de amerikanska företrädarnas påtryckningar, fördes Spanien upp på 301-rapportens bevakningslista. En direkt följd av detta var att Sinde-lagen, eller Ley de Economía Sostenible, lades fram i Spanien 2010 och godkändes av det spanska parlamentet 2011.
Det här är ett tillräckligt bevis för att USA har använt 301-rapporter för att åstadkomma ändringar i en medlemsstats lagstiftning. Det hände också trots att medlemsstaten under inga omständigheter var tvungen att lyda uppmaning. Kan kommissionen därför klargöra hur den garanterar att EU:s regelverk följs och att den inre marknaden inte i framtiden störs av externa faktorer?
Svar från Karel De Gucht på kommissionens vägnar
(4 januari 2013)
Enligt EU:s regelverk ges medlemsstaterna en viss flexibilitet vid införlivandet av bestämmelserna i EU-direktiv. I detta fall finns det inget i EU:s regelverk för upphovsrätt eller e-handel som hindrar medlemsstaterna från att då och då ändra eller anpassa sina nationella lagar, förutsatt att detta är förenligt med regelverket. I fråga om de uppgifter som efter vad som påstås fanns i ett meddelande från USA:s ambassad i Madrid kan kommissionen inte spekulera över Spaniens skäl för införandet av Ley Sinde år 2011. Kommissionens uppgift är att se till att den berörda nationella lagstiftningen är i överensstämmelse med EU:s regelverk.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010043/12
to the Commission
Amelia Andersdotter (Verts/ALE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Use of Special 301 Reports as a soft law tool with respect to Member States
With reference to the Commission’s answer to Question E-007816/2012, in which it states that it is not aware of any concrete situations where US Special 301 Reports or similar forms of ‘soft law’ hamper the development of the internal market and harmonisation of intellectual property rights in the EU, I wish to highlight the information contained in a cable sent by the US embassy in Madrid to Washington in 2008 and published by the media in 2010.
‘We propose to tell the new government that Spain will appear on the Watch List if it does not do three things by October 2008. First, issue a [Government of Spain] announcement stating that Internet piracy is illegal, and that the copyright levy system does not compensate creators for copyrighted material acquired through peer-to-peer file sharing. Second, amend the 2006 “circular” that is widely interpreted in Spain as saying that peer-to-peer file sharing is legal. Third, announce that the GoS will adopt measures along the lines of the French and/or UK proposals aimed at curbing Internet piracy by the summer of 2009.’
The Spanish legislation was considered in line with internal market rules at the time. In 2010, as the Spanish authorities had failed to respond to the pressure from the US representative, Spain was put on the 301 Report Watchlist. As a direct consequence of this, the ‘Sinde Law’, or Ley de Economia Sostenible, was brought forward in Spain in 2010 and approved by the Spanish Parliament in 2011.
Given that this is sufficient proof of the fact that the USA has used the 301 Reports to bring about changes in the legislation of a Member State, and as this happened despite the fact that the Member State was under no obligation to comply, can the Commission clarify how it is ensuring that the EU acquis is respected and the internal market framework is not further disrupted by external factors?
Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The EU acquis allows the Member States a certain flexibility in the transposition of the provisions in EU Directives. In this instance there is nothing in the European copyright or e-commerce acquis that prevents Member States from changing or adapting their national laws from time to time provided it respects the acquis. As to the information allegedly contained in a cable from the United States embassy in Madrid, the Commission is not in a position to speculate on Spain's reasons for having introduced the Ley Sinde in 2011. The Commission's role is to ensure that the national legislation in question is in line with the EU acquis.

(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010762/12
alla Commissione
Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)
(27 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Referendum per l'indipendenza della Scozia e nascita di nuovi Stati membri in seno all'Unione
Entro l'autunno 2014 la Scozia indirà un referendum popolare per decidere se divenire o meno indipendente dal Regno Unito. Pur trattandosi di questione interna, non sfugge ad alcun osservatore che l'eventuale nascita di un nuovo Stato sovrano a seguito della separazione da uno Stato membro UE non manca di avere importanti implicazioni giuridiche e politiche sulle Istituzioni dell'Unione nel loro complesso e sugli altri Stati membri. Al momento, il testo dei trattati nulla prevede in merito alla nascita di nuovi Stati all'interno dell'Unione, né in punto di automatismi istituzionali e di bilancio, né in punto di conseguenze valutarie ed economiche nella zona euro. La previsione e la disciplina di tali eventi potrebbe rendere meno imprevedibile la reazione dei mercati agli stessi e facilitarne l'evoluzione istituzionale verso un pronto reinserimento del nuovo Stato in seno all'UE.
Ritiene la Commissione di dover sopperire a tale mancanza prevedendo una regolamentazione istituzionale di tali possibili eventi così da renderne più efficace e meno imprevedibile l'evoluzione? Come ritiene la Commissione di agire all'indomani del referendum scozzese nel caso di esito favorevole dello stesso all'indipendenza?
Quale sarebbe l'effetto dell'indipendenza sui rappresentanti scozzesi eletti al Parlamento europeo? Ne sarebbe automatico il decadimento in quanto appartenenti ad uno Stato non membro? Quali sarebbero le conseguenze sul contingente nazionale di deputati europei riservato al Regno Unito? Quali le conseguenze sul computo dei voti riservati al Regno Unito in seno al Consiglio?
Risposta congiunta di José Manuel Barroso a nome della Commissione
(1o febbraio 2013)
Come la Commissione ha dichiarato nella risposta all'interrogazione scritta E-008133/2012, non spetta ad essa esprimere una posizione su questioni di organizzazione interna connesse alle disposizioni costituzionali di un singolo Stato membro.
Situazioni quali la secessione di una parte di uno Stato membro o la creazione di un nuovo Stato non risulterebbero senza conseguenze per i trattati dell'Unione europea. La Commissione esprimerebbe il suo parere sulle conseguenze giuridiche in base al diritto dell'UE dietro richiesta di uno Stato membro nella quale si specificasse uno scenario preciso. 
Come ha confermato la Commissione nella risposta alle interrogazioni scritte P-009756/2012 e P-009862/2012, l'UE è fondata sui trattati, che si applicano soltanto agli Stati membri che li hanno approvati e ratificati. Se parte del territorio di uno Stato membro cessasse di appartenere a tale Stato per divenire un nuovo Stato indipendente, i trattati non si applicherebbero più a tale territorio. In altre parole, l'eventuale nuovo Stato indipendente diventerebbe, proprio per la sua indipendenza, un paese terzo rispetto all'Unione e i trattati non si applicherebbero più al suo territorio.
In virtù dell'articolo 49 del trattato sull'Unione europea, ogni Stato europeo che rispetti i valori di cui all'articolo 2 del medesimo può domandare di diventare membro dell'Unione. Se la domanda è accettata dal Consiglio all'unanimità, viene negoziato un accordo tra lo Stato richiedente e gli Stati membri relativo alle condizioni per l'ammissione e agli adattamenti dei trattati che tale ammissione comporta. Tale accordo è sottoposto a ratifica da tutti gli Stati membri e dallo Stato che ha presentato la domanda.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010044/12
to the Commission
Struan Stevenson (ECR)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Independent Scotland sharing a regulator and a lender of last resort with the rest of the UK
The Scottish Government has asserted that an independent Scotland would share a regulator and a lender of last resort with the rest of the UK.
Nevertheless, as all EU countries have their own regulator, could the Commission clarify what its position would be on the idea that a newly-independent Scotland would be able to share a regulator and a lender of last resort with the rest of the UK?
Question for written answer E-010762/12
to the Commission
Francesco Enrico Speroni (EFD)
(27 November 2012)

Subject: Referendum on Scottish independence and the emergence of new Member States within the EU
By autumn 2014, Scotland will hold a referendum to decide on whether or not to become independent from the United Kingdom. Although this is an internal matter, it is clear to all observers that the potential emergence of a new sovereign State following its separation from an EU Member State will have major legal and political implications for all of the EU institutions and the other Member States. As it stands, there is no provision in the Treaties for the emergence of new States within the EU, or regarding the relevant institutional and budgetary mechanisms, or regarding the currency and economic consequences in the euro area. Making provision for and drawing up rules for such eventualities might make market reaction to them less unpredictable and facilitate the institutional evolution towards a speedy reintegration of the new State within the EU.
Does the Commission think it should remedy this deficiency by providing for institutional rules to govern such eventualities so that these developments can take a smoother, less unpredictable course? How does the Commission intend to act in the aftermath of the Scottish referendum should the result be in favour of independence?
What effect would independence have on the Scottish representatives elected to the European Parliament? Would they automatically lose their seats in that they would belong to a non-Member State? What would be the consequences for the UK delegation of MEPs? What would be the consequences on the UK's allocation of votes within the Council?
Question for written answer E-011159/12
to the Commission
Nicole Sinclaire (NI)
(6 December 2012)

Subject: Status of an independent Scotland
Could the Commission advise me whether the Scottish Government, in the event of Scotland declaring independence from the United Kingdom, would be obliged to reapply for membership of the EU in its own right?
If so, would the Scottish Government, in accordance with the Treaty of Lisbon, then be obliged to make preparations for the adoption of the single currency?
Question for written answer E-011632/12
to the Commission
David Martin (S&D)
(19 December 2012)

Subject: Negotiation of EU membership with non-independent states
Can the Commission confirm if it would consider negotiating the terms of a newly independent state’s membership of the European Union before it had actually become that newly independent country, i.e. after it had voted by a majority in a referendum for independence, but still technically remained a part of the former territory? And can it confirm that, until the legal moment of separation, the UK as existing would be the Member State on which the obligation to negotiate would fall, and with which the EU institutions and the other Member States would expect to negotiate?
Joint answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(1 February 2013)
As the Commission has noted in its reply to Written Question E-008133/2012, it is not its role to express a position on questions of internal organisation related to the constitutional arrangements of a particular Member State.
Scenarios such as the separation of one part of a Member State or the creation of a new state would not be neutral as regards the EU Treaties. The Commission would express its opinion on the legal consequences under EC law upon request from a Member State detailing a precise scenario. 
As the Commission has confirmed in the reply to written questions P-009756/2012 and P-009862/2012, the EU is founded on the Treaties which apply only to the Member States who have agreed and ratified them. If part of the territory of a Member State would cease to be part of that state because it were to become a new independent state, the Treaties would no longer apply to that territory. In other words, a new independent state would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the EU and the Treaties would no longer apply on its territory.
Under Article 49 of the Treaty on European Union, any European state which respects the principles set out in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union may apply to become a member of the EU. If the application is accepted by the Council acting unanimously, an agreement is then negotiated between the applicant state and the Member States on the conditions of admission and the adjustments to the Treaties which such admission entails. This agreement is subject to ratification by all Member States and the applicant state.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010045/12
to the Commission
John Stuart Agnew (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Use of the word ‘resignation’
Does the Commission understand that, in the English language at least, the word ‘resignation’ (together with all its variants and derivatives) refers by definition to a voluntary act, and that any element of legal, bureaucratic or administrative compulsion necessitates the use of a different word? Will the Commission therefore ensure that this usage accuracy is maintained in every single use of the word in all documents, papers (including non-papers) and treaties and in all other publications?
Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)
The word ‘resignation’ referred-to in the question of the Honourable Member corresponds to the wording of the Treaty on European Union, as published in the Official Journal of the European Union
 (198). The text was agreed and signed by all the Heads of State and government of the Member States and it is equally authentic in all the official languages of the European Union. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010046/12
to the Commission
Struan Stevenson (ECR)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Commissioners contacted by UK Government
In response to my letter earlier this year on the subject of an independent Scotland’s place in the EU, President José Manuel Barroso revealed that ‘none of the other members of the Commission ha(ve) received correspondence from Members of the incumbent Scottish Government, either in their current capacity or as a member of the opposition’.
Could the Commission clarify which (if any) Commissioners have been contacted by the UK Government regarding what the UK position would be if Scotland were to become independent?
Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(30 January 2013)
The Commission confirms that none of its Members have been contacted by the Government of the United Kingdom regarding what the UK position would be if Scotland were to become independent.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010047/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(6. November 2012)

Betrifft: Genehmigung der umstrittenen Genmais-Sorte MIR 162
Die Kommission hat die Verwendung der überaus umstrittenen Genmaissorte MIR 162 in Lebens‐ und Futtermitteln genehmigt. Die Kommission beruft sich bei ihrer Entscheidung auf die heftig kritisierte Studie der Europäischen Behörde für Lebensmittelsicherheit; allseits in den Medien herrscht der breite Konsens, die gesundheitlichen Folgen gentechnisch veränderter Lebensmittel seien nicht kalkulierbar.






1.


Wie wird abgeschätzt, wie sich nach wie vor mögliche gesundheitliche Beeinträchtigungen, die im Zusammenhang mit gentechnisch veränderten Lebensmitteln stehen, entwickeln werden?




— Kann die Kommission mit absoluter Sicherheit sagen, dass gesundheitliche Schäden in der Folge — womöglich auch erst in mehreren Jahrzehnten — wirklich auszuschließen sind?
Laut einem im September erschienenen Artikel der Süddeutschen Zeitung gibt es kaum Langzeitstudien über die Auswirkungen von gentechnisch veränderten Nahrungsmitteln. Bei verschiedenen Tieren reagierte das Immunsystem nach der Aufnahme von gentechnisch verändertem Futter.






2.


Ist sich die Kommission dieser Tatsache bewusst?










3.


Wurden diesbezüglich im Rahmen des Gutachtens Langzeitstudien durchgeführt?




— Wenn ja, wie viele, in welchem Umfang, mit welcher wissenschaftlichen Methode, über welchen Zeitraum und mit welchen Ergebnissen?
— Wenn nein, warum nicht, und wie begründet die Behörde dann, dass die betreffende Pflanze (Genmais, Sorte MIR 162) keine gesundheitsschädlichen Wirkungen habe?
Antwort von Herrn Borg im Namen der Kommission
(11. Januar 2013)






1.


Nach den EU-Vorschriften dürfen GVO nur zugelassen werden, wenn sie als sicher für die Gesundheit von Mensch und Tier sowie für die Umwelt bewertet werden. Daher umfasst das äußerst strenge Zulassungsverfahren eine gründliche Bewertung der möglichen Risiken genetisch veränderter Erzeugnisse — u. a. auch der langfristigen Auswirkungen — durch die Europäische Behörde für Lebensmittelsicherheit (EFSA) auf Grundlage der besten verfügbaren wissenschaftlichen Daten. Die EFSA zog in ihrem Gutachten zur Zulassung der Maissorte MIR162, zu der eine offene Konsultation stattfand, den Schluss, dass MIR162 hinsichtlich möglicher Auswirkungen auf die Gesundheit von Mensch und Tier sowie auf die Umwelt so sicher ist wie die entsprechende herkömmliche Sorte.











2.


Der Kommission ist bekannt, dass bereits eine Reihe von durch Peer-Review überprüften Langzeitstudien zu GVO durchgeführt worden sind, wie aus einem im April 2012 in 










2.


Der Kommission ist bekannt, dass bereits eine Reihe von durch Peer-Review überprüften Langzeitstudien zu GVO durchgeführt worden sind, wie aus einem im April 2012 in 



„Food and Chemical Toxicology“ veröffentlichten hervorgeht. Darin wurden 12 Langzeit-Fütterungsstudien (mit einer Dauer von 182 Tagen bis zu zwei Jahren) und 12 Mehrgenerationen-Studien (zwei bis fünf Generationen) überprüft. Außerdem hat die EU über ihre Forschungsrahmenprogramme mehrere Forschungsprojekte zur Sicherheit von GVO finanziell unterstützt. Die jüngsten Beispiele dafür sind die Projekte GMSAFOOD (199) und GRACE (200), die insbesondere die Durchführung von Langzeit-Toxizitätsstudien betreffen. 






3.


Die Antragsunterlagen zu MIR162 umfassten eine 90-Tage-Fütterungsstudie an Ratten, die keinerlei Anzeichen einer Toxizität des Erzeugnisses erkennen ließ










3.


Die Antragsunterlagen zu MIR162 umfassten eine 90-Tage-Fütterungsstudie an Ratten, die keinerlei Anzeichen einer Toxizität des Erzeugnisses erkennen ließ




 (201). Aufgrund des Ergebnisses dieser Studie und anderer mit dem Antrag eingereichter Daten hielt es die EFSA nicht für erforderlich, weitere Untersuchungen zur Toxizität des Erzeugnisses, etwa durch eine Langzeitstudie, anzufordern. (English version)
Question for written answer E-010047/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Approval of controversial GM maize MIR 162
The Commission has approved the use of the highly controversial GM maize MIR 162 in food and feed. The Commission bases its decision on the heavily criticised study by the European Food Safety Agency; there is a broad consensus in the media that the health impact of genetically modified foodstuffs cannot be calculated.






1.


What is the assessment as to how possible impairments to health related to genetically modified foodstuffs will develop?




— Can the Commission say with absolute certainty that subsequent damage to health — possibly only after several decades — can really be ruled out?
According to an article published in the Süddeutsche Zeitung in September, there are few long-term studies on the effects of genetically-modified foodstuffs. Several animal species have shown immune responses to the consumption of genetically modified feed.






2.


Is the Commission aware of this?










3.


With this in mind, were long-term studies carried out when preparing the opinion?




— If so, how many, what was their scope, what scientific methods did they use, over what period were they carried out, and what were the results?
— If not, why not, and how in that case can the authority substantiate its claim that the plant in question (GM maize, type MIR 162) does not have any harmful effects on health?
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)






1.


The EU GMO legislation provides that GMOs can only be authorised only when assessed as safe for human and animal health and for the environment. Consequently, the very strict authorisation procedure includes a thorough assessment by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of the potential risks — including long-term effects — of the GM products, based on best available scientific data. As regards the maize MIR162, the EFSA's opinion which was subject to an open consultation phase concluded that MIR162 is as safe as its conventional counterpart as regards potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.











2.


The Commission is aware that a number of peer-reviewed long-term studies have already been performed on GMOs, as indicated in a paper published in April 2012 in the 










2.


The Commission is aware that a number of peer-reviewed long-term studies have already been performed on GMOs, as indicated in a paper published in April 2012 in the 




Food and Chemical Toxicology Journal. This paper reviewed 12 long-term feeding studies going from 182 days to two years, and 12 multigenerational studies (from two to five generations). Furthermore, the EU has been funding several research projects on safety of GMOs under its Research Framework Programmes. Latest examples are the projects GMSAFOOD (202) and GRACE (203), which specifically concern the conduct of long term toxicity studies. 






3.


The application file of MIR162 contained a 90-day feeding study on rats, which did not show up any sign of toxicity of the product










3.


The application file of MIR162 contained a 90-day feeding study on rats, which did not show up any sign of toxicity of the product




 (204). Based on the result of this study and other data presented in the application, EFSA has not identified the need to request further investigation on the toxicity of the product, for instance via a long-term study. (Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010048/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(6. November 2012)

Betrifft: Verbraucherinformation über gentechnisch veränderte Lebensmittel
Die umstrittene Genmais-Sorte MIR 162 darf nun laut Kommission in Lebens‐ und Futtermitteln verwendet werden.






1.


Werden die Verbraucher ausreichend darüber informiert, worin dieser Genmais enthalten ist, so dass jeder selbst entscheiden kann, ob er solche Lebensmittel zu sich nehmen möchte?










2.


Bewertet die Kommission die Kennzeichnung gentechnisch veränderter Lebensmittel — auch solcher, die in Folge der Nahrungs‐ und Versorgungskette mit gentechnisch veränderten Komponenten in Verbindung zu bringen sind — als ausreichend?




Antwort von Herrn Borg im Namen der Kommission
(11. Januar 2013)






1.


Die Vorschriften über GVO stellen sicher, dass die Verbraucher umfassend über das Vorhandensein von GVO in Futtermitteln und Lebensmitteln informiert werden, so dass sie eine bewusste Kaufentscheidung treffen können. Nach der Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1829/2003 müssen alle Produkte, die GVO enthalten, aus solchen bestehen oder aus solchen hergestellt werden, ordnungsgemäß gekennzeichnet sein. Eine Ausnahme gilt, wenn Futtermittel oder Lebensmittel Material enthalten, das GVO enthält, aus solchen besteht oder aus solchen hergestellt ist, mit einem Anteil von höchstens 0,9 % der einzelnen Lebensmittel‐ oder Futtermittelzutaten oder des Lebensmittels/Futtermittels, wenn es aus einer einzigen Zutat besteht, vorausgesetzt, dieser Anteil ist zufällig oder technisch nicht zu vermeiden.










2.


Die Gesetzgeber haben beschlossen, dass die Pflicht zur Kennzeichnung von GVO nicht für Erzeugnisse von Tieren gilt, die mit GVO gefüttert werden (z. B. Eier, Fleisch oder Milchprodukte). Die Kommission hat die EFSA im Jahr 2007 ersucht, zu prüfen, ob wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse vorliegen, die eine Kennzeichnungspflicht für diese Erzeugnisse rechtfertigen könnten. Dazu hat die EFSA eine Stellungnahme veröffentlicht, nach der eine solche Kennzeichnungspflicht wissenschaftlich nicht begründet ist, da in tierischem Gewebe oder in tierischen Erzeugnissen keine Spuren von GVO nachweisbar sind. Daher zog die Kommission den Schluss, dass die geltenden Vorschriften beibehalten werden sollten.




Nach den EU-Vorschriften ist es nicht verboten, auf der Etikettierung anzugeben, dass Lebensmittel keine GVO enthalten oder nicht unter Verwendung von GVO hergestellt wurden (Kennzeichnung in der Art „Gentechnik-frei“ oder „ohne Gentechnik“), sofern diese Etikettierung den allgemeinen Bestimmungen über die Kennzeichnung von Lebensmitteln entspricht (Richtlinie 2000/13/EG), insbesondere hinsichtlich der Bestimmung über die nicht irreführende Information der Verbraucher. Da solche freiwilligen Kennzeichnungen in der EU immer häufiger verwendet werden, hat die Kommission eine Studie eingeleitet, um deren Anwendungsbereiche und Spezifikationen besser zu verstehen und zu bewerten, ob dieser Bereich möglicherweise harmonisiert werden müsste. Die Ergebnisse der Studie werden Anfang 2013 veröffentlicht.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010048/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Information for consumers about genetically modified food
According to the Commission, the controversial genetically modified maize MIR162 may be used in food and feed.






1.


Will consumers be properly informed about which products contain this genetically modified maize, so they can decide for themselves whether they want to eat them?










2.


Does the Commission consider labelling of genetically modified foods — including those in contact with genetically modified ingredients through the food and supply chain — to be sufficient?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)






1.


The GMO legislation ensures that consumers are comprehensively informed on the presence of GMOs in feed and food, so that they can make an informed purchasing decision. Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 provides that all products containing, consisting of, or produced from GMOs are properly labelled. An exception applies when feed and food contain material which contains, consists of, or is produced from GMOs in a proportion not higher than 0.9% of the food or feed ingredient considered individually, or food/feed consisting of a single ingredient, provided that this presence is adventitious and technically unavoidable.










2.


The co-legislator decided that GMO labelling do not apply to animal products from animals fed with GMOs, e.g. eggs, meat or dairy products. The Commission asked EFSA in 2007 to look into the scientific evidence that could justify establishing a labelling for these products. EFSA published a statement explaining that there is no scientific background to support such labelling, as no traces of GMO feed can be detected in animal tissues or products. Therefore the Commission concluded that it was appropriate to maintain the current legislative approach. 




The EU legislation does not forbid the use of labels signalling that foodstuffs do not contain GMOs, or were not produced using GMOs (so-called ‘GM free’ labels), provided that they meet the general rules on food labelling (Directive 2000/13/EC), in particular as regards provision on non-misleading information to consumers. As such voluntary labels are developing in the EU, the Commission launched a study to better understand their scopes and specifications, and to assess the need for a possible harmonisation of this field. The results of the study will be published in early 2013.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010049/12
to the Commission
Julie Girling (ECR)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Agri-environment schemes beyond 2014
In England over 5 000 agri-environment schemes, which are supported by the EAFRD, will come to an end during 2014. Of these, 2 800 are agreements made prior to 2005 and some will have been in place for 10 years or more. Even if the new rural development regulation is agreed without further delay, it is almost certain that the new programmes will not be approved and in place for 1 January 2014. 
Has this issue been brought to the Commission’s attention already? If so, what arrangements is the Commission likely to put in place to ensure that the environmental efforts of these farmers are safeguarded, and that they do not suffer as a result of a failure to agree either the EU budget or the CAP proposals in time for the next rural development programme to start in 2014?
Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(14 December 2012)
The Commission is aware of possible implications of not approving and not putting in place new rural development programmes as of 1 January 2014. 
The financing of new agri-environment-climate contracts which would be signed once the current agri-environment contracts expire will have to be established under the new legal framework. Therefore, agreement on the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and on a basic regulation for rural development by Council and Parliament is a precondition for the financing of agri-environment-climate contracts under the post 2014 budget in the new period.
All the European institutions are intensively working on establishing the necessary Regulations for the implementation of the rural development programmes. However, a cornerstone to achieve this goal is of course the conclusion of the negotiations on MFF 2014‐2020. Once the MFF and basic regulations are agreed, the Commission will quickly proceed to the adoption of delegated and implementing acts.
If it appears necessary, due to delays in approving the legal framework for the new programming period, the Commission will undertake necessary steps to propose transitional arrangements linked to a financing under the post-2013 financial framework. Such arrangements can only be established by the Commission on the basis of a basic act agreed by Council and Parliament.
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-010050/12
till kommissionen
Anna Hedh (S&D)
(6 november 2012)

Angående: Översyn av lagstiftningen om skydd av personuppgifter
Sedan direktiv 95/46/EG om skydd av personuppgifter antogs har den tekniska utvecklingen, med t.ex. bloggar och sociala nätverk, totalt förändrat hur privatpersoner kommunicerar.
Vid ett möte med en arbetsgrupp i rådet nyligen undrade flera medlemsstater om kommissionen tänker inkludera privat kommunikation i tillämpningsområdet för den nya förordningen om skydd av personuppgifter, med hänvisning till EU‐domstolens rättspraxis (Lindqvistmålet).






1.


Är kommissionens avsikt med den nya förordningen verkligen att begränsa yttrandefriheten i linje med rättspraxis från Lindqvistmålet?










2.


Hur tänker sig kommissionen att det ska vara möjligt att tillämpa den här sortens bestämmelser om skydd av personuppgifter på privatpersoner i det nya tekniska landskapet?




Svar från Viviane Reding på kommissionens vägnar
(4 januari 2013)
Den 25 januari 2012 antog kommissionen ett paket för reform av uppgiftsskyddslagstiftningen som omfattar ett förslag till förordning om skydd för enskilda personer med avseende på behandling av personuppgifter och om det fria flödet av sådana uppgifter (205) i syfte att reformera EU:s regler om skydd av personuppgifter (206) från 1995 samt ett förslag till direktiv om skydd av personuppgifter för rättsvårdande organ (207). Dessa förslag är för närvarande föremål för förhandlingar i Europaparlamentet och rådet.
I förslaget till förordning behåller man det undantag som gäller behandling av personuppgifter som en fysisk person utför utan vinstintresse som ett led i verksamhet av rent privat natur eller som har samband med hans eller hennes hushåll. Det innebär att tolkningen av ”hushållsundantaget” i målet Lindqvist gäller, dvs. när personuppgifter är tillgängliga för ett obegränsat antal personer omfattas behandlingen av personuppgifterna av den föreslagna förordningen. För att förena rätten till skydd av personuppgifter med reglerna om yttrandefrihet ska dock medlemsstaterna enligt förslaget till förordning vara skyldiga att bevilja undantag eller avvikelser från allmänna dataskyddsregler. 
De nationella tillsynsmyndigheterna ska precis som hittills övervaka att privatpersoner följer de tillämpliga dataskyddsreglerna när de behandlar personuppgifter.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010050/12
to the Commission
Anna Hedh (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Revision of data protection legislation
Since the data protection directive (95/46/EC) was passed, technological developments, through such phenomena as blogs and social networks, have fundamentally changed the way private persons communicate.
At a recent meeting of a Council working group, several Member States asked whether the Commission intends to include private communications in the scope of the new data protection regulation, referring to European Court of Justice case-law (the Lindqvist decision).






1.


Is the Commission’s intention with this new regulation in fact to place limits on freedom of expression in line with the Lindqvist decision?










2.


How does the Commission envisage the possibility of enforcing data protection rules of this nature on private persons in the new technological landscape?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
On 25 January 2012, the Commission adopted a data protection reform package which comprises a proposal for a regulation on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and the free movement of such data aiming at reforming the EU's 1995 Data Protection Rules (208) as well as a directive on data protection for law enforcement bodies (209). These proposals are currently being negotiated in both the Parliament and Council.
The proposal maintains the exemption of the processing of personal data by a natural person without any gainful interest in the course of its own exclusively personal or household activity from the application of the proposed Regulation. Accordingly the interpretation of the current ‘household’ exemption in the Lindqvist case applies, so that where personal data are accessible to an unlimited number of individuals, the processing falls under the proposed Regulation. However, for reconciling the right to the protection of personal data with the rules governing freedom of expression, Member States are obliged under the proposed Regulation to provide exemptions or derogations from general data protection rules.
The compliance of data processing by private individuals with the applicable data protection rules will — as it is the case now — be subject to the monitoring by national supervisory authorities. 
(České znění)
Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení E-010051/12
Komisi
Jan Březina (PPE)
(6. listopadu 2012)

Předmět: Praxe tranzitních licencí s ohledem na trh EU s obranným materiálem
Při vývozu vojenského materiálu do třetích zemí přes území sousedního členského státu Evropské unie, respektive přes jejich námořní přístavy, se řada českých exportérů z obranného průmyslu setkává v sousedních zemích se zamítavým postojem vůči již vydaným vývozním licencím, které vydaly české orgány. Čeští exportéři jsou navíc nuceni obracet se na tranzitní země prostřednictvím přepravců z tranzitní země (Polsko) a tyto tranzity jsou přezkoumávány jako vývoz jejich domácího exportéra. Dochází tím ke zvýšeným nákladům a nemožnosti přímého jednání s úřady. Po zamítnutí exportu pak je možné licenci realizovat jedině přes jiný stát nebo letecky, ovšem za zvýšené až nekonkurenceschopné náklady.
V této souvislosti si dovoluji Komisi požádat o odpověď na následující otázky:







Souhlasí Komise s názorem, že institut tzv. tranzitní licence odporuje politice tvorby rovných podmínek na trhu EU s obranným materiálem (EDEM – European Defence Equipment Market), jak je vytvářen postupnými kroky, tedy strategiemi a směrnicemi, zejména směrnicí 2009/43/ES a směrnicí 2009/81/ES?











Měly by mít všechny podnikatelské subjekty usilující o vývoz mimo EU, v zájmu posilování konkurenceschopnosti obranného průmyslu EU, rovné právo přístupu k námořním exportním cestám, a to i v případě obranného matriálu?











Domnívá se Komise, že existuje prostor pro její intervenci k zabezpečení rovného přístupu všech subjektů EU k námořním exportním cestám v případě exportu vojenského materiálu, respektive pro harmonizaci postupů při udělení exportních licencí na vojenský materiál, a pokud ano, jakou podobu by taková intervence mohla mít?




Odpověď Antonia Tajaniho jménem Komise 
(24. ledna 2013)
Podle směrnice 2009/43/ES o transferech produktů pro obranné účely mezi členskými státy jsou obecné, souhrnné nebo individuální licence dostatečné pro transfery uvnitř EU a pro průvoz přes členské státy se žádné další povolení nevyžaduje. Nicméně na tento případ „tranzitních licencí“, jejž předložil vážený pan a který se týká obchodu mimo EU, se mohou vztahovat výjimky podle článku 346 SFEU týkající se opatření nezbytných k ochraně podstatných zájmů bezpečnosti a podle článku 36 SFEU týkající se omezení vývozu nebo tranzitu odůvodněných mimo jiné ochranou veřejného zdraví či života lidí. Opatření podle článku 346 SFEU však nesmí nepříznivě ovlivnit hospodářskou soutěž týkající se výrobků dvojího užití. Omezení podle článku 36 SFEU musí být přiměřená a nesmí být diskriminační povahy ani nesmí sloužit jako prostředky zastřeného omezování obchodu. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010051/12
to the Commission
Jan Březina (PPE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Transit licences on the EU defence equipment market
Many Czech companies that export military equipment to third countries through neighbouring Member States’ seaports find that the export licences they have obtained from the Czech authorities are not honoured by those neighbouring countries. Czech exporters are, moreover, forced to use carriers from the transit country (Poland), and these transits are inspected as if they were the exports of a domestic exporter. This gives rise to increased costs and makes it impossible to negotiate directly with the authorities. Once an export has been refused, a licence may only be fulfilled via another country or by air transport, which results in costs so high that the export may become uncompetitive.






1.


Does the Commission agree that the institution of 




‘transit licences’ runs counter to the policy of creating a level playing field on the European Defence Equipment Market (EDEM), which has been developed gradually through strategies and directives — specifically Directive 2009/43/EC and Directive 2009/81/EC?






2.


With a view to strengthening the competitiveness of the EU’s defence industry, should all businesses seeking to export outside the EU not have an equal right of access to maritime export routes, including in the case of defence equipment?










3.


Is there scope for the Commission to intervene in order to ensure that all EU entities have equal access to maritime export routes when exporting military equipment, and to harmonise procedures for the issuing of export licences for military equipment? If so, what form might such an intervention take?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission 
(24 January 2013)
According to the directive 2009/43/EC on the transfers of defence-related products between Member States general, global or individual licenses are sufficient for intra EU transfers and no additional authorisation shall be required for the passage through Member States. However, this case of ‘transit licences’ raised by the Honourable Member which concerns extra EU trade may fall under the exceptions provided by Article 346 TFEU on measures necessary for the protection of the essential interests of security and Article 36 of the TFEU on restrictions on exports or goods in transit justified, inter alia, on grounds of public health or life of humans. However, the measures under Article 346 TFEU must not adversely affect competition regarding dual use products. The restrictions under Article 36 TFEU have to be proportionate and they may not be discriminatory or constitute a disguised restriction on trade. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010052/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Abolizione della pena di morte nel Sudan del Sud
Ai primi di novembre, l'organizzazione Human Rights Watch (Osservatorio dei diritti umani) ha insistito affinché il Sudan del Sud decreti una moratoria sulla pena di morte, in ordine all'abolizione completa della pena.
Il Sudan del Sud applica la pena di morte, nonostante la fragilità del sistema giudiziario del paese, che rende impossibile tutelare i diritti giuridici fondamentali delle persone.
Il 28 agosto due uomini sono stati impiccati nella prigione di Juba e vi sono attualmente 200 detenuti nel braccio della morte, in spazi angusti e affollati. Ancora più preoccupante è che, dal 2006 il Ministero della giustizia del Sud Sudan ha fornito assistenza legale in un totale di sei casi, ma molti imputati non hanno avuto la possibilità di preparare la propria difesa correttamente né di fare appello contro le condanne.
Da più parti si richiede al Sudan del Sud di incrementare l'informazione e la trasparenza sul suo uso della pena di morte, anche pubblicando statistiche sul numero di esecuzioni che hanno avuto luogo e sulle condanne a morte inflitte. Inoltre, le famiglie dovrebbero essere informate dell'imminenza delle esecuzioni. Le organizzazioni umanitarie affermano che la questione è cruciale nell'ambito del processo di revisione costituzionale.






1.


Quali passi è disposta a effettuare la Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante per convincere il Sudan del Sud ad attuare una moratoria sulla pena di morte?










2.


Il servizio europeo per l'azione esterna sta attualmente effettuando passi per chiedere al Presidente Salva Kiir Mayardit di abolire la pena di morte?










3.


In caso affermativo, di quali passi si tratta e quali successi si sono conseguiti a tutt'oggi?




Risposta dell’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(7 gennaio 2013)
L’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente deplora che nel Sud Sudan si applichi ancora la pena di morte e che, nella maggior parte dei casi, venga violato il diritto degli imputati a un processo equo.
A tal riguardo, l'AR/VP ritiene tuttavia incoraggiante che il 19 novembre 2012, per la prima volta, il Sud Sudan abbia votato a favore della risoluzione riguardante una moratoria sul ricorso alla pena di morte in seno al terzo comitato dell’Assemblea generale delle Nazioni Unite, contribuendo così a far adottare la risoluzione con un sostegno mai tanto ampio.
Secondo l’AR/VP, il processo di redazione della Costituzione in corso nel Sud Sudan rappresenta un'opportunità unica per abolire definitivamente la pena capitale nel paese. La delegazione dell’UE entrerà in contatto con i soggetti principali a livello nazionale per sostenere tale iniziativa e contribuirà a creare un clima in cui l'abolizione della pena di morte, o quantomeno una relativa moratoria, siano accettate dall'opinione pubblica. A tal proposito, la delegazione si è rivolta tra l'altro alla Commissione per i diritti umani del Sud Sudan e, assieme alla Francia, ha rilasciato una dichiarazione pubblica in occasione della Giornata internazionale contro la pena di morte (10.10.2012). Quando il Sud Sudan avrà ratificato l'accordo di Cotonu, il dialogo politico che ne conseguirà fornirà un quadro per discutere regolarmente con il governo di questo paese circa la pena di morte e altre questioni in materia di diritti umani.
Nel più ampio contesto dello Stato di diritto, l'UE sostiene il programma di sviluppo delle capacità per il sistema giudiziario del Sud Sudan, che mira a migliorare le competenze e le conoscenze dei giudici della County Court (tribunale di contea) o della High Court, tra l’altro, in materia di procedura civile e penale e in altri specifici settori di diritto sostanziale.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010052/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Abolition of the death penalty in South Sudan
In early November, the organisation Human Rights Watch urged South Sudan to establish a moratorium on the death penalty with a view to abolishing the punishment completely.
South Sudan uses the death penalty despite the weaknesses in the country’s legal system, which make it impossible to safeguard people’s basic legal rights.
On 28 August two men were hanged in Juba prison. There are currently 200 prisoners on death row, where they are kept in cramped and crowded conditions. More worryingly, since 2006 South Sudan’s Ministry of Justice has provided legal aid in a total of six cases, yet many defendants have been unable to prepare their defence properly or to appeal against convictions.
There are calls for South Sudan to increase public information and transparency regarding its use of the death penalty, including by publishing statistics on the number of executions which have taken place and the death sentences imposed. In addition, families should be informed about impending executions. Humanitarian organisations believe this is crucial during the constitutional review process.






1.


What steps is the Vice-President/High Representative prepared to take to persuade South Sudan to implement a moratorium on the death penalty?










2.


Is the European External Action Service currently taking steps to ask President Salva Kiir Mayardit to abandon the death penalty?










3.


If so, what are they and what success has been achieved so far?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission 
(7 January 2013)
The High Representative/Vice-President deplores that South Sudan is still applying the death penalty, and that, in most cases, the right of the defendants to a fair trial are seriously infringed. 
In this respect, the HR/VP found it encouraging that South Sudan, for the first time, voted in favour of the resolution on a Moratorium on the Use of the Death Penalty in the Third Committee of the United Nation's General Assembly on 19 November 2012, contributing thus to the adoption of the resolution by an unprecedented numbers of supporters. 
For the HR/VP, the constitutional drafting process currently under way in South Sudan presents a unique chance to abolish capital punishment in the country for good. The EU Delegation will reach out to key players in the country to support such a move and will contribute to creating an environment where such abolition or — at least — a moratorium will find public acceptance. In this respect, the Delegation has reached out inter alia to the Human Rights Commission of South Sudan, and, together with France, issued a public statement on the International Day against Death Penalty (10.10.2012). When South Sudan ratifies the Cotonou Agreement, the political dialogue to be established will provide the framework in which the death penalty and other human rights issues will be regularly discussed with the Government of South Sudan. 
In the wider context of the rule of law, the EU supports a capacity building programme for the judiciary in South Sudan, which aims to enhance the skills and knowledge of County Court and High Court Judges in, inter alia, civil and criminal procedure and selected areas of substantive legislation.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010053/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Rischio di attentati antioccidentali in Egitto
Il 2 novembre 2012, varie fonti di informazione hanno riferito che il British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Ministero degli esteri inglese) (FCO) ha innalzato il livello di minaccia terroristica in Egitto da «generale» a «alto», il che significa che un attentato è probabile. L'FCO ha sconsigliato tutti i viaggi non essenziali nella penisola del Sinai.
Alla fine di ottobre 2012, almeno cinque jihadisti sono stati arrestati dalla polizia egiziana vicino al confine con Gaza, e vi è la convinzione che gli islamisti abbiano in programma di attaccare la località di Sharm el-Sheikh nel periodo di Natale. Gli uomini in questione sono stati catturati con fucili e granate a razzo, il che suggerisce che stessero progettando un massacro stile Mumbai. Gli occidentali nella regione sono particolarmente vulnerabili.
Nel 2006, 23 persone furono uccise da una serie di bombe nella località turistica di Dahab. L'attuale leader di al-Qaeda, Ayman al-Zawahiri, che è anche egiziano, ha chiesto ai jihadisti di attaccare e rapire gli occidentali dappertutto nel mondo.






1.


La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è a conoscenza dei maggiori rischi di attentati terroristici in Egitto?










2.


La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è disposta a parlare con il Presidente egiziano Morsi onde valutare le misure che il governo egiziano ha attuato per contrastare la minaccia di nuovi attacchi?










3.


Quali azioni è disposto ad intraprendere il SEAE per garantire la sicurezza dei cittadini europei che scelgono di recarsi a Sharm el-Sheikh, durante il periodo natalizio?










4.


La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante vorrà prendere in considerazione la creazione di un sistema esterno di valutazione della minaccia, che informi e consigli i cittadini dell'UE sulla sicurezza delle destinazioni di viaggio? 




Risposta dell’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton  a nome della Commissione
(8 gennaio 2013)
Per le domande 1, 2 e 3, si rinvia alla risposta recentemente fornita all’interrogazione parlamentare E-8526/212 (210) sul medesimo argomento.
Quanto alla domanda 4, il rilascio di avvertenze di viaggio è di competenza degli Stati membri, che non ne coordinano di norma l’aggiornamento o la formulazione in sede di Consiglio. Tuttavia, attraverso la pagina consolare web del Centro di situazione dell’UE, essi procedono regolarmente a uno scambio di informazioni sulle proprie valutazioni dei pericoli che minacciano i cittadini dell’Unione in alcune regioni o paesi del mondo, tra cui l’Egitto.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010053/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Risk of anti-Western attacks in Egypt
On 2 November 2012, various media sources reported that the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) had raised its terror threat level within Egypt from ‘general’ to ‘high’, which means an attack is likely. The FCO has advised against all non-essential travel to the Sinai peninsula.
In late October 2012, at least five jihadists were arrested by Egyptian police near the border with Gaza, and there is a belief that Islamists plan to attack the resort of Sharm el-Sheikh over Christmas. The men in question were caught with guns and rocket-propelled grenades, which suggests they were planning a Mumbai-style massacre. Westerners in the region are particularly vulnerable.
In 2006, 23 people were killed in a series of bombings in the resort town of Dahab. The current leader of al-Qaeda, who is also Egyptian, Ayman al-Zawahiri, has called on jihadists to attack and kidnap Westerners around the world.






1.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of the increased risks of a terrorist attack in Egypt?










2.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative prepared to talk with Egypt’s President Morsi in order to assess the steps adopted by the Egyptian Government in tackling the threat of a fresh attack?










3.


What action is the EEAS prepared to take to ensure the safety of EU citizens who choose to travel to Sharm el-Sheikh during the Christmas period?










4.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative willing to consider the creation of an external threat assessment system which would give EU citizens advice on the safety of travel destinations?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton  on behalf of the Commission 
(8 January 2013)
For questions 1, 2 and 3, please refer to the reply recently provided to parliamentary Question E-8526/212 (211) on the same issue. 
For question 4 :
The issuing of travel warnings is a competence of Member States. They normally do not coordinate the upgrade or wording of warnings in the Council. However, through the EU Situation Centre's consular online webpage they regularly exchange information on their assessment of threats to EU citizens in certain world regions or countries, including Egypt. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010054/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Attentati in Bahrein
Il 5 novembre 2012, almeno cinque bombe sono esplose nella capitale del Bahrein, Manama, lasciando due morti. Tra gli obiettivi un cinema e il quartiere di Adliya, che è meta di turisti e uomini d'affari. Il Ministero degli interni del Bahrein ritiene che le bombe siano di fattura artigianale. Sono state collocate nei contenitori dei rifiuti e sotto una macchina che era in riparazione.
Almeno 70 persone sono morte da che nel 2011scoppiarono le proteste in tutto il Bahrein, in una rivolta guidata dalla maggioranza sciita del paese. Ad oggi, i colloqui mirati a trovare una soluzione politica non sono stati efficaci. Ciò è dovuto al fatto che gli oppositori hanno chiesto la liberazione preliminare di tutti i prigionieri politici perché ci possa essere un dialogo, ma il governo ha rifiutato di accettare qualunque condizione per i colloqui.
Il governo è convinto che la rivolta sia stata in gran parte istigata dall'Iran. Nel frattempo, i gruppi di oppositori all'interno del Bahrein affermano che gli attentati sono stati «fabbricati».






1.


Qual è la posizione della Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante in merito agli attentati verificatisi in Bahrein il 5 novembre 2012?










2.


Quali passi, a parere della Vice Presidente/Alto Rappresentante, andrebbero effettuati per facilitare il dialogo tra le autorità del Bahrein e gli oppositori?










3.


Nel corso degli ultimi due anni, quali sforzi sono stati compiuti dalla Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante per affrontare i problemi interni del Bahrein?




Risposta dell'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(16 gennaio 2013)
La posizione dell'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente in merito agli attentati verificatisi in Bahrein il 5 novembre 2012 è illustrata con chiarezza nella dichiarazione del suo portavoce del 7 novembre 2012.
Dallo scoppio dei disordini nel paese, agli inizi del 2011, l'AR/VP ha rilasciato diverse dichiarazioni in cui ha esortato tutte le parti a dar prova di misura, a evitare il ricorso alla violenza e a impegnarsi in un dialogo nazionale pacifico e costruttivo. L'AR/VP ha discusso la questione del Barhein con i ministri degli Affari esteri dell'UE in seno al Consiglio «Affari esteri» (marzo, aprile e maggio 2011) e con le autorità bahreinite, ivi compreso con il re Hamad e il ministro degli Affari esteri.
L'evoluzione della situazione interna in Bahrein è stata seguita con molta attenzione anche grazie all'invio nel Regno di funzionari del SEAE di alto livello, tanto dalla sede principale quanto dalla delegazione dell'UE a Riyād, ufficialmente accreditata anche per il Bahrein.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010054/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Bomb attacks in Bahrain
On 5 November 2012, at least five bombs exploded in the Bahraini capital, Manama, leaving two people dead. The targets included both a cinema and the district of Adliya, which is popular with tourists and business people. The Bahraini Interior Ministry considers the bombs to have been ‘home-made’. They were planted in rubbish bins and under a car which was being repaired.
At least 70 people have died since protests broke out across Bahrain in 2011, in an uprising that has been led by the country’s Shia majority. To date, talks on finding a political solution have not been effective. This is due to the fact that the opposition groups have demanded the release of all political prisoners before there can be a dialogue. However, the government has refused to accept any preconditions for talks.
The government believes that the uprising has in large part been instigated by Iran. Meanwhile, opposition groups inside Bahrain are saying that the attacks were fabricated.






1.


What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative regarding the attacks which occurred in Bahrain on 5 November 2012?










2.


What steps does the Vice-President/High Representative believe should be taken to facilitate a dialogue between the Bahraini authorities and opposition groups?










3.


Over the past two years, what efforts have been made by the Vice-President/High Representative to address Bahrain’s internal problems?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(16 January 2013)
The position of the Vice-President/High Representative on the attacks that occurred in Bahrain on 5 November 2012 is clearly explained in Catherine Ashton’s spokesperson’s statement on 7 November 2012.
Since the beginning of the unrest in Bahrain in early 2011, HR/VP has issued several statements calling all sides to exercise restraint, avoid violence and engage in a peaceful and constructive national dialogue. She has discussed several times Bahrain with EU Foreign Ministers in the Foreign Affairs Council (March, April and May 2011) and with the Bahraini authorities, including King Hamad and the Foreign Minister.
The evolution of the domestic situation in Bahrain has also been followed very closely through the dispatching of top-ranking EEAS officials to the Kingdom, both from the Headquarters and the EU Delegation in Riyadh, officially accredited to Bahrain too.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-010055/12
til Kommissionen
Christel Schaldemose (S&D)
(6. november 2012)

Om: Farlig og virkningsløs medicin
Danske medier har afsløret, at apotekerne i Danmark i flere år har solgt lægemidler, som apotekerne selv anser for at være ubrugelige eller i værste fald farlige. I 2002 sendte Apotekerforeningen et brev til den daværende Lægemiddelstyrelse (nuværende Sundhedsstyrelse) for at advare om, at mindst 23 lægemidler burde revurderes eller fjernes fra markedet. I dag kan danskerne fortsat købe 12 af disse lægemidler.
Den europæiske lovgivning kræver klare beviser for, at bivirkninger overtrumfer medicinens effekt, før et lægemiddel kan fjernes, og det gør det i praksis svært at fjerne for eksempel virkningsløs medicin.
Mine spørgsmål til Kommissionen er derfor:







Hvad vil Kommissionen gøre ved denne problemstilling?











Har Kommissionen planer om at kigge på lægemiddelsdirektivet for at højne patientsikkerheden ved at gøre det lettere at fjerne såvel farlig som virkningsløs medicin fra markedet?




Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Tonio Borg
(21. december 2012)
Et lægemiddel kan kun markedsføres efter at en markedsføringstilladelse i overensstemmelse med lægemiddellovgivningen er udstedt (212), og efter at dets kvalitet, sikkerhed og effektivitet er blevet undersøgt, og en positiv fordele-og-ulemper-vurdering er afsluttet.
Når lægemidlet er godkendt, kan det suspenderes eller tilbagekaldes på grundlag af materielle kriterier, der er fastsat i lovgivningen. Dette sker for at give de kompetente myndigheder mulighed for at handle af hensyn til folkesundheden, men på samme tid for at beskytte virksomhedernes interesser ved at sikre, at en beslutning om at suspendere eller tilbagekalde en markedsføringstilladelse kun kan vedtages på visse særlige betingelser, og ved at sikre, at en markedsføringstilladelse opretholdes, så længe en af disse betingelser ikke foreligger (213).
Sikkerheden for alle godkendte lægemidler overvåges løbende (lægemiddelovervågning) for at sikre, at der træffes passende foranstaltninger, hvis der er bivirkninger. Lovgivningen vedrørende lægemiddelovervågningen er for nylig blevet styrket (214) for at forbedre patientsikkerheden og folkesundheden gennem bedre sporing og vurdering af bivirkninger ved lægemidler, og hensigtsmæssig opfølgning.
Denne nye lovgivning giver mulighed for at pålægge indehavere af markedsføringstilladelser yderligere effektivitetsundersøgelser, når forståelsen af sygdommen eller den kliniske metodologi viser, at tidligere virkningsvurderinger måske skal ændres væsentligt. Kommissionen har for nylig iværksat en offentlig høring om dette (215).
Hvad endelig angår den særlige situation i Danmark drejer det sig for de tolv resterende produkters vedkommende ifølge oplysninger på hjemmesiden for den danske Lægemiddelstyrelse (216) om produkter, der er godkendt på nationalt plan, og som de nationale myndigheder primært er ansvarlige for.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010055/12
to the Commission
Christel Schaldemose (S&D)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Dangerous and ineffective medicines
The Danish media have disclosed that pharmacists in Denmark have for many years been selling medicines which the pharmacists themselves regard as useless or at worst dangerous. In 2002 the Danish Pharmacists’ Association wrote to the Danish Medicines Authority (now the Danish Health and Medicines Authority) to warn that at least 23 medicines needed to be reviewed or withdrawn from sale. It is still possible to purchase 12 of these medicines in Denmark today.
Under European legislation there has to be clear evidence that a medicine’s side-effects outweigh its beneficial effects in order for it to be withdrawn, and this makes it hard in practice to withdraw ineffective medicines, for example.
I should therefore like to ask:







What does the Commission propose to do about this problem?











Does the Commission have any plans to review the Medicines Directive in order to improve patient safety by making it easier to withdraw both dangerous and ineffective medicines from the market?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
A medicinal product can be placed on the market only after a marketing authorisation has been granted in line with the pharmaceutical legislation (217), after its quality, safety and efficacy have been evaluated, and a positive benefit-risk balance has been concluded.
Once authorised, it may be suspended or withdrawn on the basis of substantive criteria as provided by the legislation. This is to allow the competent authorities to act on public health grounds, but at the same time to protect the interests of undertakings by ensuring that a decision to suspend or withdraw a marketing authorisation can only be adopted in certain specific conditions and by ensuring its retention as long as the existence of one of those conditions is not established. (218)

The safety of all authorised products is continuously monitored (pharmacovigilance) to ensure that appropriate action is taken, if there are adverse reactions. Legislation on pharmacovigilance has been recently strengthened (219) to improve patient safety and public health through better detection and assessment of adverse reactions to medicines, and appropriate follow-up action.
This new legislation provides for the possibility to impose additional efficacy studies on marketing authorisation holders, when the understanding of the disease or the clinical methodology indicate that previous efficacy evaluations might have to be revised significantly. The Commission recently launched a public consultation on this. (220)

Finally, as regards the specific situation in Denmark, according to the information provided on the website of the Danish Health and Medicines Authority (221) that the twelve remaining products are nationally authorised products for which national authorities are primarily responsible.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010056/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Διώξεις δημοσιογράφων στην Ελλάδα
Τις πρώτες πρωινές ώρες σήμερα συνελήφθη, με κινηματογραφική επιχείρηση της αστυνομίας, ο δημοσιογράφος Σπύρος Καρατζαφέρης, αμέσως μετά το τέλος της τηλεοπτικής του εκπομπής, στην οποία αναφέρθηκε σε έγγραφα τα οποία του απεστάλησαν και απεδείκνυαν ολιγωρίες ή αδικήματα οικονομικών αρχών. Ο δημοσιογράφος κάλεσε από την εκπομπή του σε παρέμβαση τα αρμόδια στελέχη του Υπουργείου Οικονομικών προς διασταύρωση ή διάψευσή τους και προανήγγειλε ότι, από την επόμενη, θα αρχίσει τη δημοσίευση των στοιχείων. Λίγο αργότερα, και ενώ κατευθυνόταν προς την οικία του, συνελήφθη με την αιτιολογία ότι ενεργοποιείται τα μεσάνυχτα δικαστική απόφαση για συκοφαντική δυσφήμηση διά του Τύπου προσώπου κατηγορηθέντος για συμμετοχή στο παραδικαστικό κύκλωμα.
Την τελευταία εβδομάδα παρουσιάστηκαν κρούσματα διώξεων εις βάρος και άλλων δημοσιογράφων στην Ελλάδα κατά παράβαση της ελευθερίας του Τύπου. Συνελήφθη ο δημοσιογράφος Βαξεβάνης, ο οποίος έφερε στην δημοσιότητα ονόματα ελλήνων καταθετών σε ελβετική τράπεζα (λίστα Λαγκάρντ), τα οποία είχαν παραδοθεί στις ελληνικές αρχές πριν από δύο περίπου έτη χωρίς να τύχουν οποιασδήποτε αξιοποιήσεως. Εξεδιώχθησαν κακήν κακώς οι δημοσιογράφοι Κ. Αρβανίτης και Μ. Κατσίμη από την κρατική τηλεόραση για κριτική που άσκησαν σε θέμα που ανέδειξε η πασίγνωστη εφημερίδα GUARDIAN. Από τη συμπεριφορά των ελληνικών αρχών δημιουργείται εντύπωση στην κοινή γνώμη ότι επιδιώκεται συστηματικά το κουκούλωμα υποθέσεων διαφθοράς. Η συμπεριφορά αυτή εκθέτει και αθώα πρόσωπα.
Δοθέντος ότι η τρόικα εμφανίζεται να υποβάλλει και επιβάλλει στην ελληνική κυβέρνηση τη λήψη μέτρων οριζόντιας περικοπής των εισοδημάτων των φτωχών και μεσαίων εισοδημάτων της ελληνικής κοινωνίας, δεν προκύπτει εμφανώς σχεδίαση ουσιαστικής καταπολέμησης της φοροδιαφυγής και της διαφθοράς στην Ελλάδα. Το γεγονός αυτό κλονίζει την εμπιστοσύνη των ελλήνων πολιτών στο οικοδόμημα της ΕΕ.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


Προτίθεται επιτέλους, διά της τρόικας, την οποία ελέγχει, αντί να συνιστά εξαθλίωση της ελληνικής κοινωνίας, να προτείνει ουσιαστικά μέτρα για την καταπολέμηση της φοροδιαφυγής και της διαφθοράς στην Ελλάδα κατά τρόπο ώστε αντί η ελληνική κυβέρνηση να συλλαμβάνει και να ταλαιπωρεί δημοσιογράφους που προβληματίζονται για τα νόμιμα έσοδα του ελληνικού δημοσίου, κατά παράβαση της ελευθερίας του Τύπου, να αναζητήσει αποτελεσματικά τα έσοδα που φοροδιαφεύγουν και διογκώνουν την διαφθορά;




Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(11 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η Επιτροπή θα ήθελε να τονίσει ότι η καταπολέμηση της φοροδιαφυγής, της νομιμοποίησης εσόδων από παράνομες δραστηριότητες και της διαφθοράς αποτελεί σημαντική συνιστώσα του ελληνικού προγράμματος οικονομικής προσαρμογής (222). Το γεγονός αυτό καταδεικνύεται από μια σειρά συγκεκριμένων δράσεων (223), για τις οποίες προβλέπονται αντίστοιχες προθεσμίες εφαρμογής. Ως παραδείγματα μπορούν να αναφερθούν τα εξής: 






—


Ενίσχυση της διαδικασίας πρόσληψης φορολογικών ελεγκτών, ούτως ώστε ο αριθμός των ελεγκτών που ασκούν πλήρη καθήκοντα να ανέλθει στις δύο χιλιάδες, μέχρι τα μέσα του 2013. 










—


Υποχρέωση όλων των υπουργείων που συνδέονται με φορολογική σχέση με τους φορολογουμένους να χρησιμοποιούν τον αριθμό φορολογικού μητρώου αυτών των τελευταίων για τις οικονομικές συναλλαγές μαζί τους, μέχρι τα μέσα του 2013.










—


Καθιέρωση κεντρικής υπηρεσίας για την ενοποίηση και τη σύνδεση μεταξύ τους όλων των διαφόρων αριθμών μητρώου που σήμερα χρησιμοποιούνται στο πλαίσιο της λειτουργίας διαφόρων δημόσιων υπηρεσιών, μέχρι τα μέσα του 2014.










—


Θέσπιση νομοθεσίας με σκοπό τη θέση σε ισχύ ενός σύγχρονου κώδικα δεοντολογίας για τις συγκρούσεις συμφερόντων και τη δήλωση συμφερόντων, καθώς και συστήματος για την παροχή προστασίας σε όσους καταγγέλλουν τα κακώς κείμενα και αναφέρουν περιπτώσεις διαφθοράς, μέχρι το πρώτο τρίμηνο του 2013.










—


Εκπόνηση και δημοσιοποίηση ολοκληρωμένου σχεδίου για την πάταξη της διαφθοράς στις δημόσιες υπηρεσίες, περιλαμβανομένων ειδικών διατάξεων για τις φορολογικές και τις τελωνειακές υπηρεσίες (Φεβρουάριος 2013).




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010056/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Journalism witch-hunt in Greece
Journalist Spyros Karatzaferis was arrested in a filmed police operation in the early hours of this morning, immediately after he referred live on his television broadcast to documents he had been sent proving that the financial authorities had committed negligent or criminal acts. The journalist called on air for the competent officers of the Ministry of Finance to crosscheck or deny the documents and warned that he would start publishing the documents the following day. Shortly afterwards, while on his way home, he was arrested on the grounds that a court judgment against him for defamation in the press of a person accused of involvement in a para-state had taken effect at midnight.
Last week other journalists were also prosecuted in Greece, in contravention of the principle of press freedom. Journalist Costas Vaxevanis was arrested for publishing the names of Greeks with Swiss bank accounts (the Lagarde list). The names were passed to the Greek authorities about two years ago, but no action was taken. State television journalists Costas Arvanitis and Marilena Katsimi were targeted for making critical remarks on an issue reported in the famous Guardian newspaper. The approach by the Greek authorities is giving the general public the impression that they are systematically trying to cover up corruption cases. This approach is also putting innocent people at risk.
Given that the Troika appears to be tabling and requiring the Greek Government to introduce across-the-board cuts to the incomes of poor and average earners in Greek society, there does not appear to be any plan to effectively combat tax evasion and corruption in Greece. This is undermining the confidence of Greek citizens in the EU.
In view of the above, will the Commission answer the following:






—


Instead of recommending measures that will impoverish Greek society, does the Commission intend — finally — to propose substantial measures, via the Troika which it controls, to combat tax evasion and corruption in Greece, so that, instead of the Greek Government, in breach of freedom of the press, arresting and harassing journalists who are asking questions about the legitimate revenue of the Greek State , it will take effective action to collect revenue from tax evaders and prosecute corruption?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)
The Commission would like to emphasise that the fight against tax evasion, money laundering and corruption is a significant aspect of the Greek economic adjustment programme (224). This is illustrated by a number of specific actions (225) with corresponding deadlines for implementation such as: 






—


Stepping up the hiring procedure of the tax auditors so as to reach 2 000 tax auditors fully operational by mid-2013. 










—


Requiring that all Ministries which have a fiscal relationship with taxpayers utilize their tax identification number for financial transactions with them by mid-2013.










—


Introducing a central agency to consolidate and link all of the different identification numbers now employed across various government agencies by mid-2014.










—


Adopting legislation in order to introduce a modern code of conduct concerning conflicts of interests and declaration of interests and a system for protecting whistle-blowers who report corruption by the first quarter of 2013.










—


Preparing and making public a fully-fledged anti-corruption plan for the civil service, including special provisions for the tax and customs administrations (February 2013).




(English version)
Question for written answer P-010057/12
to the Commission
Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Ash dieback
Have EUROPHYT or DG SANCO issued any notifications or employed their rapid alert system regarding imports or trading of ash trees (Fraxinus species) infected with the fungal pathogen Chalara fraxinea (or C. fraxinea)?
If so, what action has subsequently been taken by the Commission to support Member States in stopping the further spread of this pathogen?
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(6 December 2012)
The fungal pathogen Chalara fraxinea is not regulated by EU Plant Health legislation (226). The EUROPHYT notification database provides updates on imports into the EU that are non-compliant with EU regulatory import requirements. Therefore, no notifications with regard to the unregulated fungal pathogen Chalara fraxinea have been made through EUROPHYT.
According to the EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant Protection Organisation) this pathogen is widespread in continental Europe. Ash trees in Europe have been affected by ash tree dieback since the early 1990s. The United Kingdom and Ireland have recently notified the Commission of findings in their territory for the first time this year. As a consequence, the United Kingdom and Ireland have introduced national measures, including a ban on the import of ash trees, to prevent the introduction of Chalara fraxinea. The Commission is discussing with Member States and is currently considering whether sufficient scientific and technical information is available to conclude that eradication or at least containment is realistic. If this is the case, the Commission may decide to adopt appropriate measures.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010058/12
to the Commission
Bill Newton Dunn (ALDE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: The most highly paid EU employees
According to a recent article in a British newspaper, well-known for its one-sided views concerning the EU, ‘Two thousand EU civil servants earn over GBP 81 000 a year, and help is at hand again for household costs, childcare, school fees and travel expenses.’
Whatever ‘help is at hand again’ means, is the figure of 2 000 EU staff correct? And is it correct that they also receive money for childcare and school fees?
Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission
(4 February 2013)
A household allowance can be paid to married staff under certain conditions. Spouses of expatriate staff often have to give up their professional activity to move to the place of employment with their partner. 
The Staff Regulations do not provide for any allowance for childcare. Institutions can provide childcare facilities for their staff; these are however subject to fees. A child allowance can be paid to staff with children. Child allowances paid from other sources national or local child allowances are deducted.
Both allowances were reviewed in the 2004 reform of the Staff Regulations.
Expatriate staff benefit from a flat rate payment to cover one travel per year to the home country of the staff member. Similar rules are in place in diplomatic services and other international organisations. The Commission has proposed to modernize this system in its proposal to amend the Staff Regulations of 2011 (COM(2011)890).
The salary grid and establishment plans of the institutions, agencies and other bodies with the number of authorised number of posts per grade are fully transparent and publicly available. The salary grid and allowances can be found in Title V, Chapter 1 of the Staff Regulations (Remuneration and expenses).
The breakdowns of establishment plan posts are set out in the supporting documents for the annual budget (for the Commission: Working Document Part II — Commission Human Resources (COM(2012) 300)).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010059/12
to the Commission
Julie Girling (ECR)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Energy-efficient light bulbs
Following the ban on the sale of general-purpose, non-directional incandescent bulbs in accordance with the Commission regulation implementing Directive 2005/32/EC, I would like to ask the Commission the following questions:







How many energy-saving light bulbs have been sold since the ban was introduced?











How many energy-saving light bulbs have been recycled since the ban was introduced?











How much energy has been saved through the introduction of the ban and the subsequent switch to energy-saving bulbs?











What quantity of mercury has been saved from the lower amount of coal burnt through the use of energy-saving light bulbs?




Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(9 January 2013)







1.


The European Lamp Companies Federation has provided the Commission with sales data










1.


The European Lamp Companies Federation has provided the Commission with sales data




 (227) (until September 2012). These companies represent approximately half of manufacturers. Since 1 September 2009, approximately 1.15 billion non-directional household light bulbs, which are more energy efficient than incandescent bulbs, have been sold by these companies in the European Union. Data for the other half of the manufacturers is not currently available.






2.


Information on collection and recycling of energy saving lamps reported by the Member States to the Commission is available on the website of Eurostat










2.


Information on collection and recycling of energy saving lamps reported by the Member States to the Commission is available on the website of Eurostat




 (228). For further details, the Commission refers the Honourable Member to the answer given to E-011190/2011 by Mrs Westlund (229). 





3.


Preliminary estimates for the year 2020 suggest that EU citizens are expected to save close to 40 billion kWh (roughly the electrictity consumption of Romania). 











4.


It is estimated in the impact assessment










4.


It is estimated in the impact assessment




 (230) accompanying Regulation (EC) No 244/2009 that the release of approximately 6,24 tonnes of mercury into the environment will be avoided as a result of the reduction in coal burnt thanks to the energy savings accumulated by 2020. More detailed assessments of energy savings and emissions avoidance resulting from the measures set out in Regulation (EC) No 244/2009 (231) on household lamps will be part of a review to be started at the latest on 13 April 2014.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010060/12
to the Commission
William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: New Commission job scheme
The Commission’s ‘first EURES job’ scheme — limited at the moment to Spain, Germany, Denmark, and Italy but potentially to be extended to the entire EU-27 — allows jobseekers from the continent to claim the sum of GBP 1000 if they obtain jobs in the UK. Given that youth unemployment in the UK has been rising steadily over the past 18 months — with the latest estimate at 957 000 — has the Commission considered the effect of the EURES scheme on youth unemployment in the UK? If so, what preliminary conclusions has it reached?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
‘Your first EURES job’ is a pilot job mobility scheme to help young people find jobs in other EU countries. As it is testing a new concept, its resources and overall target (5000 placements by 2014) are limited. For the period 2014-2020 the Commission has proposed to continue the funding of such ‘targeted job mobility schemes’ under the EU Programme for Social Change and Innovation. These schemes can focus on specific target groups e.g. young people but also on specific occupations, sectors and/or countries. 
The current scheme is based on support from certain national employment services — information, job search, recruitment, funding — for both young jobseekers and businesses interested in recruiting from outside their home country. 
Germany is currently the main recruiting country in Europe, accounting for the larger share of job placements. In other EU countries, such as the United Kingdom, only bottleneck or niche job offers are targeted by the scheme.
This small-scale initiative will not have disruptive side-effects or limit the number of vacancies for national jobless young people. It redeploys competences and skills to where shortages have been identified. Funding is moreover subject to conditions and procedures put in place by the relevant employment services. The scheme will be evaluated by mid-2014.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010061/12
to the Commission
William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: EURES job scheme
Can the Commission indicate if and when it plans to extend its ‘first EURES job’ scheme to Greece?
Question for written answer E-010357/12
to the Commission
William (The Earl of) Dartmouth (EFD)
(13 November 2012)

Subject: EURES job scheme
Can the Commission indicate if and when it plans to extend its ‘first EURES job’ scheme to the EU Member States of Eastern Europe, namely Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania?
Joint answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
Interested labour market organisations of the 27 Member States — public, private or third sector employment services — are invited to implement ‘Your first EURES job’ at European level through open calls for proposals. The management of the scheme has not been devolved to nominated structures (agencies) in all EU countries. Participation is optional and applicant organisations can qualify as both stand-alone service providers and in partnership with labour market stakeholders from the same country or from other Member States.
While no Greek organisation has yet applied directly, the Public Employment Service of Greece (OAED) is an active partner of the German Public Employment Service, one of the four organisations currently implementing the action (with Spain, Denmark and Italy). OAED is in charge of informing, profiling and pre-selecting Greek job applicants for vacancies in Germany. Moreover, Greek jobseekers can apply directly for jobs in other Member States through the Danish and Italian projects. High qualified Greek jobseekers have already been placed in jobs in Germany, Italy and Sweden. 
Some of the EU Member States of Eastern Europe e.g. Poland, Bulgaria, Lithuania or Slovenia are partners of at least one of the four employment services currently implementing ‘Your first EURES job’.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010064/12
an die Kommission (Vizepräsidentin / Hohe Vertreterin)
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(6. November 2012)

Betrifft: VP/HR — Dialog über Zensur und Überwachung des Internet
Die Vizepräsidentin / Hohe Vertreterin für Außenpolitik betonte bei der Budapester Konferenz zum digitalen Raum (Budapest Conference on Cyberspace) erneut die Selbstverpflichtung der EU, die Redefreiheit und andere Grundrechte auch im Internet zu schützen. In Staaten außerhalb der EU werden diese Grundrechte von einigen nationalen Regierungen allerdings nicht anerkannt und teilweise aktiv beschränkt. Im Zuge der Proteste des Arabischen Frühlings hat sich die Möglichkeit, Informationen sicher und anonym aus dem Internet abzurufen und zu verbreiten, als wesentliches Mittel zur Organisation von Protesten und Widerstand gegen autoritäre Regime herausgestellt.






1.


Mit welchen Staaten befindet sich die Vizepräsidentin / Hohe Vertreterin beziehungsweise der EAD derzeit im Dialog über die Abschaffung bestehender Mechanismen der Zensur‐ oder Überwachung des Internets?










2.


Welche Staaten haben Anfragen der Vizepräsidentin / Hohen Vertreterin oder des EAD zu einem Dialog über bestehende Zensur‐ oder Überwachungsmechanismen abgelehnt?




Antwort von Frau Ashton — Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin im Namen der Kommission
(8. Januar 2013)
Die EU tritt in allen Bereichen ihres auswärtigen Handelns ausnahmslos für die Förderung der Menschenrechte ein, und die neuen Technologien können sich als wichtige Hilfsmittel für die Förderung der Menschenrechte und der Demokratie erweisen.
Die EU hat wiederholt die Einschränkung der Meinungsfreiheit und des Internetzugangs sowie die Verhaftung von Bloggern verurteilt, sowohl im Rahmen ihrer bilateralen Dialoge (z. B. anlässlich des Menschenrechtsdialogs EU-Vietnam am 25. Oktober 2012) als auch im Rahmen ihrer Beziehungen mit Drittstaaten und in Form öffentlicher Erklärungen. So äußerte die Hohe Vertreterin im Juni 2012 ihre Besorgnis über verschärfte Zensur und Beschränkungen der Arbeit der Medien und der politischen Opposition (auch angesichts der Inhaftierung einer Reihe von Journalisten und politischen Aktivisten) in Sudan und forderte die sudanesische Regierung mit Nachdruck zur Wahrung von Rede-, Presse‐ und Versammlungsfreiheit als Grundrechte der Bürger auf.
Auf der Sitzung des UN-Menschenrechtsausschusses vom 6. Dezember 2012 in New York bekundete die EU ihr Bedauern über die zunehmende Zensur und verurteilte die Beschränkung des Internetzugangs.
In dem „Strategischen Rahmen für Menschenrechte“ ist als konkrete Maßnahme die Entwicklung von EU-Leitlinien zur freien Meinungsäußerung (online und offline) vorgesehen, die auch den Schutz von Bloggern und Journalisten zum Gegenstand haben sollen.
Als ein Beispiel für jüngste Maßnahmen, mit denen die EU sicherstellen möchte, dass das Internet ein wichtiges Vehikel für politische Freiheit, demokratischen Wandel und wirtschaftliches Wachstum bleibt, sei hier die gemeinsame Mitteilung „Eine Partnerschaft mit dem südlichen Mittelmeerraum für Demokratie und gemeinsamen Wohlstand“ genannt, in der vorgesehen ist, dass die Kommission die sogenannte „No Disconnect“-Strategie entwickelt, auf deren Grundlage die EU Organisationen der Zivilgesellschaft oder einzelnen Bürgern helfen kann, willkürliche Zugangssperren bei elektronischen Kommunikationstechnologien, beispielsweise Internetsperren, zu umgehen.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010064/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Dialogue on Internet censorship and surveillance
At the Budapest Conference on Cyberspace the Vice-President/High Representative for Foreign Affairs reaffirmed the EU’s commitment to protecting freedom of expression and other fundamental rights on the Internet. Certain governments of countries outside the EU do not recognise and partially restrict the exercise of these fundamental rights. The Arab Spring protests have, however, shown that the ability to access and disseminate information securely and anonymously is an essential means of organising protests and resistance against authoritarian regimes.






1.


With which states is the Vice-President/High Representative or the EEAS currently in talks to abolish existing Internet censorship or surveillance systems?










2.


Which states have rejected overtures from the Vice-President/High Representative or the EEAS for dialogue on existing Internet censorship or surveillance systems?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton  on behalf of the Commission 
(8 January 2013)
The EU is committed to promote human rights in all areas of its external action without exception. New technologies can be important avenues for promoting Human Rights and democracy.
The EU has repeatedly condemned restrictions to freedom of expression and access to the Internet, as well as the arrest of bloggers, in the framework of its bilateral dialogues (as an example during the EU-Vietnam HR Dialogue held on 25 October 2012) and relations with third countries and through public statements, as an example in June 2012 the High Representative expressed concern at growing levels of censorship and restrictions on the media and the political opposition in Sudan, including the detention of a number of journalists and political activists and urged the Government to respect the rights of its citizens to freedom of expression, freedom of the media and freedom of assembly.
In the UN committee (Human Rights) meeting on 6/12/2012 New York, the EU deplored the trend of increase censorship and condemned restriction on the Internet.
The Strategic Framework for Human Rights provides in its Action Plan the development of EU Guidelines on Freedom of Expression online and offline, including the protection of bloggers and journalists.
A recent example of the EU's action, to ensure that the Internet remains a driver of political freedom, democratic development and economic growth, is the Joint Communication ‘A Partnership for Democracy and Shared Prosperity with the Southern Mediterranean’ pursuant to which the Commission develop the ‘No Disconnect Strategy’, to assist civil society organisations or individual citizens to circumvent arbitrary disruption to access to electronic communications technologies, including to the Internet.
(българска версия)
Въпрос с искане за писмен отговор E-010065/12
до Комисията
Dimitar Stoyanov (NI)
(6 ноември 2012 г.)

Относно: Преговори за присъединяването на Турция към ЕС
На 31.10.2012 г. Щефан Фюле, член на Европейската комисия, беше на еднодневно посещение в София. Основна тема на разговорите му с президента на Република България Росен Плевнелиев, премиера Бойко Борисов и министъра на външните работи Николай Младенов беше разширяването на ЕС със страните от Западните Балкани и ролята на България в този процес.
По време на посещението си г-н Фюле, член на Европейската комисия, коментира и преговорите за присъединяване на Турция към Европейския съюз. В тази връзка следва да се отбележи, че въпреки инициираната от Комисията обновена положителна програма между ЕС и Турция, целяща да подпомогне преговорите по присъединяване чрез насърчаване на реформите и разширяване на правата и свободите на турските граждани, Турция все още не е приложила, за шеста поредна година, разпоредбите, произтичащи от Споразумението за асоцииране между ЕО и Турция, както и Допълнителния протокол към него.
Ето защо се обръщам към Вас със следните въпроси:







Кои и колко преговорни глави от предприсъединителния процес на Турция с ЕС са отворени?











Кои и колко преговорни глави са затворени?











По отворените глави водят ли се активни преговори с Турция и ако е така, каква прогноза би дала Комисията за приключването на преговорите по тях?




Отговор, даден от г-н Фюле  от името на Комисията
(18 декември 2012 г.)
Преговори за присъединяване с Турция бяха открити по 13 глави (от общо 35): свободно движение на капитал, дружествено право, право на интелектуална собственост, информационно общество и медии, безопасност на храните, ветеринарна и фитосанитарна политика, данъчно облагане, статистика, предприятия и индустриална политика, трансевропейски мрежи, наука и научни изследвания, околна среда, защита на потребителите и здравеопазване и финансов контрол. 
Една от отворените глави (наука и научни изследвания) е временно затворена. 
Комисията наблюдава напредъка на Турция по отворените глави и осигурява технически експертни знания за да подпомогне усилията на Турция за привеждане в съответствие на законодателството си. Освен това с цел подкрепа и допълване на преговорите за присъединяване Комисията стартира „положителната програма“, насочена към засилване на сътрудничеството между ЕС и Турция в множество области от общ интерес. В тази рамка бяха сформирани осем работни групи с цел насърчаване на привеждането в съответствие с достиженията на правото на ЕС. Въз основа на решение на Съвета от 2006 г. обаче, докато Турция не се съгласи да приложи изцяло допълнителния протокол към Анкарското споразумение за асоцииране по отношение на Кипър, няма да бъдат затваряни временно глави.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010065/12
to the Commission
Dimitar Stoyanov (NI)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Accession negotiations with Turkey
On 31 October 2012, Commissioner Štefan Füle made a one-day visit to Sofia. In his discussions with Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev, Prime Minister Boyko Borisov and Foreign Minister Nikolay Mladenov, the main topic was the enlargement of the EU to include the eastern Balkan countries and Bulgaria’s role in that process.
During his visit, Commissioner Füle commented on the EU’s accession negotiations with Turkey. It should be noted in this regard that, despite the renewed positive agenda between the EU and Turkey, launched by the Commission with the aim of assisting the accession negotiations by encouraging reforms and expanding Turkish citizens’ rights and freedoms, Turkey, for a sixth consecutive year, has still not implemented the provisions stemming from its Association Agreement with the EEC and the Additional Protocol thereto.
I therefore have a number of questions for the Commission.






1.


On how many, and which, chapters in the Turkish pre-accession process have negotiations been opened?










2.


On how many, and which, chapters have negotiations been closed?










3.


Are negotiations with Turkey on the open chapters actively ongoing and, if so, how would the Commission assess the prospects of concluding the negotiations on those chapters?




Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
Accession negotiations with Turkey have been opened on 13 chapters (out of a total of 35): Free Movement of Capital, Company Law, Intellectual Property Law, Information Society and Media, Food Safety, Veterinary and Phytosanitary Policy, Taxation, Statistics, Enterprise & Industrial Policy, Trans-European Networks, Science and Research; Environment, Consumer and Health Protection, and Financial Control. 
One of the opened chapters (Science and Research) has been provisionally closed. 
The Commission monitors progress Turkey makes in the open chapters and provides technical expertise on the alignment efforts. Additionally, in order to support and to complement the accession negotiations, the Commission has launched ‘the positive agenda’ aimed at enhancing EU-Turkey cooperation in a number of areas of joint interest. In this framework, eight working groups were set up to encourage alignment with the acquis. However, based on a 2006 Council decision, until Turkey agrees to fully implement the Additional Protocol of the Ankara Association Agreement to Cyprus, no chapter will be provisionally closed.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010066/12
a la Comisión
Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)
(6 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Consecuencias de la no armonización del impuesto de sociedades en la EU
Hace unos días la empresa Apple presentó el balance de sus cuentas ante el organismo regulador de los mercados de valores norteamericano (SEC). Esa documentación es altamente informativa. Entre otros datos, se confirma el relevante volumen de ingresos que obtiene esta compañía por sus negocios en los Estados miembros de la Unión Europea frente a la pequeña cantidad que paga de impuestos. Y es que se declaran los beneficios generados en países que mantienen una imposición razonable en aquellos otros cuya imposición es más baja, en concreto, en Luxemburgo e Irlanda. Las Haciendas de estos dos Estados se están embolsando las ganancias fiscales que deberían haber ido a las arcas de otros países europeos.
Manifesté ya mi preocupación sobre los efectos perversos de esa desigualdad impositiva en la pregunta que presenté el pasado día 4 de septiembre (E-007799/2012). La respuesta que me ha llegado de la Comisión Europea, tras aludir a la inexistencia en el Tratado de disposiciones que permitan una armonización del impuesto de sociedades, reconoce que sus servicios están estudiando estas situaciones aunque se encuentra con la interpretación de que «las estructuras de que actualmente se sirven las empresas de Internet no pueden considerarse por lo común establecimientos permanentes con arreglo a los convenios de doble imposición».






1.


¿Sigue considerando la Comisión que no tienen las Instituciones europeas ninguna posibilidad de armonizar el impuesto de sociedades para que rija una mínima igualdad entre las empresas que negocian en la Unión Europea?










2.


¿Tiene interés la Comisión en analizar la documentación contable presentada al organismo regulador de los mercados de valores norteamericano?










3.


¿No advierten los servicios de la Comisión que las sucursales y dependencias que generan de manera tan constante un elevado volumen de ingresos son establecimientos permanentes para poder aplicarles la normativa tributaria relativa a la doble imposición?




Respuesta del Sr. Šemeta en nombre de la Comisión
(17 de enero de 2013)
La pregunta se basa en la respuesta de la Comisión a la pregunta E-007799/2012. La Comisión desea añadir los datos siguientes.






1.


La Comisión considera que el actual marco jurídico y político hace poco realista prever el grado de armonización del impuesto sobre sociedades en la EU que contempla su Señoría. En cambio, se sabe desde hace tiempo la necesidad de una actuación colectiva a raíz de los problemas planteados por el correcto funcionamiento del mercado interior y el hecho de que haya tantos regímenes del impuesto sobre sociedades como Estados miembros. En este contexto, la Comisión propuso la base imponible consolidada común del impuesto sobre sociedades (BICCIS).




Varios elementos de la BICCIS abordarán efectivamente muchas de las cuestiones que preocupan hoy en día.
Además, en el contexto de su reciente Comunicación de 6.12.2012 (232), la Comisión sigue dispuesta no solo a sacar adelante nuevas ideas y propuestas, tales como la recomendación sobre la planificación fiscal agresiva, sino también a contribuir a un debate internacional más amplio sobre las maneras de reforzar las normas actuales internacionalmente aceptadas.






2.


La Comisión no tiene previsto analizar la documentación contable presentada al organismo regulador de los mercados de valores norteamericano a efectos de la información fiscal sobre las empresas. Únicamente las autoridades fiscales nacionales son responsables de la evaluación y auditoría fiscales de las empresas que operan en la EU.










3.


La Comisión considera que el tema más amplio de la distribución de beneficios entre los establecimientos permanentes en diferentes jurisdicciones es de carácter mundial y está dispuesta a contribuir a un debate en la EU y a escala internacional. Este debate revestirá especial pertinencia a la luz de las prioridades definidas este año por el G8 y el G20.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010066/12
to the Commission
Francisco Sosa Wagner (NI)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Consequences of the lack of corporate tax harmonisation in the EU
A few days ago, Apple submitted its annual report to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, the chief regulatory body of the U.S. securities market. The report was highly informative. Among other details, it confirms the vast amount of revenue that the company generates through its business activities in European Union Member States compared to the low sums that it pays in taxes. The company pays low taxes by declaring profits made in countries with a reasonable tax rate in countries which have lower tax rates, more specifically in Luxembourg and Ireland. The Luxembourg and Ireland Treasuries are therefore pocketing the profits from taxes that should have been paid to other European countries.
I already expressed my concern about the pernicious effects of this tax inequality in the question that I submitted on 4 September 2012 (E-007799/2012). The answer from the Commission alluded to the lack of provisions in the Treaty which would make corporate tax harmonisation possible, and then stated that the Commission Services were looking into these situations, although the Commission was of the view that ‘the current structures used by Internet companies do not commonly qualify as permanent establishments under double taxation conventions.’






1.


Does the Commission still think that there is no chance that the European institutionscould harmonise corporate taxes in order for a minimum level of equality to beestablished among companies doing business in the European Union?










2.


Does the Commission intend to analyse the accounts submitted to the U.S. Securities andExchange Commission?










3.


Does the Commission not view the branches and subsidiaries which generate such aconsistently high amount of revenue as permanent establishments, which could thereforebe subject to the tax legislation concerning double taxation?




Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
The question builds upon the response of the Commission to the Question E-007799/2012. Moreover, the Commission would add the following elements.






1.


The Commission considers that the current legal and political framework makes it unrealistic to envisage the degree of harmonisation of corporate taxation in the EU as contemplated by the Honourable Member. By contrast, the need for collective action arising from the problems posed for the smooth functioning of the internal Market by the co-existence of as many different corporate tax systems as there are Member States has been well known for a long time. It was in this context that the Commission proposed the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB).




Elements of the CCCTB would effectively deal with many of the issues that are of concern today.
The Commission stands ready moreover, in the context of its recent communication of 6.12.2012 (233) not only to carry forward specific new ideas and proposals, such as the recommendation on aggressive tax planning but to contribute to a wider international debate on ways to strengthen the current internationally accepted rules.






2.


The Commission does not intend to analyse returns made to the Securities and Exchange Commission in the United States for tax information on companies. Only the national tax authorities are responsible for the tax assessment and audit of companies active in the EU. 










3.


The Commission considers that the wider issue of the apportionment of profits between permanent establishments in different jurisdictions raises issues of a global nature and is ready to contribute to a debate both at EU and international level. This discussion will be particularly relevant in view of the priorities identified this year by the G8 and the G20.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010067/12
to the Commission
Marina Yannakoudakis (ECR)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Number of permanent officials and contract agents on contracts of unlimited duration who are of British nationality






1.


Could the Commission please inform me of the number of permanent officials and contract agents on contracts of unlimited duration who are of British nationality?










2.


What would be the status of these officials and contract agents were the United Kingdom to leave the European Union?










3.


Can the Commission please give details of the number of officials it recruited from Norway before the 1994 referendum? Are any of those officials still employed by the Commission? If not, when was the last official released from his or her employment?




Answer given by Mr Šefčovič on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)







1.


On 1 November 2012 there are 1,061 British










1.


On 1 November 2012 there are 1,061 British




 (234) officials and 34 contract agents with contracts of indefinite duration in activity (235) in the Commission. The Commission does not have information about the number of British staff in other EU institutions and agencies. The Commission employs around 55% of EU staff.






2.


Provisions regarding the compulsory resignation of officials and termination of employment of other servants who no longer have the nationality of one of the Member States of the Union are laid down in Article 49 of the Staff Regulations and Article 47










2.


Provisions regarding the compulsory resignation of officials and termination of employment of other servants who no longer have the nationality of one of the Member States of the Union are laid down in Article 49 of the Staff Regulations and Article 47




 (236) of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants. Provisions regarding the possibility for the appointing authority to authorise exceptions to the obligation to be a national of a Member State are laid down in Article 28 of the Staff Regulations and Article 12 and 82 of the Conditions of Employment of other Servants. 





3.


Before the 1994 referendum 7 Norwegian officials had been recruited, of which one official is still in activity.




(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010068/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Attivista cinese per i diritti delle donne condannata a un periodo di campo di lavoro
Il 6 novembre 2012, numerose organizzazioni umanitarie hanno riferito che la nota attivista cinese per i diritti delle donne, Mao Hengfeng, era stata condannata a un anno e mezzo in un campo di lavoro. La Hengfeng è nota come attivista per i diritti riproduttivi e contro gli sgomberi forzati. È stata arrestata il 30 settembre a Beijing.
Secondo Amnesty International, la famiglia Hengfeng ha appreso che sarebbe stata condannata alla «rieducazione attraverso il lavoro» per «aver turbato l'ordine sociale». Amnesty esprime la convinzione che sia a rischio di tortura e di patire altre forme di maltrattamento. Al marito è anche stato impedito di incontrarla.
La Hengfeng è stata più volte arrestata per la sua attività di propaganda. Nel 2010, è stata condannata a 18 mesi di «rieducazione attraverso il lavoro» per il suo attivismo. I campi di lavoro sono utilizzati per detenere le persone, senza accusa né processo, e non sono soggetti alle necessarie regole internazionali. Amnesty ha anche denunciato che le autorità hanno lanciato un inasprimento dell'attività repressiva contro gli attivisti dei diritti umani, e da settembre, almeno 130 persone sono state incarcerate o hanno subito restrizioni.






1.


La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è a conoscenza del caso di Mao Hengfeng?










2.


La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è disposta a chiedere alle autorità cinesi qual è la situazione della sig.ra Hengfeng, e di permetterle di incontrare la sua famiglia e ottenere assistenza legale?










3.


Quali passi hanno effettuato i funzionari dell'UE a Beijing per sollevare le preoccupazioni per i 




«campi di rieducazione attraverso il lavoro», in cui sono detenuti centinaia di prigionieri politici?
Risposta dell'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(21 dicembre 2012)
L'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente nutre serie preoccupazioni per i continui soprusi delle autorità cinesi nei confronti di Mao Hengfeng. Nel 2010 e nel 2011 l'UE ha trattato più volte la questione con le autorità cinesi, nell’ambito di un’iniziativa diplomatica e nell’elenco dei casi individuali consegnato alle autorità in occasione del dialogo tra l’UE e la Cina in materia di diritti umani. L’UE ha esortato le autorità cinesi a garantire l’integrità fisica e psicologica di Mao Hengfeng e porre fine alle continue vessazioni nei confronti della donna. Dopo l’ultima sentenza che ha condannato Mao a un programma di «rieducazione attraverso il lavoro», l'UE ha nuovamente manifestato la propria disapprovazione alle autorità cinesi e ha chiesto la sua liberazione immediata.
Nell’ambito dei precedenti cicli del dialogo tra l'UE e la Cina in materia di diritti umani, l'UE ha sollevato a più riprese la questione dei campi di lavoro per la rieducazione e continua altresì a esortare il paese a porre fine al sistema di rieducazione attraverso il lavoro e a garantire che nessuno venga incarcerato senza processo.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010068/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Chinese women's rights activist sentenced to a labour camp
On 6 November 2012, a number of humanitarian organisations reported that the prominent Chinese women’s rights activist Mao Hengfeng had been sentenced to one and a half years in a labour camp. Hengfeng is known for her work as a campaigner for reproductive rights and against forced evictions. She was detained on 30 September in Beijing.
According to Amnesty International, Hengfeng’s family learnt that she would be sentenced to ‘re-education through labour’ for ‘disturbing social order’. Amnesty believes she is at risk of being tortured and suffering other forms of ill-treatment. Her husband has also been prevented from seeing her.
Hengfeng has been detained a number of times as a result of her campaigning work. In 2010, she was sentenced to 18 months of ‘re-education through labour’ for her activism. These labour camps are used to detain people without charge or trial, and fall short of necessary international standards. Amnesty has also said that the authorities have launched a crackdown against human rights activists, and since September at least 130 people have been detained or had restrictions placed on them.






1.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of the case of Mao Hengfeng?










2.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative prepared to ask the Chinese authorities about the whereabouts of Ms Hengfeng, and to allow her to see her family and obtain legal support?










3.


What steps have EU officials taken in Beijing to raise concerns over the 




‘re-education labour camps’, which hold hundreds of political detainees?
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission 
(21 December 2012)
The High Representative/Vice-President is profoundly concerned about the persistent mistreatment of Mao Hengfeng by the Chinese authorities. In 2010 and 2011, the EU raised Ms Mao's case several times with the Chinese authorities, through a demarche and in the individual case list handed over at the EU-China human rights dialogue. The EU has called on the Chinese authorities to ensure Ms Mao's physical and psychological integrity and to put an end to their continuous harassment of her. In view of Ms Mao's most recent sentence to re-education through labour, the EU has again protested to the Chinese authorities and called for her immediate release. 
The EU has repeatedly raised the issue of re-education labour camps with China in the framework of past rounds of the EU-China Human Rights Dialogue. The EU also continues to call on China to end the system of Re-Education through Labour and to ensure that no-one is placed in detention without a trial. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010069/12
an die Kommission
Franziska Katharina Brantner (Verts/ALE)
(6. November 2012)

Betrifft: Verteilung der Daphne-III-Mittel in den Jahren 2011 und 2012






1.


Wie erklären sich die großen Unterschiede zwischen den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten in der Höhe der Mittelvergabe beim Programm Daphne III?










2.


Konkret: Wie erklärt es sich, dass zum Beispiel Projekte in Großbritannien ca. 8,65 Mio. EUR in den Jahren 2011 und 2012 erhalten, was immerhin ca. 30 % des Gesamtbudgets ausmacht? Projekte in Deutschland erhalten im Vergleich lediglich ca. 1,65 Mio. EUR.




Antwort von Frau Reding im Namen der Kommission
(7. Januar 2013)
Beim letzten Aufruf zur Einreichung von Vorschlägen (2011-2012) im Rahmen des Programms Daphne III gingen bei der Kommission 2,5-mal so viele Projektvorschläge (481 Projekte) ein als beim Aufruf 2009-2011. Aus allen Mitgliedstaaten (mit Ausnahme Estlands) ging mindestens ein Vorschlag ein, jedoch sind in der Liste der bewilligten Projekte nur Organisationen aus 16 Ländern (einschließlich Norwegen) verzeichnet. 50 % aller Vorschläge stammen aus Italien (126), dem Vereinigten Königreich (64) und Spanien (52). Die Aufforderung zur Einreichung von Vorschlägen sieht für eine Förderung der Kommission keinen Höchstbetrag pro Mitgliedstaat vor. Alle Vorschläge wurden u. a. im Hinblick auf Qualität, Relevanz, Mehrwert, Nachhaltigkeit und Kosteneffizienz bewertet. 
Der große zahlen‐ und budgetmäßige Unterschied zwischen dem Vereinigten Königreich und Deutschland ist im Wesentlichen auf die Anzahl und das veranschlagte Budget der aus diesen beiden Mitgliedstaaten eingereichten Projektvorschläge zurückzuführen. Von Organisationen aus dem Vereinigten Königreich gingen 64 Vorschläge ein (13 % der Projektvorschläge), wovon 15 Vorschläge bewilligt wurden (23 % der 64 eingereichten Vorschläge). Von Organisationen aus Deutschland hingegen wurden 24 Vorschläge eingereicht (5 % der eingegangenen Vorschläge), vier davon wurden bewilligt (17 % der 24 eingereichten Vorschläge), was eine hohe Erfolgsquote darstellt. Das durchschnittliche Projektbudget der ausgewählten Vorschläge beläuft sich im Falle Deutschlands auf 412 819 EUR, beim Vereinigten Königreich hingegen auf 576 649 EUR.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010069/12
to the Commission
Franziska Katharina Brantner (Verts/ALE)
(6 November 2012)

Subject: Allocation of DAPHNE III funding in 2011 and 2012






1.


Why are there such wide divergences in the amount of funding allocated from Member State to Member State under the Daphne III programme?










2.


More specifically, why is it that, for example, some EUR 8.65 million — at least 30% of the overall budget — was allocated to projects in the United Kingdom in 2011 and 2012, whereas projects in Germany received only around EUR 1.65 million?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
During the last call 2011-2012 under the DAPHNE III Programme, the Commission received 2.5 times (481 projects) more projects than for the call 2009-2010. Organisations from all Member states, with the exception of Estonia, have submitted at least one proposal while only organisations from 16 countries (including Norway) are in the list of awarded projects. The majority of proposals received came from Italy (126), the United Kingdom (64) and Spain (52), representing 50% of the total received. The call did not foresee any maximum amount for the EC funding per Member State. All proposals have been evaluated and selected according to their quality, relevance, added value, sustainability, cost effectiveness, etc. 
The difference in the numbers and budget allocated to the United Kingdom and Germany comes essentially from the number and proposed budget of the proposals received from those two Member States. While organisations from the United Kingdom submitted 64 proposals (13% of the proposals received) and were awarded 15 proposals (23% of the 64 proposals submitted), organisations from Germany presented 24 proposals (5% of the proposals received) and were awarded 4 proposals (17% of the 24 proposals submitted) which shows a good success rate. The average budget of the awarded proposals in the case of Germany is EUR 412 819 while for the United Kingdom it amounts to EUR 576 649. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord P-010070/12
aan de Commissie
Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D)
(7 november 2012)

Betreft: Doeltreffendheid van financiering van EIB
Twee weken geleden heeft Ford Europe haar intentie uitgesproken om enkele fabrieken in Europa te sluiten. Het gaat onder meer over de fabriek in Genk, maar ook over de fabriek in Southampton waar de Ford Transit wordt gemaakt. De productie van deze bestelwagen zou verhuizen naar de Ford-fabriek Otosan II in Koçaeli, Turkije. In het kader van deze mogelijke sluitingen is al herhaaldelijk de suggestie gedaan van steun vanuit het Globaliseringsfonds, net zoals dat bijvoorbeeld bij de sluiting van de GM/Opel-fabriek in Antwerpen is gebeurd.
Nu blijkt dat de Europese Investeringsbank een financiering verstrekt voor de Ford-fabriek in Turkije. In juni is een eerste schijf van EUR 100 miljoen goedgekeurd en de totale financiering zou EUR 200 miljoen bedragen.






1.


Vindt de Commissie het opportuun dat de Europese Investeringsbank financiering verstrekt voor een project dat gelinkt is aan afdankingen in de Europese Unie? Is de Commissie de mening toegedaan dat het financieren van projecten met een mogelijke negatieve impact op tewerkstelling binnen de Unie een correcte invulling is van het mandaat van de EIB?










2.


Is er enige coördinatie tussen de Commissie en de EIB om te vermijden dat door de EIB gefinancierde projecten nog eens een budgettaire impact hebben voor de EU (bijvoorbeeld door mogelijk gebruik van middelen uit het Globaliseringsfonds)?










3.


Is er een gedegen impactstudie geweest over de verstrekking van financiering door de EIB aan de Ford-fabriek in Turkije en de mogelijke impact op Ford-fabrieken in de EU? En welke sociale criteria heeft de EIB gehanteerd in het overwegen van toekennen van financiering in dit dossier?




Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord P-010100/12
aan de Commissie
Ivo Belet (PPE)
(7 november 2012)

Betreft: Steun Europese Investeringsbank aan Ford Turkije
Onlangs kondigde de Europese directie van autoconstructeur Ford aan dat het bedrijf twee vestigingen in Europa — in Genk en Southampton — zal sluiten.
Ondertussen is duidelijk geworden dat de Europese Investeringsbank een lening van 100 miljoen euro heeft goedgekeurd voor de modernisering van een Ford-fabriek in Turkije.






1.


Hoe beoordeelt de Commissie het feit dat de EU op deze manier indirect de delocalisatie van automotive productie in de hand werkt, op een ogenblik dat autoconstructeurs met name in de Unie betrokken zijn in moeilijke herstructureringen en het afbouwen van capaciteit en werkgelegenheid?










2.


Welke initiatieven gaat de Commissie nemen ten aanzien van het beleid van de directie van de EIB om een herhaling van soortgelijke ongelukkige beslissingen in de toekomst te vermijden?




Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010134/12
aan de Commissie
Laurence J. A. J. Stassen (NI)
(8 november 2012)

Betreft: Europese Investeringsbank verstrekt 100 miljoen euro aan Ford-fabriek in Turkije
Terwijl de Ford-fabrieken in het Belgische Genk en in het Britse Southampton hun deuren moeten sluiten en vele werknemers daardoor op straat komen te staan, verstrekt de Europese Investeringsbank maar liefst 100 miljoen euro aan de Ford-fabriek in het Turkse Koçaeli, zogezegd voor „modernisering”.







1.


Is de Commissie bekend met het bericht 










1.


Is de Commissie bekend met het bericht 



„Europa financiert delokalisatie van Ford” (237)?





2.


Hoe verklaart de Commissie dat de Europese Investeringsbank 100 miljoen euro verstrekt aan een Ford-fabriek in het Turkse Koçaeli en tegelijkertijd de Ford-fabrieken in het Belgische Genk en het Britse Southampton aan hun lot over laat? Hoe verklaart de Commissie haar 




„voorkeur” voor een Ford-fabriek buiten de EU?






3.


Hoe verantwoordt de Commissie dit sociale dumpingsbeleid? Hoe verantwoordt de Commissie de tengevolge daarvan ontstane oneerlijke concurrentie? Hoe verantwoordt de Commissie het dat er door sluiting van de Ford-fabrieken in de EU banen verdwijnen en tegelijkertijd d.m.v. financiering door de Europese Investeringsbank banen in Turkije worden gecreëerd?




Antwoord van de heer Rehn namens de Commissie
(21 december 2012)
De EIB zet zich zeer in voor het ondersteunen van groei en banen in de EU middels duurzame en economisch gezonde langetermijninvesteringen in infrastructuur, privéondernemingen en kleine bedrijven. Zij is overeenkomstig het externe beleid van de EU ook buiten de EU actief  ter ondersteuning van langetermijninvesteringen om de plaatselijke economische ontwikkeling te bevorderen.
Met name zal de investering in de productielijn van Ford Otosan niet in een capaciteitstoename resulteren, maar is deze gericht op het moderniseren van de technologie en het versnellen van de naleving door de promotor van aangekondigde EU-wetgeving betreffende CO2-emissies. De EIB-lening wordt door de bank op eigen risico verstrekt en geniet geen EU-begrotingswaarborg.
Ford heeft bevestigd dat de leningondersteunende investering van de EIB in Turkije geenszins verband hield met het besluit van het bedrijf om de fabriek in Genk of Southampton te sluiten, dat na ondertekening van de EIB-lening voor Ford Otosan genomen is.
De EIB voert een rigoureuze technische, economische, ecologische en sociale beoordeling uit van alle projecten die met het oog op mogelijke financiering worden geëvalueerd en volgt hoe haar leningen worden gebruikt om ervoor te zorgen dat daarbij aan de doelstelling in de oorspronkelijke aanvraag wordt voldaan. De gedetailleerde beoordeling van de EIB-lening aan Ford in Turkije vond in 2011 plaats en leidde tot de goedkeuring door de raad van bestuur van de EIB in maart 2012 en ondertekening van de leningovereenkomst met Ford in juli 2012. 
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010070/12
to the Commission
Kathleen Van Brempt (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Effectiveness of EIB financing
Two weeks ago, Ford Europe expressed its intention of closing a number of plants in Europe. One is in Genk, while another is the plant in Southampton where the Ford Transit is manufactured. Production of this van is set to move to the Ford plant Otosan II in Koçaeli, Turkey. In connection with these possible closures, it has already repeatedly been suggested that aid might be provided from the Globalisation Fund, as for example happened at the time of the closure of the GM/Opel plant in Antwerp.
Now it has become apparent that the European Investment Bank is providing financing for the Ford plant in Turkey. In June, an initial instalment of EUR 100 m was approved, and the total financing is expected to amount to EUR 200 m.






1.


Does the Commission consider it desirable for the European Investment Bank to provide financing for a project which is linked to redundancies in the European Union? Does the Commission consider that a decision to finance a project which may damage employment in the Union indicates a correct interpretation of the EIB’s remit?










2.


Is there any coordination between the Commission and the EIB to ensure that projects funded by the EIB do not have an additional budgetary impact on the EU (for example due to the possible use of appropriations from the Globalisation Fund)?










3.


Was a proper impact assessment performed concerning the EIB financing of the Ford plant in Turkey and its possible impact on Ford plants in the EU? And what social criteria did the EIB apply when considering awarding funding in this case?




Question for written answer P-010100/12
to the Commission
Ivo Belet (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: European Investment Bank support for Ford Turkey
The European board of the car manufacturer Ford recently announced that the concern plans to shut down two plants in Europe, in Genk and Southampton.
In the meantime it has emerged that the European Investment Bank (EIB) has approved an EUR 100 million loan to fund the modernisation of a Ford plant in Turkey.






1.


What view does the Commission take of the fact that by granting this loan the EU is indirectly encouraging the relocation of automobile production at a time when manufacturers in the Union are in the throes of difficult restructuring programmes and are shedding capacity and jobs?










2.


What steps will the Commission take with a view to persuading the Board of Governors of the EIB to change its policy and so prevent any repeat of this unfortunate decision?




Question for written answer E-010134/12
to the Commission
Laurence J.A.J. Stassen (NI)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: EUR 100 m for Ford plant in Turkey from the European Investment Bank
While the Ford plants in Genk, Belgium, and Southampton, UK, are being compelled to close down, making many employees redundant, the European Investment Bank is giving the princely sum of EUR 100 m to the Ford plant in Koçaeli, Turkey, for so-called ‘modernisation’.







1.


Is the Commission aware of the report 










1.


Is the Commission aware of the report 



‘Europa financiert delokalisatie van Ford’ [Europe financing Ford’s relocation]? (238)






2.


How does the Commission explain the fact that the European Investment Bank is giving EUR 100 m to a Ford plant in Koçaeli, Turkey, while at the same time leaving the Ford plants in Genk, Belgium, and Southampton, UK, to their fate? How does the Commission explain its 




‘preference’ for a Ford plant outside the EU?






3.


How can the Commission justify this social dumping policy? How can the Commission justify the resultant unfair competition? How can the Commission justify the fact that the closure of the Ford plants in the EU will destroy jobs while at the same time, thanks to funding from the European Investment Bank, jobs are created in Turkey?




Joint answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The EIB is strongly committed to supporting growth and jobs in the EU through long-term, sustainable and economically sound investment in infrastructure, private sector companies and small businesses. It also operates outside the EU in line with the EU’s external policies, in support of long-term investment in order to foster local economic development.
In particular, the investment in the Ford Otosan production line will not result in a capacity increase but aims at upgrading technology and accelerating the promoter's compliance with forthcoming EU legislation on CO2 emissions. The EIB loan is carried out at the own risk of the Bank and does not benefit from an EU budget guarantee.
Ford confirmed that the EIB’s loan supporting investment in Turkey was by no means linked to the decision taken by the company to close either the Genk or the Southampton plants which was taken after signature of the EIB loan to Ford Otosan.
The EIB undertakes a rigorous technical, economic, environmental and social assessment of all projects under appraisal for possible finance and monitors how its loans are used to ensure that they comply with the scope outlined in the original application. The detailed assessment for the EIB loan to Ford in Turkey took place in 2011, leading to the EIB Board’s approval in March 2012 and signature of the loan agreement with Ford in July 2012. 
(Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej P-010071/12
do Komisji
Tomasz Piotr Poręba (ECR)
(7 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Stanowisko Komisji w sprawie Adama Darskiego
Dnia 31 października Komisja Europejska przedstawiła swoje stanowisko w związku ze sprawą Adama Darskiego, oskarżonego w Polsce o obrazę uczuć religijnych, po tym jak podczas koncertu swojego zespołu „Behemoth” podarł na scenie Biblię.
Komisja w swym oświadczeniu wskazuje, że oskarżanie zespołu muzycznego o obrazę uczuć religijnych jest niezgodne z wartościami Unii Europejskiej. Komisja podkreśla też, iż wszystkie kraje członkowskie UE muszą respektować pakty międzynarodowe.
W związku z tym pragnę zadać Komisji następujące pytania:







Dlaczego Komisja uważa, że obrona Biblii – świętej księgi cywilizacji Chrześcijańskiej, która legła u podstaw stworzenia Unii Europejskiej – jest niezgodna z wartościami tejże Unii?











Dlaczego Komisja poprzez swoje oświadczenie stara się wywrzeć presję na niezawisły polski sąd, prowadzący sprawę Darskiego i orzekający według przepisów polskiego prawa?











Kto i w jakim trybie zadecydował o wydaniu przez Komisję oświadczenia w ww. sprawie?




Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarz Viviane Reding w imieniu Komisji
(10 grudnia 2012 r.)
Komisja nie wydała oświadczenia, według którego obrona Biblii byłaby niezgodna z wartościami Unii, ani nie starała się nigdy wywierać presji na niezawisły polski sąd.
Komisja przypomina, że przepisy dotyczące bluźnierstwa podlegają wewnętrznemu porządkowi prawnemu państw członkowskich oraz że zapewnienie respektowania praw podstawowych – wynikających z umów międzynarodowych, jak i z wewnętrznego ustawodawstwa – leży wyłącznie w gestii państw członkowskich.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010071/12
to the Commission
Tomasz Piotr Poręba (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Opinion of the Commission regarding the case of Adam Darski
On 31 October 2012, the Commission delivered its opinion regarding the case of Adam Darski, who was charged with offending religious sensibilities after he tore up a copy of the Bible during a concert given by his band ‘Behemoth’.
In its statement, the Commission points out that charging a band with offending religious sensibilities goes against the values of the European Union. It also stresses that all EU Member States must respect international pacts.
With this in mind:







Why does the Commission consider that defending the Bible — the holy book of Christian civilisation and one of the foundation stones of the European Union — goes against the values of that same Union? 











Why does the Commission attempt to exert pressure in its statement on the independent Polish court examining the Darski case and adjudicating in line with Polish legal provisions?











Who decided that the Commission would issue a statement on this case, and how was thisdecision reached?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)
The Commission has not provided a statement according to which defending the bible would go against the values of the Union and nor has there ever been an attempt to exert pressure on the independent Polish judiciary.
The Commission recalls that blasphemy laws are a matter for the domestic legal order of the Member States and that it is for Member States alone to ensure that their obligations regarding fundamental rights — as resulting from international agreements and from their internal legislation — are respected.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010072/12
al Consiglio
Barbara Matera (PPE)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Nomina di un membro del comitato esecutivo della Banca Centrale Europea
Nel marzo 2012, il commissario alla giustizia Viviane Reding ha lanciato un ambizioso progetto di direttiva che obbligherebbe tutte le grandi aziende europee quotate in borsa (ad eccezione delle piccole e medie imprese, di quelle con meno di 250 dipendenti e un fatturato inferiore ai 50 milioni di euro annui) ad avere almeno il 40 per cento di donne nei consigli di amministrazione non esecutivi. 
La nuova legislazione avrebbe dovuto dare un segnale positivo a un’Europa politicamente ed economicamente ancora troppo al maschile. Si consideri, infatti, che solo 2 donne sono state presidenti del Parlamento, su un totale di 29 presidenti; alla Commissione europea 9 Commissari su 27 sono donne e, peggio ancora, il comitato esecutivo della Banca centrale europea è composto di soli uomini.
La media europea della presenza di donne nei ruoli-chiave delle grandi aziende è oggi del 14 per cento. Nonostante i buoni esempi forniti, contro la proposta legislativa si sono schierati venti Commissari su ventisette. I Commissari hanno spinto l'organo legislativo a ritirare il progetto senza nemmeno arrivare a un voto, con la motivazione di non voler vincolare le imprese e vedendo nelle quote rosa una violazione del principio del merito. Il progetto sarà dunque modificato e ripresentato tenendo conto del rispetto del principio di sussidiarietà, entro il 14 novembre 2012.
Da parte sua, il Parlamento europeo, in difesa delle politiche per l'uguaglianza di genere, nella seduta plenaria di Strasburgo del 27 settembre 2012, ha bocciato momentaneamente la nomina formale del candidato Yves Mersch a membro del comitato esecutivo della BCE con 325 voti negativi, 300 favorevoli e 49 astenuti.
Alla luce di quanto sopra, può il Consiglio far sapere:







In quale misura il Consiglio intende accogliere il parere consultivo del Parlamento europeo in merito al voto contrario alla nomina del candidato Mersch alla BCE.











Se il Consiglio intende proporre la nomina di un candidato donna per migliorare l'equilibrio di genere all'interno della BCE.




Risposta
(21 gennaio 2013)
L'articolo 283, paragrafo 2 del trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea prevede che i membri del comitato esecutivo della Banca centrale europea (BCE) siano nominati, tra persone di riconosciuta levatura ed esperienza professionale nel settore monetario o bancario, dal Consiglio europeo che delibera a maggioranza qualificata, su raccomandazione del Consiglio e previa consultazione del Parlamento europeo e del consiglio direttivo della Banca centrale europea. E' sulla base di questa procedura che il Consiglio europeo ha adottato la decisione del 22 novembre 2012 di nominare il sig. Yves Mersch membro del comitato esecutivo della BCE per un periodo di otto anni a decorrere dal 15 dicembre 2012.
Il Consiglio è a conoscenza del parere espresso dal Parlamento europeo al Consiglio europeo sulla raccomandazione del Consiglio e del forte appello lanciato dal presidente del Consiglio europeo Herman Van Rompuy a tutti i capi di Stato o di governo affinché individuino e propongano valide candidate per i posti vacanti a livello europeo, in particolare nei settori economico e finanziario, dove le donne sono palesemente sottorappresentate.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010072/12
to the Council
Barbara Matera (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Appointment of a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank
In March 2012, Commissioner for Justice Viviane Reding launched an ambitious draft directive that would require all major European publicly listed companies (except small and medium enterprises with fewer than 250 employees and an annual turnover of less than EUR 50m) to have at least 40% of their non-executive boards made up of women. 
The new legislation should have been a positive sign to a Europe in which men are still over-represented in the political and economic arenas. Indeed, only two women have been President of the Parliament out of a total of 29 presidents; only nine out of 29 European Commissioners are women and — worse still — the Executive Board of the European Central Bank is composed entirely of men.
On average, in Europe, women only hold 14% of the key roles in major enterprises. Despite the good examples given, 20 out of the 27 Commissioners were against the legislative proposal. The Commissioners pushed the legislative body to withdraw the draft without even putting it to the vote, on the pretext that they did not want to tie businesses' hands and seeing the female quota as breaching the principle of merit. The draft will therefore be amended and resubmitted, taking into account the subsidiarity principle, by 14 November 2012.
Meanwhile, at its plenary session in Strasbourg on 27 September 2012, the European Parliament, in defence of gender equality policies, opposed the formal appointment of candidate Yves Mersch to the Executive Board of the ECB by 325 votes to 300, with 49 abstentions.
In the light of the above, will the Council say:







to what extent the Council intends to take into account the consultative opinion of the European Parliament in regard to the vote against the appointment of candidate Mersch to the ECB;











whether the Council intends to propose the appointment of a female candidate to improve gender balance within the ECB?




Reply
(21 January 2013)
Article 283(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides that the members of the executive board of the European Central Bank (ECB) are appointed by the European Council, acting by a qualified majority, from among persons of recognised standing and professional experience in monetary or banking matters, on a recommendation from the Council, after it has consulted the European Parliament and the Governing Council of the European Central Bank. It is on the basis of this procedure that the European Council adopted its decision of 22 November 2012 to appoint Mr Mersch to the ECB's executive board for a term of eight years, beginning on 15 December 2012.
The Council is aware of the European Parliament's opinion to the European Council on the Council Recommendation and of the strong appeal of Mr Herman Van Rompuy, President of the European Council, to all Heads of State or Government to identify and propose qualified female candidates for vacant posts at European level, in particular in the economic and financial sectors, where the underrepresentation of women is blatant.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010073/12
alla Commissione
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE) e Gianni Vattimo (ALDE)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Gravi violazioni delle direttive 2009/147/CE e 92/43/CEE in alcuni siti della Rete Natura 2000 a Mazara del Vallo (Sicilia occidentale)
Nel territorio di Mazara del Vallo (TP) vi sono alcune aree di estremo valore ambientale, che fungono da luoghi di sosta per un enorme numero di uccelli migratori in transito tra l‘Europa e l’Africa e ospitano lembi residuali di habitat anche di interesse prioritario (codici 3170, 7210, 11120, 1150, 12010).
Si tratta del Pantano Leone di Campobello di Mazara (ZPS ITA010031 e zona Ramsar) e delle sciare di Mazara (SIC ITA010005 e ZPS ITA010031). A questi si aggiunge la Laguna di Tonnarella, proposta come ZPS nel 2009 e nel 2012, ma non ancora tutelata malgrado l’evidente valenza ornitologica e la presenza di habitat di interesse comunitario, come riconosciuto ufficialmente anche dall'XI Convegno Italiano di Ornitologia del 2001 (239).
L’istituzione di SIC e ZPS ha indotto le Amministrazioni responsabili ad adottare piani di gestione per recepire formalmente la normativa europea e nazionale. Malgrado ciò, in concreto non sono state messe in atto nemmeno le più elementari misure volte a preservare/migliorare lo stato dei luoghi, omettendo di dare applicazione ai piani stessi. L’integrità dei siti, come riportato costantemente dagli organi di stampa (240) e denunciato da associazioni e cittadini locali, è minacciata da progetti di sviluppo, colmate (241), discariche abusive, incendi, mentre la biodiversità è minacciata da un bracconaggio incontrollato, dall’uso irresponsabile di pesticidi e dall’assenza di regolamentazioni per le attività di fruizione.
Alla luce di quanto sopra, si chiede alla Commissione di far sapere:







se sia a conoscenza del grave stato in cui si trova questo straordinario specchio d'acqua costiero;











se abbia avviato o intenda avviare specifiche iniziative nei confronti delle autorità italiane al fine di sottolineare la necessità di designare Laguna di Tonnarella come Zona di Protezione Speciale;











se possa confermare che con i fondi comunitari erogati non siano finanziati interventi che intaccano il patrimonio naturale di interesse comunitario presente nell’area di Mazara del Vallo, nel rispetto del Messaggio di Malahide.




Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione
(4 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione è a conoscenza della situazione generale della zona per cui l'Italia ha fornito informazioni nei formulari standard per il sito Natura 2000 relativi alle due aree in oggetto (242). La Commissione esaminerà le informazioni trasmesse dall'onorevole deputato in merito alle recenti attività di bracconaggio e alle colmate, nonché alle ripercussioni sull'impianto di depurazione locale e, ove opportuno, verificherà con le autorità italiane se sono conformi alla legislazione dell'UE.
La classificazione di una rete di zone di protezione speciale (ZPS) per l'Italia è già stata finalizzata. Le autorità nazionali hanno il compito di valutare i nuovi dati scientifici per stabilire se la laguna di Tonnarella o altri siti hanno i requisiti per essere tutelati quali zone di protezione speciale.
La Commissione non può verificare se i singoli progetti di sviluppo realizzati nella zona abbiano rispettato i pertinenti requisiti ambientali, poiché essa non partecipa alla valutazione, alla selezione e all'approvazione di detti progetti. Spetta alle autorità nazionali competenti garantire che tutti i piani o progetti, compresi i progetti finanziati dall'UE, che potrebbero avere incidenze significative sui siti Natura 2000, formino l'oggetto di una valutazione a norma dell'articolo 6, paragrafo 3, della direttiva 1992/43/CEE (243) («direttiva Habitat»). Qualora la valutazione abbia esito negativo e in mancanza di soluzioni alternative, il progetto può essere autorizzato solo per motivi imperativi di rilevante interesse pubblico, a norma dell'articolo 6, paragrafo 4.
Sulla base delle informazioni ad oggi disponibili, la Commissione non ravvisa alcuna potenziale violazione delle summenzionate disposizioni.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010073/12
to the Commission
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE), Sonia Alfano (ALDE), Niccolò Rinaldi (ALDE), Giommaria Uggias (ALDE) and Gianni Vattimo (ALDE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Severe breaches of Directives 2009/147/EC and 92/43/EEC in some Natura 2000 sites in Mazara del Vallo (western Sicily)
The Mazara del Vallo (Trapani province) area contains some sites of extremely high environmental value, which serve as stopover locations for a huge number of migratory birds in transit between Europe and Africa and comprise residual stretches of habitat that are also of priority interest (codes 3170, 7210, 11120, 1150, 12010).
The areas in question are the Leone di Campobello marshland in Mazara (SPA ITA010031 and Ramsar area) and the Mazara volcanic fields (SCI ITA010005 and SPA ITA010031). Also under threat is the Tonnarella lagoon, proposed as an SPA in 2009 and 2012, but not yet protected despite its high ornithological value and the presence of habitats of Community interest, as officially recognised by the XI Italian Ornithology Convention in 2001 (244).
The establishment of SCI and SPA status has required the responsible administrations to adopt management plans in order to formally implement national and European legislation. However, in reality, not even the most basic measure to preserve/improve the area has been put in place, and the plans themselves have not been implemented. As reported regularly by the press (245) and by local associations and citizens, the areas in their entirety are threatened by development plans, silting (246), fly tipping and fire, while their biodiversity is jeopardised by uncontrolled poaching, irresponsible use of pesticides and a lack of regulation governing leisure activities.
In light of the above, will the Commission say:







whether it is aware of the serious situation facing this extraordinary coastal body of water;











whether it has taken or intends to take specific measures against the Italian authorities in order to highlight the need to designate the Tonnarella lagoon as a Special Protection Area;











whether it can confirm that the Community funds supplied have not served to finance any actions that compromise the natural heritage of Community interest present in the Mazara del Vallo area, in accordance with the Malahide Message?




Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The Commission is aware of the general situation in the area, for which information has been provided by Italy within the framework of the Natura 2000 site Standard Data Forms for the two areas (247). The Commission will examine the information, provided by the Honourable Members, on recent poaching and silting activities and on the effects of the local depuration plant and if necessary will verify with the Italian authorities their compliance with the EU legislation. 
The designation of the network of Special Protection Areas (SPAs) for Italy has already been finalised. It is the responsibility of the national authorities to evaluate any new scientific information to determine if the Tonnarella lagoon or other sites qualify for protection as SPAs.
The Commission cannot check whether individual development projects carried out in the area have complied with the relevant environmental requirements, as the Commission is not involved in their assessment, selection, and approval. It is the responsibility of the relevant national authorities to ensure that any plan or project, including EU funded projects, likely to have significant effects on Natura 2000 sites, is subject to an assessment under Article 6.3 of Directive 1992/43/EEC (248) (‘Habitats Directive’). In case of a negative assessment and in the absence of alternative solutions, the project can be authorised only for imperative reasons of overriding public interest under Art.6.4.
On the basis of the currently available information, the Commission cannot identify any potential breach of the abovementioned provisions.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010074/12
alla Commissione
Mario Mauro (PPE)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Disabilità
Le persone portatrici di disabilità sono tra le più emarginate al mondo. Secondo il «Rapporto mondiale sulla disabilità», prodotto congiuntamente da OMS e Banca mondiale, le persone con disabilità tendono ad avere un rapporto meno favorevole tra stato di salute e risultati delle cure sanitarie, risultati scolastici inferiori, partecipano meno all'economia e sperimentano tassi più elevati di povertà rispetto alle persone senza disabilità.
Nonostante il quadro legislativo vigente, tra cui la Convenzione internazionale sui diritti delle persone con disabilità, entrata in vigore nel 2008, gli articoli 10 e 19 del TFUE, e gli articoli 1, 21 e 26 della Carta dei diritti fondamentali, un crescente numero di persone con disabilità rimane isolato all'interno della propria comunità.
Alla luce del potere legislativo conferito all'Unione dai trattati, la Commissione è invitata a rispondere ai seguenti quesiti:







Quali progressi specifici sono stati compiuti dal 2003, Anno europeo delle persone con disabilità?











Quali misure intende prendere per garantire che l'attuale recessione economica non colpisca negativamente le persone con disabilità?











Quali strumenti sono disponibili a livello dell'UE per incoraggiare e sostenere finanziariamente le associazioni che operano attivamente per la piena partecipazione dei bambini con disabilità all'istruzione e per il loro diritto alla libera circolazione?











La Commissione ha in programma di includere, nel documento di lavoro sull'equità nell'istruzione e nella formazione professionale che sarà pubblicato nel corso dell'ultimo trimestre del 2012, il contributo della società civile? In caso affermativo, quali termini e condizioni sono previste per siffatto contributo?




Risposta di Viviane Reding a nome della Commissione
(10 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione è pienamente impegnata ad attuare, nei limiti delle competenze dell'UE, la convenzione delle Nazioni Unite sui diritti delle persone con disabilità (di cui l'Unione è parte dal gennaio 2011) attraverso la strategia europea sulla disabilità 2010-2020 (249) e le azioni collegate (250). Dal 2008 la Commissione e il gruppo ad alto livello sulla disabilità (251) pubblicano una relazione annuale sui progressi realizzati nell'attuazione della convenzione delle Nazioni Unite sui diritti delle persone con disabilità (252).
Il Fondo sociale europeo è uno strumento importante a cui la Commissione ha proposto di assicurare uno stanziamento minimo corrispondente ad almeno il 25 % del bilancio della politica di coesione, ossia 84 miliardi di euro, e di destinare almeno il 20 % della dotazione di ciascuno Stato membro per le misure di integrazione sociale.
I programmi «Apprendimento permanente» e «Gioventù in azione» forniscono opportunità di sostegno diretto alle associazioni attive a livello europeo nel settore dell'istruzione e della formazione, comprese le associazioni che operano per la partecipazione inclusiva dei minori con disabilità, di cui è un esempio la International Federation of Hard of Hearing Young People. Inoltre, la Commissione sostiene finanziariamente e opera in stretta collaborazione con l'Agenzia europea per lo sviluppo dell'istruzione per alunni con esigenze speciali. Il programma «Erasmus per tutti» proseguirà dopo il 2013.
Alcune importanti considerazioni politiche in materia di equità nei sistemi d'istruzione sono state integrate nella comunicazione «Ripensare l'istruzione», pubblicata dalla Commissione nel novembre 2012. I contributi della società civile sono stati raccolti in occasione del forum consultivo europeo sulle misure da prendere per lottare contro lo svantaggio educativo tenutosi a Bruxelles nel dicembre 2011. La Commissione intende proseguire questo lavoro in stretta collaborazione con l'Agenzia europea per lo sviluppo dell'istruzione per alunni con esigenze specifiche.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010074/12
to the Commission
Mario Mauro (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Disability
People with disabilities are among the most marginalised in the world. According to the ‘World Report on Disability’, produced jointly by WHO and the World Bank, people with disabilities tend to have poorer health outcomes and lower education achievements, to participate less in the economy and to experience higher rates of poverty than people without disabilities.
Despite the legislative framework in force — the International Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (which entered into force in 2008), Articles 10 and 19 of the TFEU, and Articles 1, 21 and 26 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights — an increasing number of persons with disabilities remain isolated within their own communities.
In the light of the legislative power conferred on the EU by the Treaties, the Commission is asked to answer the following:







What specific progress has been made since the 2003 European Year of People with Disabilities?











What measures does it intend to take to ensure that the current economic downturn does not adversely affect people with disabilities?











What instruments are available at EU level to encourage and financially sustain associations working actively for the inclusive participation of disabled children in education and for their right to freedom of movement?











Does the Commission plan to include, in the working document on equity in education and training to be published in the last quarter of 2012, a contribution from civil society? If so, what terms and conditions are envisaged for this contribution?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
The Commission is fully committed to implementing, to the extent of EU competence, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (to which the EU is a party since January 2011) through the European Disability Strategy 2010-2020 (253) and its actions (254). Since 2008 the Commission and the Disability High-Level Group (255) have published an annual report on progress in the implementation of the UN CRPD (256). 
The European Social Fund remains an important instrument and the Commission proposed to give it a guaranteed minimum budget representing at least 25% of cohesion policy — i.e. EUR 84 billion — and to allocate at least 20% of the envelope of each Member State for social inclusion measures. 
The Lifelong Learning and the Youth in Action programmes provide opportunities for direct support to associations active at European level in the field of education and training, including associations working for the inclusive participation of disabled children; the International Federation of Hard of Hearing Young People is an example. In addition, the Commission supports financially and works closely with the European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education. The Erasmus for All programme will continue this work after 2013.
Some important policy considerations about equity in education have been incorporated in the ‘Rethinking Education’ Communication issued by the Commission in November 2012. Input from civil society was collected at the ‘European consultation symposium on measures to combat educational disadvantage’ in Brussels in December 2011. The Commission intends to continue this work in close cooperation with the European Agency for Development in Special Needs Education.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010075/12
aan de Commissie
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(7 november 2012)

Betreft: Geheim Duits rapport over Russische witwasprakijkn op Cyprus







1.


Is de Commissie op de hoogte van de berichten over vermeende Russische witwaspraktijken op Cyprus










1.


Is de Commissie op de hoogte van de berichten over vermeende Russische witwaspraktijken op Cyprus




 (257)? Kan de Commissie bevestigen of deze berichten kloppen?





2.


Zo ja, vindt de Commissie het dan verdedigbaar dat Cyprus van de EU mogelijk EUR 10 miljard krijgt om zijn banken te herkapitaliseren waarmee ook de Russische deposito's worden gegarandeerd? Zo ja, op grond waarvan? Zo nee, wat stelt de Commissie dan voor?










3.


Volgens de Duitse SPD'er Carsten Schneider is het ondenkbaar dat er Duits belastinggeld wordt gebruikt om illegaal Russisch geld in Cypriotische banken te garanderen. Deelt de Commissie diens opvatting? Zo nee, waarom niet?










4.


Naar verluidt worden de overeenkomsten om het witwassen van geld tegen te gaan in Cyprus onvoldoende nageleefd. Is de Commissie voornemens om hier verandering in te brengen? Zo ja, hoe? Zo nee, waarom niet?




Antwoord van de heer Barnier namens de Commissie
(7 januari 2013)
De Commissie is op de hoogte van de in de Duitse media verschenen berichten over vermeende witwaspraktijken van Russen in Cyprus. De Commissie is echter niet in het bezit gesteld van het bewijsmateriaal waarnaar in de persberichten wordt verwezen en acht het dan ook nog te vroeg om uitspraken over deze specifieke kwestie te doen.
In het in september 2011 gepubliceerde verslag van het comité van deskundigen inzake de bestrijding van het witwassen van geld en van de financiering van  terrorisme van de Raad van Europa (MONEYVAL) (258) werd geconcludeerd dat Cyprus beschikt over een vrij stevig technisch kader om witwassen en  terrorismefinanciering tegen te gaan. MONEYVAL heeft een gedegen follow-upmechanisme in het kader waarvan Cyprus in september 2013 wederom verslag zal moeten uitbrengen aan genoemd comité.
In samenwerking met haar partners van de trojka en met de Cypriotische autoriteiten stelt de Commissie alles in het werk om ervoor te zorgen dat het in Cyprus bestaande kader  ter bestrijding van het witwassen van geld en van de financiering van  terrorisme robuust blijft.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010075/12
to the Commission
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Secret German report on money laundering by Russians in Cyprus







1.


Is the Commission aware of the reports on alleged money laundering by Russians in Cyprus










1.


Is the Commission aware of the reports on alleged money laundering by Russians in Cyprus




 (259)? Can the Commission say whether these reports are accurate?





2.


If so, does the Commission consider it defensible that Cyprus may receive EUR 10 bn from the EU to recapitalise its banks, thus also guaranteeing the Russian deposits? If so, on what basis? If not, what alternative does the Commission propose?










3.


According to Carsten Schneider of the German SPD, it is inconceivable that German tax-payers’ money should be used to guarantee illegal Russian money in banks in Cyprus. Does the Commission agree with him? If not, why not?










4.


It is said that the agreements to combat money laundering in Cyprus are not being sufficiently complied with. Will the Commission take action to remedy this situation? If so, how? If not, why not?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The Commission is aware of reports in the German press of alleged money laundering by Russians in Cyprus. The Commission has not, however, been provided with evidence referred to in the press reports, and it is therefore premature to comment on this specific issue.
The report of the Council of Europe Committee of Experts of Anti-Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism (MONEYVAL) in September 2011 (260) concluded that Cyprus has a relatively strong technical framework against money laundering and terrorist financing. MONEYVAL has a robust follow-up mechanism, which will see Cyprus reporting back to this Committee in September 2013. 
The Commission is working with its Troika partners and the Cypriot authorities to ensure that the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing framework in Cyprus continues to be robust.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010076/12
à Comissão
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: África — risco de medicamentos contrafeitos
A Organização Mundial das Alfândegas realizou uma operação em 16 países africanos na sequência da qual confiscou 82 milhões de doses de medicamentos contrafeitos de diversos tipos num valor estimado de 40 milhões de dólares. Em 110 contentores marítimos inspecionados, 84 continham produtos contrafeitos ou substâncias ilícitas. A maioria destes contentores provinha do sul e leste da Ásia e do Médio Oriente. Esta realidade torna patentes os riscos para a saúde pública que ainda afetam as populações africanas, expostas à ação de medicamentos sem controlo nem qualidade.
Assim, pergunto à Comissão:






—


Tem conhecimento destes dados? Que comentários lhe merecem?










—


Dispõe de mais informações acerca deste gravíssimo problema?










—


Estaria disponível para auxiliar os países africanos a colocarem no terreno mecanismos e procedimentos que lhes permitissem aferir com rapidez e facilidade o grau de fiabilidade dos medicamentos que importam?










—


Tem conhecimento de carregamentos provenientes da Europa ou contendo produtos aqui produzidos em que tenham sido detetados produtos daquele tipo?










—


Que medidas tomou ou prevê tomar neste tocante?




Resposta dada por Andris Piebalgs em nome da Comissão
(9 de janeiro de 2013)






1.


A Comissão tem conhecimento dos dados apresentados e considera que se trata de umproblema grave. 










2.


A operação de 16-20 de julho de 2012 envolveu 16 portos na África Ocidental, Central e Oriental, tendo nela participado consultores técnicos e operacionais dos Estados‐Membros da UE (Bélgica, Alemanha e Itália). Esta operação fez parte dos esforços da Organização Mundial das Alfândegas para desenvolver a cooperação internacional na aplicação das regras aduaneiras em matéria de DPI. A principal prioridade consistiu na proteção da saúde e segurança dos consumidores, concentrando‐se a operação nos produtos farmacêuticos, peças sobressalentes, produtos alimentares e outros produtos. Em três dias foram intercetados mais de 104 milhões de produtos, 79 % dos quais eram produtos farmacêuticos. Os portos de partida para os contentores intercetados estão localizados sobretudo na China (81 %), na Índia (10 %) e nos Emirados Árabes Unidos (6 %). 










3.


A Comissão está empenhada em ajudar os países africanos a melhorar a gestão e a auditoria das cadeias de abastecimento para impedir a entrada de medicamentos falsificados nos seus mercados. Esse tipo de mecanismos poderia ser criado através da assistência técnica prestada pelo Observatório Europeu das Infrações aos Direitos de Propriedade Intelectual em colaboração com os institutos PI africanos. Na luta contra a contrafação, a Comissão procurará debater a questão em consultas bilaterais com as autoridades nacionais competentes e os produtores e distribuidores de produtos farmacêuticos no decurso de 2013. Irá igualmente estudar a possibilidade de apresentar esta questão ao Comité Consultivo de Execução da OMPI em 2013.










4.


A Comissão não tem conhecimento da existência de remessas provenientes da Europa em que tenham sido detetados medicamentos falsificados.










5.


A Comissão continuará a promover ativamente a cooperação internacional a fim de eliminar o comércio internacional de mercadorias que infrinja os DPI ao longo de toda a cadeia de abastecimento internacional.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010076/12
to the Commission
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Africa — Risk of counterfeit medicines
The World Customs Organisation carried out an operation in 16 African countries following which it confiscated 82 million doses of counterfeit medicines of various types with an estimated value of USD 40 million. Of a total number of 110 shipping containers inspected, 84 contained counterfeit products or illicit substances. The majority of the containers came from South and East Asia and the Middle East. This clearly shows the risks to public health still affecting African populations exposed to the effects of medicines with no quality control.
In the light of this, the following questions are submitted for the consideration of the Commission:






—


Is it aware of these data? What are its comments?










—


Does it have further information about this extremely serious problem?










—


Would it be prepared to help African countries set up mechanisms and procedures on the ground to allow them to assess the level of reliability of imported medicines quickly and easily?










—


Is it aware of shipments from Europe or containing products produced here in which this kind of product has been detected?










—


What steps has the Commission taken or does it plan to take in this regard?




Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission
(9 January 2013)
1.The Commission is aware of the data presented and considers it a serious problem. 







2.


The operation of 16-20 July 2012 involved 16 ports in Western, Central and Eastern Africa. Operational and technical advisors from EU Member States (Belgium, Germany and Italy) participated. This operation was an integral part of the World Customs Organisation's efforts to develop international cooperation in IPR










2.


The operation of 16-20 July 2012 involved 16 ports in Western, Central and Eastern Africa. Operational and technical advisors from EU Member States (Belgium, Germany and Italy) participated. This operation was an integral part of the World Customs Organisation's efforts to develop international cooperation in IPR




 (261) customs enforcement. The main priority was the protection of the health and safety of consumers; the operation targeted pharmaceutical products, spare parts, foodstuffs and other products. In 3 days, more than 104 million products were intercepted, 79% of which were pharmaceutical products. The ports of departure for the intercepted containers are mainly in China (81%), India (10%) and the United Arab Emirates (6%). 






3.


The Commission is keen to help African countries to improve the management and auditing of supply chains to prevent counterfeit medicines from entering their markets. Such mechanisms could be set up through technical assistance by the Observatory on infringements of IPR and in collaboration with African IP










3.


The Commission is keen to help African countries to improve the management and auditing of supply chains to prevent counterfeit medicines from entering their markets. Such mechanisms could be set up through technical assistance by the Observatory on infringements of IPR and in collaboration with African IP




 (262) offices. In the fight against counterfeiting the Commission will seek to discuss the issue bi-laterally with the relevant national authorities and the producers and distributors of pharmaceutical products during the course of 2013. It will also consider presenting it to the WIPO (263) Advisory Committee of Enforcement in 2013.4.The Commission is not aware of shipments from Europe in which counterfeit drugs have been detected.
5.The Commission will continue to promote international cooperation actively with a view to eliminating international trade in goods infringing IPR throughout the international supply chain.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010077/12
à Comissão
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Limitações à escolha de browsers
Notícias recentes dão conta de que a Microsoft estaria a relutar em possibilitar aos compradores dos seus produtos optar por outros browsers que não apenas o seu próprio Internet Explorer. A Microsoft terá alegado ter-se tratado de um erro e declarado que o iria corrigir.
Assim, pergunto à Comissão:






—


Que comentário lhe merece as declarações da Microsoft?










—


Caso o problema persista, o que tenciona fazer para devolver aos consumidores a possibilidade de escolha?










—


Para além da possibilidade da escolha de browsers, existem mais limitações à concorrência entre as empresas que prestam serviços ligados à computação e à Internet, quer se tratem de produtores e vendedores de software quer de hardware?










—


Que medidas tomou ou prevê tomar para lhes fazer face?




Resposta dada por Joaquín Almunia em nome da Comissão
(10 de janeiro de 2013)
A Comissão está atualmente a investigar a possibilidade de a Microsoft não ter distribuído um ecrã de escolha com o Windows 7 Service Pack 1, que foi lançado em fevereiro de 2011 (264), o que não respeita os compromissos tornados obrigatórios para a Microsoft através da Decisão da Comissão de 16 de dezembro de 2009 (265).
A este respeito, a Comissão enviou uma comunicação de objeções à Microsoft em 25 de outubro de 2012, tendo dado à empresa um prazo de quatro semanas à Microsoft para enviar os seus comentários sobre a mesma. A Comissão irá agora analisar os comentários da Microsoft e tomar as medidas apropriadas. De qualquer modo, os compromissos tornados obrigatórios para a Microsoft através da Decisão de 16 de dezembro de 2009 permanecem em vigor e terminarão apenas, nos termos da mesma, a 16 de dezembro de 2014.
No âmbito da legislação europeia em matéria de competitividade, a Comissão tem de analisar cada caso de forma individual. Por conseguinte, a Comissão não pode fazer comentários gerais sobre possíveis restrições à competitividade entre empresas que fornecem serviços de computador e internet no que diz respeito a fabricantes e vendedores de software ou hardware. A Comissão está supervisionar atentamente os mercados e, sempre que necessário, aplicará as regras de concorrência com determinação.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010077/12
to the Commission
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Restricted choice of browser
According to recent reports, Microsoft is reluctant to enable purchasers of its products to choose to use browsers other than its own Internet Explorer. Microsoft has claimed that this was due to an error and that it would be corrected.
In the light of this, the following questions are submitted for consideration by the Commission:






—


What are its comments on Microsoft’s statements?










—


Should the problem persist, what does the Commission intend to do to facilitate consumer choice?










—


In addition to browser choice, are there any other restrictions on competition between companies providing computer and Internet services, with regard to manufacturers and vendors of either software or hardware?










—


What steps has the Commission taken or does it plan to take to tackle these issues?




Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
The Commission is currently investigating whether Microsoft may have failed to roll out the choice screen with Windows 7 Service Pack 1, which was released in February 2011 (266), contrary to the commitments made binding on Microsoft by Commission decision of 16 December 2009 (267).
In that regard, the Commission sent a Statement of Objections to Microsoft on 25 October 2012 and Microsoft was given four weeks to submit its comments on the Statement of Objections. The Commission will now analyse Microsoft's comments and take the appropriate next steps. In any case, the commitments made binding on Microsoft by the decision of 16 December 2009 remain in place and will, in accordance with that Decision, expire only on 16 December 2014.
Under European competition law the Commission has to analyse each case individually. It is therefore not possible for the Commission to make general comments about possible restrictions on competition between companies providing computer and Internet services with regard to manufacturers and vendors of either software or hardware. The Commission is monitoring the markets closely and will enforce the competition rules vigorously where this proves to be necessary.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010078/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Guiné-Bissau — clima de medo
Segundo a Amnistia Internacional, dois cidadãos guineenses críticos do autoproclamado governo de transição — Inacuba Indjai e Silvestre Alves — foram brutalmente agredidos; as forças militares procuram outros que consideram envolvidos no golpe.
A mesma organização denunciou o clima de medo que se vive no país. Diversos membros do governo deposto e seus familiares estão a ser perseguidos pelos militares e alguns já procuraram refúgio em representações diplomáticas em Bissau.
Assim, pergunto à Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante:






—


Que informações tem a este respeito?










—


Tendo em conta os relatos que lhe vão chegando da Guiné-Bissau, considera tomar novas medidas contra os responsáveis pelo clima de medo que aí se vive, em particular sanções contra os principais dirigentes civis e militares do governo de transição?




Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão
(17 de janeiro de 2013)
A AR/VP está muito preocupada com as violações dos direitos humanos ocorridas na Guiné-Bissau nas últimas semanas. A Delegação da UE está a desempenhar um papel importante na proteção das potenciais vítimas de violência.
As informações disponíveis sobre as 15 pessoas atualmente detidas são escassas; espera-se para breve um relatório da ONU/Cruz Vermelha. 
A Delegação da UE tem estado em contacto direto com os representantes da sociedade civil e outras partes na Guiné-Bissau. Para a sociedade civil e para o governo no exílio, estes eventos evidenciam, uma vez mais, a necessidade urgente de se regressar à ordem constitucional e pôr fim ao controlo do poder civil pelas forças armadas. Tal exige uma verdadeira e profunda reforma do setor da segurança, que só será possível mudando por completo as atuais chefias militares.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010078/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Guinea-Bissau — climate of fear
According to Amnesty International, two Guinea‐Bissauan critics of the self‐styled transitional government, Inacuba Indjai and Silvestre Alves, have been badly beaten and the nation’s military are conducting searches for others they believe were involved in the coup.
Amnesty also denounced the climate of fear that has gripped the country. Various members of the deposed government and their relatives are being persecuted by the military and some have already taken refuge in embassies in Bissau.
In the light of this, the following questions are submitted for consideration by the Vice‐President / High Representative:






—


What information does the HR have in this regard?










—


Given the reports coming in from Guinea-Bissau, is the HR considering taking further action against those responsible for the climate of fear in the country, in particular in the form of sanctions against the main civil and military leaders of the transitional government?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission 
(17 January 2013)
The HR/VP is very concerned with the human rights violations which occurred in Guinea Bissau in the last weeks. The EU Delegation is playing an important role in providing protection to potential victims of violence.
The information available in respect of the 15 persons currently detained is limited; a report by the UN/Red Cross is expected soon. 
The EU delegation has been in close contact with civil society and other parties in Guinea Bissau. For both civil society and the government in exile, these events highlight once more the urgent need to return to a constitutional order and to remove the grip of the armed forces on the civilian powers. This requires a genuine and deep reform of the security sector which will only be possible with a complete change of the current military leadership.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010079/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Instabilidade na Birmânia
Notícias recentes dão conta de conflitos entre as comunidades budista e muçulmana na parte ocidental da Birmânia que teriam já provocado cerca de 170 mortos e 28 000 desalojados. Esta situação preocupante ameaça pôr em causa o processo de democratização em curso no país. 
Assim, pergunto à Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante:






—


Dispõe de informações acerca da dimensão do conflito na Birmânia?










—


Crê ser possível um regresso à normalidade que não comprometa o processo de institucionalização da democracia em curso?










—


Estaria disponível a contribuir para este esforço de pacificação entre as comunidades Rakhine e Rohyngia? Em que termos?




Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão
(8 de janeiro de 2013)
Em junho e em outubro deste ano, ocorreram situações de violência intercomunitária no Estado de Rakhine, que se revestiram de especial crueldade. Continuam deslocadas mais de 110 000 pessoas. Segundo relatórios governamentais, a violência saldou-se em 167 mortos e foram incendiados ou destruídos 10 100 edifícios privados, públicos e religiosos, tendo sido afetados onze municípios, de um total de dezassete do Estado de Rakhine.
A separação das comunidades e uma maior presença do exército permitiu que a violência cessasse, mas a situação continua a ser de grande tensão. A UE continua a defender que uma separação permanente das comunidades será prejudicial para a estabilidade política e a prosperidade económica; a abordagem a médio prazo deve procurar formas de reintegração de ambas as comunidades.
O facto de o Governo estar agora empenhado em encontrar uma solução duradoura para a situação de Rakhine e disposto a abordar as questões políticas mais controversas, como a reinstalação e a cidadania, é especialmente encorajador. A identificação e punição dos promotores da violência também é um elemento importante dos esforços de reconciliação e da construção de um clima de confiança entre as comunidades, como as autoridades reconhecem. Apesar de o Governo ser o principal responsável pela condução dos esforços de reconciliação, todas as figuras políticas e religiosas devem ter consciência da necessidade de passar para o público mensagens pautadas pela moderação e viradas para o futuro. 
A UE está pronta e disposta a ajudar, nomeadamente com o envio de assistência humanitária a curto prazo e de ajuda ao desenvolvimento a longo prazo a favor de ambas as comunidades do Estado de Rakhine, desde que esteja assegurada a liberdade de acesso aos nossos agentes humanitários. Além disso, a UE vai continuar a ajudar na procura de soluções, prestando apoio prático e dialogando com as autoridades e a sociedade civil. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010079/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Instability in Burma
According to recent reports, 170 people have been killed and 28 000 have been displaced due to conflicts between the Buddhist and Muslim communities in the western part of Burma. This worrying situation is threatening to jeopardise the democratisation process currently underway in Burma. 
In the light of this, the following questions are submitted for consideration by the Vice‐President / High Representative:






—


Does the HR have any information regarding the scale of the conflict in Burma?










—


Does the HR believe it is possible to return to normality without compromising the democratisation process currently underway?










—


Would the HR be prepared to contribute to the effort to restore peace between the Rakhine and Rohingya communities? On what terms?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The inter-communal violence in the Rakhine State, erupted in June and in October this year, was particularly cruel. More than 110 000 people remain displaced. Government reports show that a total of 167 people were killed and 10 100 private, public and religious buildings were burned or destroyed.The violence occurred in eleven townships among a total of seventeen townships in the Rakhine state.
Segregation of communities and increased army presence made it possible for the violence to stop, but tensions remain high. The EU maintains that a permanent separation of communities will be detrimental to political stability and to economic prosperity; the medium-term approach must involve finding ways of reintegrating both communities.
It is particularly welcome that the government is now committed to finding a durable solution to the Rakhine situation and prepared to address contentious political issues, ranging from resettlement to citizenship. Identifying and prosecuting perpetrators of the violence is also an important part of the reconciliation efforts and of building trust between the communities, as recognised by the authorities. While the government should be in the lead of driving the reconciliation efforts, all political and religious actors should realise the importance of moderate and forward-looking public messages. 
The EU stands ready and willing to help, including with short-term humanitarian assistance and long-term development aid for both communities in the Rakhine State, as long as unhindered access to our operators is ensured. Furthermore, the EU will continue to help finding solutions through practical support and dialogue with the authorities and with civil society. 
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010080/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Prémio Sakharov 2012 — Nasrin Sotoudeh e Jafar Panahi
O Parlamento Europeu concedeu o Prémio Sakharov 2012 a Nasrin Sotoudeh e Jafar Panahi, democratas e ativistas iranianos, presentemente detidos pelas autoridades do seu país.
Assim, pergunto à Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante:






—


Dispõe de informações acerca da atual situação, saúde e paradeiro de ambos?










—


Que comentário lhe merece a sua detenção?










—


Caso lhes seja permitido abandonar o Irão, admitiria recebê-los oficialmente?




Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão
(17 de janeiro de 2013)
A AR/VP acompanha de perto as condições em que se encontram Nasrin Sotoudeh e Jafar Panahi, apesar da falta de informações fiáveis. A AR/VP subscreve plenamente a decisão do Parlamento Europeu de os galardoar, em conjunto, com o Prémio Sakharov para a Liberdade de Pensamento e expressou em várias ocasiões a sua preocupação com o processo judicial intentado contra Nasrin Sotoudeh e outros detidos defensores dos direitos humanos. O Embaixador do Irão em Bruxelas foi recentemente instado a informar-se sobre esta questão e a Representação da UE em Teerão efetuou diligências nesta matéria em 7 de novembro de 2012. 
A AR/VP e o SEAE estão a recorrer a todos os instrumentos disponíveis na sensibilização para a situação dos direitos humanos no Irão e, em especial, a repressão dos defensores dos direitos humanos e dos artistas. A AR/VP analisará a situação a que se refere a terceira pergunta caso ela se venha a concretizar. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010080/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — 2012 Sakharov Prize — Nasrin Sotoudeh and Jafar Panahi
The European Parliament awarded the 2012 Sakharov Prize to the Iranian democrats and activists Nasrin Sotoudeh and Jafar Panahi, who are currently detained by the Iranian authorities.
In the light of this, the following questions are submitted for consideration by the Vice‐President / High Representative:






—


Does the HR have any information on the current situation, health and whereabouts of these two people?










—


What comments would the HR make regarding their detention?










—


If they were allowed to leave Iran, would the HR be prepared to receive them in an official capacity?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission 
(17 January 2013)
The HR/VP closely follows the conditions of Nasrin Sotoudeh and Jafar Panahi, in spite of the lack of reliable information. She fully supports the European Parliament's decision to jointly award them the Sakharov Price for Freedom of Thought, and has expressed her concern regarding the legal case brought agaist Sotudeh and other imprisoned human rights defenders on several occasions. The Iranian ambassador in Brussels was recently summoned to be informed of these concerns, and a demarche on the matter was carried out by the local EU representation in Tehran on 7 November 2012. 
The HR/VP and the EEAS are using all tools available in raising awareness of the human rights situation in Iran, and especially the repression of human rights defenders and artists. The HR/VP would be prepared to consider the third question, should such a situation concretely arise. 
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010081/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Rússia — aprovação da Lei da Traição
A Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante manifestou publicamente o seu desacordo face à formulação da nova lei da traição aprovada pela Duma russa no passado dia 23 de outubro de 2012. A definição abstrata do que seja traição tornará este conceito demasiado indeterminado para garantir a necessária segurança jurídica, porá em causa as possibilidades de defesa dos arguidos, limitará os contactos com o estrangeiro e restringirá a capacidade de desenvolvimento da sociedade civil. Motivos de renovada preocupação.
Assim, pergunto à Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante:






—


Contactou as autoridades de Moscovo, a oposição democrática e as organizações de defesa dos direitos humanos a este propósito?










—


Que respostas obteve?




Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton em nome da Comissão
(22 de janeiro de 2013)
As autoridades russas tiveram conhecimento da comunicação proferida pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente sobre a lei da traição na Federação da Rússia que o Senhor Deputado refere na sua pergunta. Estão atualmente em curso discussões sobre este assunto junto da Missão Russa em Bruxelas e do Ministério dos Negócios Estrangeiros em Moscovo. 
A AR/VP e a Delegação da UE em Moscovo têm estado em contacto com os representantes da sociedade civil russa debatendo o seu trabalho e analisando os seus progressos, bem como quaisquer outros eventuais problemas. Nos últimos meses, os contactos com a sociedade civil têm sido muito frequentes em Moscovo, em Bruxelas e em São Petersburgo. O Representante Especial da UE para os Direitos Humanos, Stavros Lambrinis, participou inclusivamente no Fórum da sociedade civil. A lei da traição, bem como outros desenvolvimentos recentes de natureza legislativa, foram discutidos em profundidade. Esta questão foi também colocada às autoridades russas durante as consultas sobre direitos humanos entre a UE e a Rússia, que tiveram lugar em 7 de dezembro.
Não foi dada qualquer resposta oficial à comunicação da AR/VP por parte da Federação da Rússia. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010081/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Diogo Feio (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Russia — adoption of the law on treason
The Vice‐President / High Representative has publicly expressed disagreement with the wording of the new law on treason adopted by Russia’s Duma on 23 October 2012. The abstract definition of what constitutes treason will make the concept too vague to guarantee the necessary legal certainty, reduce defence options for the accused, restrict contacts with foreign nationals and limit the scope for the development of civil society. All of which are reasons for renewed concern.
In the light of this, the following questions are submitted for consideration by the Vice‐President / High Representative:






—


Has the HR contacted the Moscow authorities, the democratic opposition and human rights organisations about this matter?










—


What replies have been received?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(22 January 2013)
The High Representative/Vice-President statement on the law on treason in the Russian Federation, to which the Honourable Member refers to in his question, was noted by the Russian authorities, and discussions on this matter are ongoing, both with the Russian mission in Brussels as well as with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Moscow. 
The HR/VP and the EU Delegation in Moscow have been in contact with Russian civil society representatives to discuss their work and to review recent developments and possible problems. Contacts with civil society have been very frequent in recent months in Moscow, in Brussels and in St Petersburg, including on the occasion of the Civil Society Forum, in which the EUSR on Human Rigths, Mr Stavros Lambrinidis, took part. The law on treason, as well as other recent legislative developments, were discussed at great length. This issue was also raised with Russian authorities during the EU-Russia consultations on human rights that took place on December 7.
No official reply to the HR/VP statement was issued by the Russian Federation. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010083/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Chiarezza sui fondi europei per i minori non accompagnati
La Commissione conferma la priorità del finanziamento di progetti concernenti i minori non accompagnati e invita gli Stati membri, le organizzazioni internazionali e non governative a utilizzare appieno le risorse finanziarie disponibili.
Inoltre il Fondo asilo e migrazione dovrebbe garantire il finanziamento delle attività relative a questo gruppo di migranti. Altri fondi coinvolti nel fenomeno dei minori non accompagnati sono il Fondo per i rimpatri e il Fondo per i rifugiati.






1.


Può la Commissione comunicare a quanto ammontano i finanziamenti per ogni Fondo (asilo e migrazione, rimpatri e rifugiati) per i minori non accompagnati?










2.


Il Fondo asilo e migrazione garantirà, come detto, il finanziamento delle attività relative ai minori non accompagnati. Quali sono queste attività?




Si evince anche che l'UE, attraverso i suoi strumenti di assistenza esterna, continuerà a finanziare, nei paesi terzi e nelle loro regioni, iniziative che riguardino i minori non accompagnati.






3.


A quanto ammontano questi finanziamenti?










4.


Quali sono le iniziative finanziate?










5.


Quali sono i paesi terzi beneficiari di tali finanziamenti?










6.


In che modo la Commissione monitora il corretto utilizzo dei finanziamenti in questi paesi terzi?




Risposta data da Cecilia Malmström a nome della Commissione
(10 gennaio 2013)
Il Fondo europeo per i rifugiati (FER), il Fondo per l'integrazione (FI) e il Fondo per i rimpatri (FR) contemplano fra le loro priorità i minori non accompagnati, e varie azioni sono state attuate dagli Stati membri, ma non riguardano necessariamente solo questo gruppo. Non è quindi possibile comunicare l'importo preciso dei finanziamenti destinati esclusivamente ai minori non accompagnati. Nell'ambito delle azioni comunitarie del FI e del FER, per alcuni progetti destinati ai minori non accompagnati sono stati stanziati 4,90 milioni di euro. È stato inoltre lanciato un invito per un nuovo progetto pilota per i minori non accompagnati (budget: 1 milione di euro).
Il Fondo asilo e migrazione (2014-2020) continuerà a essere utilizzato per affrontare le necessità dei minori non accompagnati nell'ambito del sistema delle procedure d'asilo, delle condizioni d'accoglienza, delle misure di integrazione, delle procedure di rimpatrio e degli incentivi al reinsediamento.
I minori non accompagnati costituiscono anche una priorità del Programma tematico 2011-2013 per la cooperazione con i paesi terzi nel campo della migrazione e dell'asilo. Le azioni finanziate non riguardano necessariamente solo questo gruppo, ma almeno 34 milioni sono stati stanziati dal 2005 nell'ambito di questo e di altri strumenti esterni. Le iniziative finanziate predispongono sistemi efficaci di protezione dell'infanzia, garantiscono l'accesso all'istruzione e all'assistenza legale e sociale, migliorano la protezione e il reinserimento dei minori vittime della tratta e prevengono la migrazione a rischio.
Hanno beneficiato dei finanziamenti: Marocco, Algeria, Egitto, Libano, Zambia, Kenya, Uganda, Moldova, Ucraina, Georgia, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar, Argentina e Paraguay.
Per valutare il corretto utilizzo dei finanziamenti vengono utilizzati strumenti di monitoraggio standard, ossia missioni incentrate sui risultati svolte da esperti indipendenti, che garantiscono valutazioni in situ mirate.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010083/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Clarity on European funds for unaccompanied minors
The Commission is confirming the priority given to projects relating to unaccompanied minors and calls on the Member States, international organisations and NGOs to make full use of the available funding.
In addition, the Asylum and Migration Fund is supposed to guarantee the financing of activities connected with this category of migrants. Other funds involved in the issue of unaccompanied minors include the European Return Fund and the European Refugee Fund. 






1.


Can the Commission state the funding levels for each Fund (asylum and migration, returns, and refugees) for unaccompanied minors?










2.


The Asylum and Migration Fund is, as stated above, to guarantee funding for activities relating to unaccompanied minors. What are these activities?




It is also apparent that the EU, via its external aid instruments, will continue to finance initiatives relating to unaccompanied minors in non-EU countries and their regions.






3.


How much money does this funding involve?










4.


What initiatives are being funded?










5.


Which non-EU countries benefit from such funding?










6.


How is the Commission monitoring the proper use of the funds in these non-EU countries?




Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
The European Refugee Fund (ERF), Integration Fund (IF) and Return Fund (RF) identify unaccompanied minors among their priorities and several actions were implemented by Member States. However, these do not necessarily target only this group. It is therefore not possible to give precisely the amount of funding dedicated solely to unaccompanied minors. Within the Community Actions of RF and ERF, some projects targeting unaccompanied minors were financed for EUR 4.90 million. A call was launched for a new Pilot Project for unaccompanied minors (budget EUR 1 million).
The Asylum and Migration Fund (2014-2020) will continue addressing the needs of unaccompanied minors within the system of asylum procedures, reception conditions, integration measures, return procedures and resettlement incentives. 
The 2011-2013 Thematic Programme for cooperation with third countries in the areas of Migration and Asylum has also unaccompanied minors as a thematic priority. Financed actions do not necessarily target only this group, but at least EUR 34 million were allocated since 2005 under this and other external instruments. Funded initiatives establish effective child protection systems, guarantee access to education, legal and social assistance, improve protection and reintegration of trafficked minors, prevent unsafe migration. 
Morocco, Algeria, Egypt, Lebanon, Zambia, Kenya, Uganda, Moldova, Ukraine, Georgia, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, Myanmar, Argentina, and Paraguay benefitted from funding.
Standard monitoring tools are used to assess the proper use of the funds, i.e. results-oriented missions by independent experts ensure focused on-site assessments
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010084/12
to the Commission
Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Directive 2000/29/EC and ash dieback in the United Kingdom
Article 24 of Council Directive 2000/29/EC on protective measures regarding plant health states that ‘protected zones exposed to particular plant health risks should be defined and should be accorded special protection under conditions compatible with the internal market’.






1.


Can the Commission expand on what this 




‘special protection’ would entail and state whether the current problems the UK is experiencing with regard to the fungal pathogen 
Chalara fraxinea
 might qualify for this protected status?






2.


What compensation is available from the EU for those whose forests, nurseries or other businesses may have been infected by plant diseases originating in another Member State?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)







1.


Protected zones are areas within the Union which receive, at the request of the Member State(s) concerned, special protection against the introduction of one or more of the regulated harmful organisms listed in Council Directive 2000/29/EC










1.


Protected zones are areas within the Union which receive, at the request of the Member State(s) concerned, special protection against the introduction of one or more of the regulated harmful organisms listed in Council Directive 2000/29/EC




 (268). They are protected due to the absence of the harmful organism, despite the fact that environmental conditions in the protected zone are favourable for its establishment.A protected zone can cover the whole or a part of a Member State's territory. Annual surveys need to confirm the absence of the relevant harmful organism. In case of outbreaks, eradication measures need to be implemented immediately. If these are not successful within two years, the protected zone has to be cancelled.
If the UK would introduce a request for protected zone recognition for Chalara fraxinea then the Commission will need to consider whether sufficient scientific and technical information is available to conclude that the harmful organism is absent from that area. If this is the case, the Commission may decide to adopt appropriate measures.






2.


Under the EU plant health regime, established by Council Directive 2000/29/EC, there is a basis for co-financing eradication campaigns by the competent authorities under very strict conditions (in particular, immediate notification to the Commission of the first outbreak and swift and adequate eradication measures), but without any compensation of losses of producers, nursery, or forest owners affected by plant harmful organisms. 




(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010085/12
an die Kommission
Mathieu Grosch (PPE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: EU-Finanzmittel für Ford
Ford wird das Montagewerk in Genk bis 2014 schließen, dadurch werden circa 4 300 Beschäftigte ihre Arbeit verlieren. Dies wird erhebliche soziale und wirtschaftliche Auswirkungen nicht nur für diese Region, sondern auch für ganz Belgien und die EU haben. Aus diesem aktuellen Anlass wäre es interessant, von der Kommission folgende Informationen zu erhalten:







Erhält der Autobauer Ford europäische Gelder 











für Forschung und Entwicklung,











als Standortbeihilfen über die Strukturfonds,











als Beschäftigungsbeihilfen über den Sozialfonds?











Würde die Kommission gegebenenfalls Geldmittel zurückfordern aufgrund der Standortschließung, der damit einhergehenden schweren Arbeitsplatzverluste in Belgien und der Auswirkungen in ganz Europa?




Antwort von Herrn Andor im Namen der Kommission
(4. Januar 2013)






1.


Zwischen 2004 und 2012 erhielt der Ford-Konzern über das 6. und 7. Rahmenprogramm für Forschung europäische Fördermittel für seine Projekte in Deutschland, Schweden, dem Vereinigten Königreich und der Türkei. Ingesamt wurden den europäischen Tochterunternehmen von Ford Förderbeträge in Höhe von 8 605 536 EUR gewährt. In der beigefügten Tabelle sind die Forschungsprojekte aufgeführt, an denen sich der Ford-Konzern im Rahmen des EU-Finanzbeitrags beteiligt hat. Aus der Tabelle geht hervor, dass die Forschungsarbeiten des Ford-Konzerns in Europa überwiegend in seinem Forschungszentrum in Aachen durchgeführt wurden. Ford Genk wurden keine Fördermittel für Forschung und Entwicklung gewährt. 










2.


Im Anschluss an die angekündigte Umstrukturierung bei Ford Genk überprüften und bestätigten die für die Durchführung der operationellen Programme des ESF und des EFRE in Flandern zuständigen Verwaltungsbehörden auf ausdrückliches Ersuchen der Kommission, dass Ford Genk keine Mittel aus dem ESF oder dem EFRE erhalten hat. Genauso wenig erhielt diese Tochtergesellschaft Fördermittel aus dem Europäischen Fonds für die Anpassung an die Globalisierung. 




Da Ford Genk keine Fördermittel aus dem ESF, EFRE und/oder EGF gewährt wurden, ist auch keine Rückforderung notwendig. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010085/12
to the Commission
Mathieu Grosch (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: EU funding for Ford
Ford intends to close its assembly plant in Genk by 2014 which will result in around 4 300 workers losing their jobs. This will have a considerable social and economic impact, not only on the region involved but also on all of Belgium and the EU. For this reason, it would be interesting to obtain the following information from the Commission:







Does the car manufacturer Ford receive European funding 











for research and development,











as grants to attract industry via the Structural Funds,











as employment aid via the European Social Fund?











If necessary, would the Commission recover this funding because of the plant closure, the severe job losses in Belgium associated with the closure and its impact throughout Europe?




Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)






1.


Between 2004 and 2012, the Ford Group received European support funding under the EU’s 6th and 7th Framework Programme for Research for its operations in Germany, Sweden, the UK and Turkey. The total amount of funding granted to Ford European subsidiaries equals EUR 8,605,536. The enclosed table indicates the research projects in which Ford has participated along with the EC contribution to Ford. As it shows, most of the research carried out by Ford in Europe is concentrated in its research centre in Aachen. No R R R R&D D D D funding was granted to Ford Genk.










2.


After the announced restructuring at Ford Genk, at the explicit request of the Commission, the Managing Authorities implementing the ESF Operational Programme and the ERDF operational programme in Flanders have verified and confirmed, that Ford Genk did not receive ESF or ERDF funding. Neither did it receive any funding from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund. 




As no ESF, ERDF and/or EGF funding has been granted to Ford Genk, there is no need for recovery. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010086/12
an die Kommission
Mathieu Grosch (PPE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Förderung von generationsübergreifenden Projekten auf EU-Ebene
Seniorenspezifische Probleme sind ein Schwerpunkt europäischer Politik, vor allem im „Europäischen Jahr für aktives Altern und Solidarität zwischen den Generationen“.
Welche konkreten generationsübergreifenden Programme gibt es momentan auf europäischer Ebene, und mit welchen konkreten Finanzmitteln werden sie finanziert?
Antwort von Herrn Andor im Namen der Kommission
(8. Januar 2013)
In der Europäischen Union gibt es kein spezielles generationsübergreifendes Programm und es stehen auch keine speziellen Fördermittel für derartige Projekte zur Verfügung.
Generationsübergreifende Projekte lassen sich jedoch über verschiedene EU‐Finanzhilfeprogramme fördern. So wurde aus dem Forschungsrahmenprogramm das groß angelegte Projekt Multilinks gefördert, das sich der Frage widmete, wie sich der demografische Wandel auf die Solidarität zwischen den Generationen auswirkt  (269) Ferner wurden aus dem GRUNDTVIG-Programm mehrere multilaterale Projekte und Netze zum generationsübergreifenden Lernen und zur Solidarität zwischen den Generationen gefördert, darunter ENIL (European Network for Intergenerational Learning)  (270) und TCAST (Transfer of acquired competences and technical skills)  (271).
Gemeinsam mit dem Ausschuss der Regionen und der AGE-Plattform Europa hat die Kommission 2011 eine Broschüre zu den bestehenden Förderprogrammen aufgelegt, die Behörden und interessierten Einrichtungen, insbesondere auf regionaler und lokaler Ebene, bei Initiativen zum aktiven Altern und zur Solidarität zwischen den Generationen helfen soll  (272).
Während des Europäischen Jahres für aktives Altern und Solidarität zwischen den Generationen 2012 hat die Kommission das Projekt „generations@school“ mit rund 500 Teilnehmerschulen aus ganz Europa gestartet. Hierbei diskutierten die Schulen mit älteren Menschen, wie der generationsübergreifende Dialog dazu beitragen kann, dass die verschiedenen Generationen mehr Verständnis füreinander entwickeln, und was man gemeinsam für eine bessere Zukunft tun kann  (273).
Ferner hat die Kommission vor kurzem eine Konferenz zum Thema Lernen für das aktive Altern und Solidarität zwischen den Generationen abgehalten, auf der auch drei Workshops zum generationsübergreifenden Lernen stattfanden  (274).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010086/12
to the Commission
Mathieu Grosch (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Promoting intergenerational projects at EU level
Issues relating specifically to elderly people are a European policy priority, particularly during the European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations.
What specific intergenerational programmes are there currently at European level and what specific funding is there for them?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The European Union does not have a specific intergenerational programme and there is no specific funding available for funding intergenerational projects. 
However, intergenerational projects can receive funding through different EU funding programmes. The Research Framework Programme has funded a major research project called Multilinks which investigated how demographic change impacts on solidarity between generations (275). Several multilateral projects and networks related to intergenerational learning and solidarity between generations have been supported under the GRUNDTVIG Programme such as ENIL (European Network for Intergenerational Learning) (276) and TCAST (Transfer of acquired competences and technical skills) (277). 
The Commission has produced in 2011 in cooperation with the Committee of the Regions and the AGE Platform Europe a brochure on existing funding programmes to help public authorities and stakeholder organisations, particularly at the regional and local level, to develop initiatives relating to active ageing and solidarity between generations (278).
During the European Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations 2012 the Commission launched the ‘generations@school’ project in which around 500 schools across Europe took part, opening their classrooms to older people to explore how the dialogue between generations can contribute to a better understanding of each other and what the generations could do together for a better future (279).
The Commission has recently organised a Conference on learning for active ageing and intergenerational solidarity including three workshops on intergenerational learning (280). 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010087/12
an die Kommission
Jörg Leichtfried (S&D)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Kühlflüssigkeit HFO-1234yf
HFO-1234yf wird als Nachfolger des Kältemittels R134a in Auto-Klimaanlagen eingesetzt. Die EU hat eine Richtlinie erlassen, die Kältemittel mit einem GWP-Wert von mehr als 150 in Auto-Klimaanlagen verbietet; Gültigkeit hat diese Richtlinie für alle Pkw-Baureihen, die nach dem 1. Januar 2011 zertifiziert wurden, und sie tritt mit Januar 2013 in Kraft. Das Kältemittel R134a hat einen GWP-Wert von 1300, das HFO-1234yf einen Wert von 4. Die Produktion des neuen Kältemittels soll im 4. Quartal 2012 beginnen, ein Jahr später als erwartet.






1.


Ist der Kommission bewusst, dass es im Moment und auch bis zum Inkrafttreten der Richtlinie nicht genügend HFO-1234yf gibt, um alle Neuwägen damit zu befüllen?










2.


Wird es Ausnahmegenehmigungen oder ‐regelungen für die Autohersteller geben?










3.


Wenn ja: Wie werden diese Ausnahmen gestaltet werden?










4.


Wie schätzt die Kommission die Warnungen diverser Forschungsinstitute im Hinblick auf die Sicherheit, speziell die leichte Entflammbarkeit, des neuen Kältemittels ein?










5.


Gibt es bereits Ergebnisse oder neue Informationen bezüglich des von der Kommission eingeleiteten EU-Kartellrechtsverfahrens gegen die Produzenten des neuen Kältemittels?




Antwort von Herrn Tajani im Namen der Kommission
(21. Dezember 2012)






1.


Den Pressemitteilungen der Anbieter des Kältemittels HFO-1234yf zufolge ist die Versorgung gesichert, und es würden ausreichende Mengen zur Deckung der Nachfrage ausgeliefert.










2. und 3. 


Gemäß Richtlinie 2006/40/EG dürfen ab 1. Januar 2011 nur noch Fahrzeugtypen genehmigt werden, deren Klimaanlagen (MAC-Systeme) mit einem Kältemittel mit niedrigem Treibhauspotenzial befüllt sind. Die Verwendung bestimmter Kältemittel oder Anlagen ist nicht vorgeschrieben.




 Einzig aufgrund der Lieferschwierigkeiten bei HFO‐1234yf hat sich die Kommission bereit erklärt, bis zum 31. Dezember 2012 von der Einleitung von Vertragsverletzungsverfahren abzusehen, wenn weiterhin das Kältemittel R134a in der Automobilherstellung verwendet wird. 






4.


Der Kommission ist bekannt, dass ein Automobilhersteller seine Befunde zur Verwendung des Mittels in seinen Fahrzeugen in einer Pressemitteilung veröffentlicht hat. Die vorläufigen Untersuchungsergebnisse der zuständigen Behörden bestätigen, dass im Fall dieser Fahrzeuge ernsthafte Risiken bestehen. Die nationalen Behörden prüfen derzeit den Sachverhalt und dessen Relevanz für die Fahrzeuge anderer Hersteller. Weitere Fälle sind der Kommission nicht bekannt. 




Um neue technische Lösungen zur Verringerung der mit der leichten Entflammbarkeit von HFO-1234yf verbundenen Risiken zu entwickeln, wurden detaillierte Risikobewertungen und Standardisierungsverfahren durchgeführt. Dabei ergab sich, dass die mit der Verwendung von HFO-1234yf verbundenen Risiken geringer oder zumindest nicht höher sind als bei anderen in Fahrzeugen verwendeten entzündlichen Flüssigkeiten. Nach Ansicht der Kommission ist der derzeitige Rechtsrahmen ausreichend, um die Sicherheit der auf dem EU‐Markt angebotenen Produkte zu gewährleisten.






5.


Was das Wettbewerbsverfahren gegen die Hersteller des Kältemittels angeht, so hat die Kommission am 16. Dezember 2011 ein förmliches Prüfverfahren eingeleitet, um deren Zusammenarbeit bei der Entwicklung, Produktion und Vermarktung von HFO-1234yf zu untersuchen. Die Untersuchung ist noch nicht abgeschlossen.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010087/12
to the Commission
Jörg Leichtfried (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: HFO-1234yf liquid coolant
HFO-1234yf, as successor to the R134a coolant, is to be used in car air-conditioning systems. The EU has enacted a directive prohibiting the use of coolants with a global warming potential higher than 150 in car air-conditioning systems. This directive applies to all car types certified after 1 January 2011 and it will come into force in January 2013. The R134a coolant has a global warming potential of 1 300, while HFO‐1234yf has a value of 4. The production of the new coolant should commence in the fourth quarter of 2012, a year later than expected.






1.


Is the Commission aware of the fact that there is not enough HFO‐1234yf currently available to cater for all new cars, nor will there be by the time the directive comes into force?










2.


Will there be derogations for car manufacturers?










3.


If so, what form will these derogations take?










4.


What is the Commission’s assessment of the warnings from research institutions as regards the safety of the new coolant, in particular its flammability? 










5.


Are any results or new information available at this stage in respect of the EU antitrust proceedings brought by the Commission against the producers of the new coolant?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)






1.


The suppliers of the refrigerant HFO-1234yf issued press releases stating that its supply was successfully ensured and that the product was being shipped in quantities to meet demand.




2 and 3. Directive 2006/40/EC stipulates that as of 1 January 2011 MAC Systems of newly approved vehicle types must be filled with a refrigerant with a low global warming potential. The directive does not prescribe any particular refrigerant or system. Exclusively due to supply problems of HFO-1234yf, the Commission agreed not to launch infringement procedures until 31 December 2012, in cases where the vehicle production would continue to be done with the R134a coolant. 






4.


The Commission is informed that one manufacturer issued a press release on its conclusions regarding the use of the gas in its vehicles. Preliminary conclusions by the relevant authority confirmed that these vehicles pose a serious risk. National authorities are currently evaluating the issue and its relevance for vehicles produced by other manufacturers. The Commission is not aware of other cases. 




Detailed risk assessments and standardisation processes were conducted to develop technical solutions to mitigate the flammability risks of the use of HFO-1234yf, which concluded that the risk was equivalent or inferior to other flammable fluids used in vehicles. The Commission considers that the current body of regulation is adequate to provide for safe products on the EU market.






5.


As far as competition proceedings against the producers of the refrigerant are concerned, on 16 December 2011 the Commission opened a formal investigation into 




their collaboration to jointly develop, produce and market HFO 1234yf refrigerant. The investigation is ongoing.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010088/12
to the Commission
Struan Stevenson (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Denial of work permits by Greece to European vets
Populations of stray animals in various EU Member States are rising rapidly, particularly in Greece, where the increasing stray population is a direct consequence of the financial crisis. Little is being done from within Greece to address the situation, but a substantial number of animal welfare NGOs from other Member States have offered to send volunteer vets to the country to perform ‘catch-neuter-release’ campaigns.
Directive 2005/36/EC provides for a special temporary mobility scheme and specifically refers to veterinary surgeons. Additionally, Greek law No 4039/2012 allows non-Greek vets to perform neutering operations on a voluntary basis. However, with few exceptions, all fully qualified vets with established surgeries in their country of origin who have applied for a temporary permit to work in Greece have been refused, on the basis of Greek Decree No 40/2006, which, according to the Geotechnical Chamber (the Greek body responsible for issuing such permits), includes no provision for authorising voluntary work and lays down knowledge of the Greek language as a requirement.






1.


Is the Commission aware of the obstacles currently facing European volunteer vets seeking to work temporarily in Greece to help curb the numbers of strays?










2.


Is the Commission currently taking any steps to address the deteriorating situation for stray animals across Europe, and what action will it take to ensure compliance with the criteria laid down in Directive 2005/36/EC?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)






1.


The Commission is aware of the claim that foreign veterinary surgeons are facing problems in Greece when seeking to provide voluntary temporary and occasional services in the framework of 




‘catch-neuter-release’ campaigns. Voluntary and unpaid services are however not to be considered as services within the meaning of the TFEU as, under its Article 57, services are normally provided for remuneration. The Commission considers therefore that these specific activities are not covered by EC law on free movement of professionals.







2.


If the services mentioned above are provided for a remuneration paid to the veterinary surgeon (including payment by third parties), the Treaty and the secondary legislation, including Directive 2005/36/EC










2.


If the services mentioned above are provided for a remuneration paid to the veterinary surgeon (including payment by third parties), the Treaty and the secondary legislation, including Directive 2005/36/EC




 (281) should apply. This directive sets out that a professional legally established in a Member State, including in a self-employed capacity, can provide services on a temporary and occasional basis in another Member State without a prior check of professional qualifications. In the case of veterinary surgeons benefitting from the regime of automatic recognition under Directive 2005/36/EU, the host Member State might ask for a prior declaration but cannot forbid the provision of services. 
Moreover, the directive foresees that persons benefitting from the recognition of professional qualifications shall have knowledge of languages necessary for practicing the profession in the host Member State, taking into account the particular circumstances for the provision of services in question. 
The Commission refers to the answers to written questions E‐006543/2011, E-007161/2011, E-009002/2011 and E-002062/2012, and E-008179/2012 (282) which address the issue of stray dogs and dog population management.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010089/12
to the Commission
Andrew Duff (ALDE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights
Three years on from the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, is the Commission satisfied at the present state of progress of the negotiations with the Council on the drafting of the internal rules which will apply once the EU has acceded to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)?
Will the list of the EU's three nominations for the appointment of a judge to the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) be drawn up in accordance with the procedures laid down in Article 255 TFEU for the appointment of judges to the European Court of Justice?
What will be the role of the Commission in the process of judicial appointments?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(15 January 2013)
The Commission is engaged in exploratory discussions with the Council on the drafting of the internal rules. The result of these discussions will inform a future proposal for a legal act providing for these internal rules. The latter must respect the institutional balance within the Union, reflect the principle of mutual sincere cooperation between institutions of the Union as well as between the Union and the Member States and allow for an effective defence of Union law in proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
A panel composed of the members of the panel pursuant to Article 255 TFEU should give an opinion on whether candidates are of ‘high moral character and […] possess the qualifacations required for appointment to high judicial office or [are] jurisconsults of recognised competence’ as required by Article 21 (1) ECHR and on which among the candidates are most suitable to perform the duties of a judge at the ECtHR. Based on the panel's opinion, the Commission should make a recommendation to the Council to that effect.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-010090/12
til Kommissionen
Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE)
(7. november 2012)

Om: Censur af kulturelle produkter
Det amerikanske selskab Apple har ved talrige lejligheder afvist eller ændret indhold i digitale, kulturelle produkter, som de udbyder i iBookstore og iTunes. Det sker med henvisning til, at produkterne ikke lever op til Apples regler — dog uden nærmere præcisering.
Et eksempel på denne censur er afvisningen af Peter Øvig Knudsens tobindsværk »Hippie« 1 og 2, fordi det indeholder nøgenbilleder. Det førte til, at forfatteren dækkede nøgenbillederne til med æbler, hvilket i første omgang blev accepteret af Apple, som udbød bogen i iBookstore. Kort tid efter blev bogen imidlertid alligevel fjernet — igen uden nærmere begrundelse.






1.


Agter Kommissionen at skride ind over for Apples censurering af digitale kulturprodukter på det europæiske marked?










2.


Mener Kommissionen, at denne form for censurering er forenelig med det traktatfæstede europæiske krav om ytringsfrihed?




Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Michel Barnier
(17. januar 2013)






1.


Kommissionen har som udgangspunkt ikke kompetence til at skride ind over for private virksomheder såsom Apple hvad angår eventuelle afgørelser om fjernelse af onlineindhold fra deres platforme under de omstændigheder, som det ærede medlem beskriver, da det er et spørgsmål om den offentlige sædelighed, som medlemsstaterne er ansvarlige for.










2.


Den Europæiske Unions charter om grundlæggende rettigheder gælder ikke for alle situationer vedrørende en påstået krænkelse af grundlæggende rettigheder. Ifølge chartrets artikel 51, stk. 1, gælder chartret kun for medlemsstaterne, når de gennemfører EU-retten. Desuden hedder det i artikel 6, stk. 1, i traktaten om Den Europæiske Union: 




»Chartrets bestemmelser udvider ikke på nogen måde Unionens beføjelser som fastsat i traktaterne«. I situationer, der ikke reguleres af EU-retten, er det medlemsstaterne, herunder deres retlige myndigheder, der skal sikre, at de grundlæggende rettigheder faktisk bliver respekteret og beskyttet i overensstemmelse med den nationale lovgivning og internationale forpligtelser på menneskerettighedsområdet.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010090/12
to the Commission
Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Censoring of cultural products
The US company Apple has on many occasions rejected or modified the content of digital cultural products offered on iBookstore and iTunes. The reason given for doing so is that the products do not comply with Apple’s rules, albeit without any further explanation.
One example of such censorship is the rejection of Peter Øvig Knudsen’s two-volume work ‘Hippie 1’ and ‘Hippie 2’. As a result, the author covered up the nude pictures with apples; and that was initially accepted by Apple, which offered the work on iBookstore. Shortly afterwards, however, the work was deleted — again without giving reasons.






1.


Is the Commission proposing to intervene over Apple’s censoring of digital cultural products on the European market?










2.


Does the Commission believe that this form of censorship is compatible with the EU freedom-of-expression requirement under the Treaty?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)






1.


The Commission does not, in principle, have the competences to take action vis-à-vis private companies such as Apple in regard of decisions, as the case may be, to remove online content from their platforms under the circumstances as described by the Honourable Member, which primarily raise issues of public morality for which Member States are responsible.










2.


The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union does not apply to every situation of an alleged violation of fundamental rights. According to its Article 51(1), the Charter applies to Member States 




only 
when they are implementing European Union law. Moreover, Article 6(1) of the Treaty of the European Union states that, ‘[t]he provisions of the Charter shall not extend in any way the competences of the Union as defined in the Treaties’. In cases not governed by EC law, it is for Member States, including their judicial authorities, to ensure that fundamental rights are effectively respected and protected in accordance with their national legislation and international human rights obligations.
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-010091/12
till kommissionen
Christian Engström (Verts/ALE)
(7 november 2012)

Angående: Insyn i domstolsfall som rör klagomål mot kommissionen
Patrick Breyer, som är EU-medborgare och ledamot av det regionala parlamentet i Schleswig-Holstein, har ingett ett klagomål mot kommissionen eftersom den vägrat att ge honom tillgång till handlingar i ett domstolsfall som rör direktivet om lagring av uppgifter och dess genomförande (mål T-188/12).
I samband med detta har kommissionen bett Patrick Breyer ta bort både sitt eget klagomål och kommissionens svar till honom som han publicerat på internet.






1.


Är det kommissionens allmänna policy att vägra all tillgång till domstolshandlingar, även i komplicerade fall, såsom mål T-188/12?










2.


Om så är fallet, hur länge har denna policy varit i kraft, och hur många begäranden om handlingar har nekats varje år som den varit i kraft?










3.


Om så inte är fallet, varför förvägrade kommissionen Patrick Breyer tillgång till dessa handlingar?










4.


Varför har kommissionen bett Patrick Breyer ta bort sitt klagomål mot kommissionen och kommissionens svar från internet där han publicerat dem?










5.


Om en ledamot av Europaparlamentet skulle offentliggöra dessa två handlingar, skulle kommissionen då skicka en likadan begäran till ledamoten? Om så är fallet, på vilken rättslig grund? Om inte, varför inte, eftersom den redan riktat en sådan begäran till den medborgare som ingett klagomålet mot kommissionen?




Svar från José Manuel Barroso på kommissionens vägnar
(19 december 2012)
Artikel 15.3 i fördraget om Europeiska unionens funktionssätt är den rättsliga grunden för kommissionens policy när det gäller utlämnande av inlagor till domstolen. Detta innebär att EU-domstolens dömande verksamhet är undantagen från allmänhetens rätt till tillgång till handlingar. Detta överensstämmer med domstolens rättspraxis i Association de la presse internationale ASBL (API) (förenade mål C-514//07P, C-528/07P och C-532/07P), där domstolen konstaterade att detta undantag är motiverat för att meningsutbytena mellan parterna och den berörda domstolens överläggningar ska kunna äga rum ostört under hela domstolsförfarandet (se punkt 92 i domen).
När kommissionen lämnar ut egna inlagor i avslutade mål tar den ibland bort personuppgifter för att skydda rättmätiga intressen hos de personer som berörs. Kommissionen har vägrat att ge Patrick Breyer tillgång till handlingar som rör mål T-189/09. Kommissionen anser, som en följd av artikel 15.3 i fördraget om Europeiska unionens funktionssätt och den rättspraxis i API, att inlagor från andra parter till domstolarna inte omfattas av förordning (EG) nr 1049/2001 om allmänhetens tillgång till handlingar. Denna fråga är under rättslig prövning i mål T-188/12, efter klagomål från Patrick Breyer.
Kommissionen har bett Patrick Breyer att ta bort sin ansökan till domstolen och kommissionens svar från sin webbplats, eftersom parterna i förfarandet, enligt domstolens rättegångsregler endast får tillgång till inlagor från andra parter för att kunna driva det egna målet. Den anser att offentliggörande av inlagor i icke avgjorda mål har en negativ effekt på en god rättskipning enligt domstolens tolkning i sin dom i API-målen och dessförinnan i mål T-174/95.
Kommissionen önskar att parlamentsledamöterna grundar sig på fördraget och domstolens rättspraxis vid eventuella publiceringar i framtiden.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010091/12
to the Commission
Christian Engström (Verts/ALE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Transparency in court cases about complaints against the Commission
Dr Patrick Breyer, who is an EU citizen and a member of the regional parliament of Schleswig-Holstein, has made a complaint against the Commission because it refused to give access to documents in a court case regarding the Data Retention Directive and its implementation (Case T-188/12).
In this connection, the Commission has requested that Dr Breyer remove both his own complaint and the Commission’s answer to him from the Internet, where he has published them.






1.


Does the Commission have a general policy of refusing any access to court documents even in completed cases, such as Case T-188/12?










2.


If so, for how long has this policy been in effect, and how many requests for documents have been denied each year that it has been in effect?










3.


If not, why did the Commission refuse Dr Breyer access to those documents?










4.


Why has the Commission demanded that Dr Breyer remove his complaint against the Commission and the Commission’s answer from the Internet, where he has published them?










5.


If a Member of the European Parliament were to republish those two documents, would the Commission make a similar demand to that MEP? If so, on what legal basis? If not, why not, given that it has already made such a demand to the citizen who lodged the complaint against the Commission?




Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
Article 15(3) TFEU is the legal basis for the Commission's policy on disclosure of submissions to the Courts and this excludes the judicial activities of the Court of Justice of the EU from the public right of access to documents. It complies with the case law of the Court of Justice in API (joined cases C-514//07P, C-528/07P and C‐532/07P), where the Court ruled that this exclusion is justified to ensure that the exchange of arguments by the parties and the deliberations of the Court take place in an atmosphere of total serenity (cf. paragraph 92 of the judgment). 
In closed cases the Commission discloses its own submissions, sometimes expunged in order to protect legitimate interests. The Commission refused Dr Breyer access to submissions from the other party in case T-189/09. The Commission considers that, as a consequence of Article 15(3) TFEU and the case law in API, submissions from other parties to the Courts do not fall within the scope of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 regarding public access to documents. This question is sub judice in the case T-188/12 lodged by Dr Breyer. 
The Commission has asked Dr Breyer to remove his application to the Court and the Commission's defence from his website, since, according to the Court's Rules of Procedure, parties to proceedings receive submissions of the other parties only for the purpose of pursuing their own case. It considers that publication of submissions in pending cases adversely affects the due administration of justice as interpreted by the Court in API and previously in Case T-174/95.
The Commission hopes that, when considering a possible re-publication, Members of the Parliament would base themselves on the Treaty and on the case law of the Court.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010092/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)
(7 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Τα τείχη της Αμμοχώστου
Τα ιστορικά τείχη της κατεχόμενης Αμμοχώστου καταρρέουν. Τα τείχη κατασκευάστηκαν κατά την περίοδο της κυριαρχίας των Λουζινιάν (1192-1489) και επισκευάστηκαν από τους Ενετούς το 1550. Η κατάσταση των τειχών έχει επιδεινωθεί και πλέον αποκολλούνται πέτρες, με αποτέλεσμα να τίθεται σε κίνδυνο η ζωή των ανθρώπων.
Θα ήθελα να ρωτήσω την Επιτροπή:
Τι είδους δράση σκοπεύει να αναλάβει για να προλάβει την περαιτέρω κατάρρευση των τειχών;
Απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(17 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η δικοινοτική τεχνική επιτροπή για την πολιτιστική κληρονομιά, που τελεί υπό την αιγίδα των ΗΕ αναγνώρισε τα τείχη της Αμμοχώστου ως μία από τις προτεραιότητές της και, χάρη στη χρηματοδότηση της ΕΕ, θα διεξαχθούν επειγόντως έργα αποκατάστασης στον πύργο του Οθέλλου.
Το πρόγραμμα βοήθειας για την τουρκοκυπριακή κοινότητα χορήγησε ποσό ύψους 2 εκατομ. ευρώ το 2011 για τη στήριξη των δραστηριοτήτων της δικοινοτικής τεχνικής επιτροπής για την πολιτιστική κληρονομιά. Βάσει του προγράμματος βοήθειας του 2012, η Επιτροπή έχει δεσμευθεί να συνεχίσει τη στήριξη των εργασιών της εν λόγω δικοινοτικής τεχνικής επιτροπής, με περαιτέρω συνεισφορά ύψους 2 εκατ. ευρώ.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010092/12
to the Commission
Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Walls of Famagusta
The historic walls of occupied Famagusta are collapsing. The walls were constructed during the period of Lusignan rule (between 1192 and 1489) and fortified by the Venetians in 1550. The walls have deteriorated and the stones have now started falling down, putting people’s lives at risk.
I would like to ask the Commission:






—


What action does it intend to take in order to prevent them from collapsing further?




Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(17 December 2012)
The bi-communal Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage operating under UN auspices has identified the walls of Famagusta as one of its priorities and, thanks to EU funding, emergency work will be undertaken on the Othello Tower.
The Aid Programme for the Turkish Cypriot community provided EUR 2 million in 2011 in support of the activities of the bi-communal Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage. Under the 2012 Aid Programme, the Commission is committed to continue supporting the work of this bi-communal committee with a further contribution of EUR 2 million. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010093/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)
(7 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Τουρκία και ΑΟΖ Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας
Το τουρκικό Υπουργείο Εξωτερικών απηύθυνε έκκληση προς τις κοινοπραξίες που εξασφάλισαν άδειες από την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία για έρευνα και εκμετάλλευση υποθαλασσίων υδρογονανθράκων σε τέσσερα νέα οικόπεδα της κυπριακής ΑΟΖ, να μην προχωρήσουν στις έρευνες. Η Άγκυρα απείλησε αυτές τις εταιρείες, και κατ’ επέκταση τις χώρες από τις οποίες προέρχονται, ότι θα τις αποκλείσει από τα ενεργειακά έργα στην Τουρκία.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Πώς σχολιάζει τις απειλές μιας υποψήφιας για ένταξη χώρας, όπως είναι η Τουρκία, σε βάρος εταιρειών, οι οποίες προέρχονται από χώρες μέλη της ΕΕ και προτίθενται να συμμετάσχουν σε μια νόμιμη διαδικασία;











Πώς αξιολογεί τη νέα προσπάθεια της Τουρκίας να αμφισβητήσει τα κυριαρχικά δικαιώματα ενός κράτους μέλους της Ένωσης, όπως είναι η Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία;











Τι προτίθεται να κάνει για τον τερματισμό της προκλητικής και παράνομης προσπάθειας της Άγκυρας να δημιουργεί κλίμα έντασης στην περιοχή;











Ποιες επιπτώσεις θα έχει η απαράδεκτη αυτή στάση της Άγκυρας στην ενταξιακή της πορεία; 




Απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(18 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος στην ανακοίνωσή της προς το Συμβούλιο και το Κοινοβούλιο της 10ης Οκτωβρίου 2012 με τίτλο «Στρατηγική για τη διεύρυνση και κυριότερες προκλήσεις για την περίοδο 2012-2013», η οποία τονίζει ότι «η ΕΕ υπογράμμισε και πάλι όλα τα κυριαρχικά δικαιώματα των κρατών μελών της ΕΕ στα οποία συμπεριλαμβάνεται η προσχώρηση σε διμερείς συμφωνίες και η εξερεύνηση και η εκμετάλλευση των φυσικών τους πόρων, σύμφωνα με το κεκτημένο της ΕΕ και το διεθνές δίκαιο, συμπεριλαμβανομένης της σύμβασης των ΗΕ για το δίκαιο της θάλασσας. Σύμφωνα με τις επανειλημμένες θέσεις προηγούμενων ετών του Συμβουλίου και της Επιτροπής, η Επιτροπή επαναλαμβάνει ότι είναι επείγον να εκπληρώσει πλήρως η Τουρκία την υποχρέωσή της ως προς την πλήρη εφαρμογή του πρόσθετου πρωτοκόλλου και να σημειώσει πρόοδο σχετικά με την εξομάλυνση των διμερών σχέσεων με την Κυπριακή Δημοκρατία. Επίσης, απευθύνει έκκληση να αποφεύγεται κάθε είδους απειλή, καθώς και οποιαδήποτε πηγή τριβής και πράξη που θα μπορούσε να καταστρέψει τις καλές σχέσεις γειτονίας και την ειρηνική διευθέτηση των διαφορών.»
Όσον αφορά τη διαδικασία προσχώρησης της Τουρκίας, η Επιτροπή παραπέμπει το Αξιότιμο Μέλος στις διατάξεις που καθορίζονται στο διαπραγματευτικό πλαίσιο το οποίο ενέκριναν όλα τα κράτη μέλη το 2005, καθώς και στην απόφαση του Συμβουλίου του Δεκεμβρίου του 2006.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010093/12
to the Commission
Antigoni Papadopoulou (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Turkey and the Republic of Cyprus EEZ
The Turkish Foreign Ministry has urged the consortia that have secured licences from the Republic of Cyprus for the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons below the sea in four new fields in the Republic of Cyprus' EEZ not to proceed with their exploration work. Ankara has threatened these companies, and by extension their countries of origin, that it will exclude them from energy projects in Turkey.
In view of the above, will the Commission say:







How does it view threats made by a candidate country, such as Turkey, against companies from EU Member States which intend to participate in a legitimate procedure?











How does it view this fresh attempt by Turkey to challenge the sovereign rights of a Member State of the Union, such as the Republic of Cyprus?











What will it do to put an end to the illegal and provocative attempts by Ankara to stoke tension in the region?











What effect will this unacceptable Turkish attitude have on Turkey's EU accession bid?




Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
The Commission refers the Honourable Member to its communication to the Council and Parliament of 10 October 2012, entitled ‘Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2012-2013’, which underlines that ‘the EU has also stressed all the sovereign rights of EU Member States which include entering into bilateral agreements, and exploring and exploiting their natural resources, in accordance with the EU acquis and international law, including the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. In line with the repeated Council and Commission positions from previous years, the Commission reiterates that it is urgent that Turkey fulfils its obligation of fully implementing the Additional Protocol and makes progress towards normalisation of bilateral relations with the Republic of Cyprus. It also urges the avoidance of any kind of threat, source of friction or action that could damage good neighbourly relations and the peaceful settlement of disputes.’
Regarding Turkey's accession process, the Commission refers the Honourable Member to the provisions set out in the Negotiating Framework agreed by all Member States in 2005, as well as the Council decision of December 2006.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010094/12
alla Commissione
Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Malformazioni dei bambini a Gela
A Gela è elevatissima, e superiore di sei volte la media nazionale, la percentuale di bambini che nascono con malformazioni gravissime. La procura di Gela ha aperto un'indagine sul caso, al fine di spiegare il perché del persistere di tali drammi nelle famiglie della zona, ma sopratutto per indagare su un eventuale nesso di causalità con l'attività del vicino complesso industriale petrolchimico.
Diffusissima è l’ipospadia, una malformazione congenita all’apparato genitale, ma comuni sono anche i casi di bambini nati microcefali o con malformazioni agli arti. Dalle prime analisi degli esperti pare che l'alto tasso di malformazioni genetiche sia dovuto ai distruttori endocrini, elementi derivati da sostanze inquinanti simili a quelle emesse dal petrolchimico.
Alla luce di quanto sopra, si interroga la Commissione per sapere:







Quali sono le strategie dell'UE per garantire l'equilibrio tra il diritto alla salute dei cittadini e la sopravvivenza di un sito petrolchimico che garantisce l'occupazione a molti operari.











Se, dal momento che siamo in presenza di dati così allarmanti, intenda attuare misure che contribuiscano al monitoraggio dell'area del petrolchimico.




Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione
(16 gennaio 2013)
La direttiva 2008/1/CE sulle emissioni industriali, ex direttiva sulla prevenzione e la riduzione integrate dell’inquinamento (IPPC), definisce i principi di base per la concessione delle autorizzazioni e il controllo degli impianti. Essa si basa su un approccio integrato e sull'applicazione delle migliori tecniche disponibili (BAT), ovvero le tecniche più efficaci a disposizione per raggiungere un livello elevato di tutela ambientale, alla luce dei rispettivi costi e benefici. Inoltre, per quanto riguarda l'esposizione a sostanze dannose per il sistema endocrino, la strategia comunitaria in materia di sostanze che alterano il sistema endocrino  (283) mira a conseguire un elevato livello di protezione della salute umana e dell'ambiente. 
La Commissione non intende monitorare in modo specifico il settore petrolchimico. Tuttavia, qualora dovesse verificare che le disposizioni della direttiva sulle emissioni industriali non sono attuate in maniera adeguata, la Commissione prenderà tutte le misure necessarie. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010094/12
to the Commission
Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Child malformation in Gela
The percentage of children born with very serious malformations is extremely high in Gela, more than six times the national average. The state prosecutor in Gela has opened an investigation into the matter, in order to find out why local households continue to suffer in this way, and above all to look into the possibility of a causal link with the operation of a nearby industrial petrochemical plant.
Hypospadias, a congenital malformation of the genitalia, is widespread, but cases of children born with microcephaly and malformations of the limbs are also common. From the experts' initial analyses, it would seem that the high rate of genetic malformations is due to endocrine destructors, elements deriving from pollutants similar to those emitted by the petrochemical industry.
In the light of the above, could the Commission say:







What strategies does the EU have to ensure a balance between the public's right to health and the survival of a petrochemical plan that provides employment for many workers?











If, given the existence of such alarming data, it plans to take measures to step up monitoring of the petrochemicals sector?




Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(16 January 2013)
Directive 2008/1/EC on industrial emissions formerly integrated pollution prevention and control (IPPC) sets out the main principles for the permitting and control of installations. It is based on an integrated approach and the application of best available techniques (BAT), most effective techniques to achieve a high level of environmental protection while taking into account the costs and benefits. In addition, in terms of exposure to endocrine disruptors, the Community Strategy for Endocrine Disruptors (284) aims to achieve a high level of protection of human health and the environment. 
The Commission does not intend to specifically monitor the petrochemical sector. However, the Commission will take all necessary measures if it finds out that provisions of the Industrial Emissions Directive are not adequately implemented. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010095/12
alla Commissione
Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Diffusione del gioco d'azzardo
È sempre più elevato in Italia il numero delle famiglie che chiedono al giudice che un parente prigioniero del gioco non possa più disporre del proprio conto in banca, dei propri beni. Il livello di allarme in Italia è altissimo in quanto il gioco d'azzardo costituisce la causa di sempre più frequenti drammi all'interno di famiglie finite sul lastrico.
Ma anche a livello europeo i dati non sono meno preoccupanti, infatti il gioco d'azzardo genera fatturati da miliardi di euro. Nel 2015 le entrate attese in Europa saranno pari a circa 13 miliardi di euro contro i 9,3 del 2011, con un tasso di crescita del 40 %. Quasi 7 milioni sono, invece, i cittadini europei che affollano le piattaforme di gambling online.
Alla luce di quanto sopra, si interroga la Commissione per sapere:







Se intende potenziare le misure esistenti al fine di tutelare i consumatori, soprattutto quelli appartenenti alle categorie più deboli come i minori, prevenire le frodi e il riciclaggio di denaro, preservare lo sport, arginando il fenomeno delle partite truccate e, naturalmente, garantire un mercato importante.











Come intende limitare la diffusione delle slot machine e l'accesso ai siti web che offrono servizi di gioco d'azzardo evitando che ciò incida negativamente su talune libertà fondamentali dei cittadini dell'Unione europea.




Risposta di Michel Barnier a nome della Commissione
(15 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione riconosce l'importanza della questione sollevata dall'onorevole parlamentare, come dimostrato dalle risposte alle recenti interrogazioni riguardanti preoccupazioni analoghe (285). 







1.


La comunicazione 










1.


La comunicazione 



«Verso un quadro normativo europeo approfondito relativo al gioco d'azzardo on-line», adottata il 23 ottobre 2012 (286), presenta una serie di iniziative previste nei prossimi due anni volte a chiarire la regolamentazione del gioco d'azzardo on-line e ad incoraggiare la cooperazione tra gli Stati membri. In particolare, la Commissione intende adottare tre raccomandazioni con l'obiettivo di fornire un elevato livello di protezione comune ai consumatori dei servizi connessi al gioco d'azzardo in tutta l'UE, compresa la tutela dei minori, garantire una pubblicità del gioco d'azzardo socialmente responsabile, nonché combattere il fenomeno delle partite truccate legate alle scommesse. La Commissione intende collaborare con gli Stati membri e, se necessario, con il settore, attingendo alle buone pratiche esistenti. La Commissione ricorda che vige una normativa UE a tutela degli interessi economici dei consumatori vulnerabili, che riguarda anche il gioco d'azzardo on-line (287).La Commissione sta inoltre valutando la possibilità di estendere il campo d'applicazione della direttiva antiriciclaggio (288) a tutte le forme di gioco d'azzardo.





2.


Gli Stati membri possono fissare i propri obiettivi relativi alla politica in materia di gioco d'azzardo e il livello di protezione desiderato. Possono restringere o limitare la prestazione transfrontaliera di servizi connessi al gioco d'azzardo on-line sulla base di obiettivi di interesse pubblico, come la tutela dei consumatori e la prevenzione della criminalità e delle frodi. Tuttavia, conformemente alla giurisprudenza della Corte di giustizia dell'Unione europea, gli Stati membri devono dimostrare l'adeguatezza e la necessità delle misure nazionali adottate in tal senso In particolare, gli obiettivi di interesse pubblico devono essere perseguiti in modo coerente e sistematico.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010095/12
to the Commission
Sergio Paolo Francesco Silvestris (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: The spread of gambling
The number of Italian families asking the courts to deny a relative who is addicted to gambling access to his or her bank account and property keeps increasing. There are very high levels of concern in Italy as gambling is the cause of ever more frequent crises within families, who end up destitute.
However, the figures at European level are no less worrying. Gambling generates turnover of billions of euros. In 2015, receipts in Europe will be around EUR 13 billion compared to EUR 9.3 billion in 2011, representing a growth rate of 40%. At the same time, the number of European citizens using online gambling platforms is almost 7 million.
In the light of the above, I would like to ask the Commission:







whether it intends to strengthen existing measures to protect consumers, particularly those belonging to the most vulnerable categories such as minors; to prevent fraud and money laundering; to protect sport by putting a stop to match fixing and, of course, to protect an important market;











how it intends to restrict the spread of slot machines and the access to websites offering gambling services, without impacting negatively on the fundamental freedoms of European Union citizens.




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(15 January 2013)
The relevance of the issue raised by the Honourable Member is recognised by the Commission, as reflected in the responses to recent questions raising similar concerns (289). 







1.


The communication 










1.


The communication 



‘Towards a comprehensive European framework for online gambling’ adopted on 23 October 2012 (290) sets out a series of initiatives planned over the next 2 years which are aimed at clarifying the regulation of online gambling and encouraging cooperation between Member States. In particular, the Commission will adopt three recommendations with the aim of providing a high level of common protection of consumers of gambling services throughout the EU, including the protection of minors, and gambling advertising which is socially responsible as well as to fight against betting-related match fixing. The Commission intends to work with Member States, as well as with industry where necessary and will draw from existing good practices. The Commission would like to recall that there is EU legislation which protects the economic interest of vulnerable consumers, including for online gambling (291).. The Commission is also considering extending the scope of the anti-money laundering Directive (292) to all forms of gambling.





2.


Member States may set their gambling policy objectives and the level of protection sought. They may restrict or limit the cross-border supply of online gambling services on the basis of public interest objectives, such as the protection of consumers and the prevention of crime and fraud. However, in accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, Member States must demonstrate the suitability and necessity of such national measures. In particular, public interest objectives must be pursued in a consistent and systematic manner.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010096/12
to the Commission
James Nicholson (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Bioethanol contribution to protein deficit within Europe
It is suggested that Europe will face increasing challenges if it continues to be dependent on protein imports.






1.


Can the Commission outline what steps it will take in order to address this issue?




One means by which to address this problem is the use of bioethanol.






2.


Will the Commission recognise the contribution crop-based biofuels can make to reducing this deficit now and beyond 2020?




Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)






1.


The EU traditionally imports a large amount of protein-rich crops such as soybeans while it exports energy-rich crops such as wheat. The Commission plans to adopt a communication on the production of plant proteins in the EU which will examine the current supply of protein-rich feed in the EU and explore the potential for developing domestic production. 










2.


The principal reason to support biofuels is to replace fossil fuels in the transport sector so as to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions. The production of protein-rich co-products from crop based biofuels can be an additional positive effect.




(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010097/12
an die Kommission
Paul Rübig (PPE), Karin Kadenbach (S&D) und Franz Obermayr (NI)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Prüfung der Ausweisung eines Schutzgebiets für Brachvögel in Wels (Oberösterreich) durch die GD Umwelt
Die GD Umwelt prüft gegenwärtig, ob eine Fläche im Stadtgebiet der Gemeinde Wels als Schutzgebiet für Brachvögel ausgewiesen werden soll. Auf Grundlage der Ergebnisse dieser Prüfung fällt die für den Naturschutz zuständige Behörde in Oberösterreich dann eine endgültige Entscheidung. Der Großteil der betreffenden Fläche wird gegenwärtig als Flugplatz für Amateurpiloten genutzt, und in der Umgebung befinden sich eine Autobahn, ein Truppenübungsplatz und ein Industriegebiet. Die Lage der örtlichen Wirtschaft ist stabil, und einige ortsansässige Unternehmen möchten ihre Tätigkeit ausdehnen, benötigen hierzu aber zusätzliche Flächen und Räumlichkeiten. Dies würde ebenso zur Schaffung mehrerer hundert neuer Arbeitsplätze in Wels führen. Sollte aufgrund der Entscheidung jedoch keine solche Ausdehnung möglich sein, könnte es zu zahlreichen Entlassungen kommen. Leider läge die einzig sinnvolle Option in der Nutzung eines Teils des Flugplatzes. Bei einem größeren Transport‐ und Bauunternehmen würde sich durch den Bau eines Umladeterminals sogar ein bedeutender Teil der Schwertransporte von der Straße auf die Schiene verlagern. Dies würde eine deutlich geringere Abgas‐ und Lärmbelastung für die hiervon schmerzlich betroffene Bevölkerung vor Ort mit sich bringen. In diesem Zusammenhang sei betont, dass Wels natürlich auch über das Schicksal der Brachvögel sehr besorgt ist.
Daher haben sich Gemeindebedienstete auf eine Kompromisslösung verständigt, bei der lediglich 24,9 Hektar der Gesamtfläche des Flugplatzes von 106 Hektar für gewerbliche Zwecke genutzt werden. Zusätzlich kann der gleichermaßen geeignete Truppenübungsplatz nördlich des Flugplatzes (nicht in die 106 Hektar eingeschlossen) in ein zukünftiges Schutzgebiet für Brachvögel integriert werden. Diese 26,5 Hektar würden mehr als einen Ausgleich für die gewerblich genutzte Fläche darstellen. Unabhängig davon, wie die endgültige Lösung aussieht, sollte alles dafür getan werden, die gewerbliche Nutzung der beiden Streifen (24,9 Hektar) am Rande der genannten Fläche des Flugplatzes zu erleichtern.
Im Gegenzug zeigten sich die Behörden von Wels in Beratungen mit Ornithologen sehr gern dazu bereit, Bereiche in der unmittelbaren Umgebung des betroffenen Gebiets an die besonderen Bedürfnisse der Brachvögel anzupassen. Das Engagement der Gemeinde Wels im Vogelschutz im Allgemeinen zeigt sich ebenso dadurch, dass 2 300 Hektar (davon 93 Hektar im Stadtgebiet selbst) bereits für diesen Zweck ausgewiesen wurden. Innerhalb weniger Jahre könnte in dem Gebiet ein weitläufiges offenes Weideland geschaffen werden, das die Brachvögel zu einer Wanderung dorthin und zum Brüten entlang der Traun anregen könnte.






1.


Welche Maßnahmen beabsichtigt die Kommission in diesem Einzelfall zu ergreifen?










2.


Ist die Kommission willens, die oben dargelegte Kompromisslösung zu unterstützen? Falls ja, wann wird die Entscheidung bekanntgegeben? Falls nicht, welche anderen entsprechenden Lösungsvorschläge kann die Kommission anbieten?




Antwort von Herrn Potočnik im Namen der Kommission
(4. Januar 2013)
Am 21. November 2012 leitete die Kommission mit der Übermittlung eines Fristsetzungsschreibens ein Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen Österreich ein, da der Flugplatz in Wels und der angrenzende Truppenübungsplatz nicht als besonderes Schutzgebiet (BSG) für Brachvögel ausgewiesen wurden, wie es in der Vogelschutz-Richtlinie  (293) vorgeschrieben ist.
Die Kommission nimmt den Vorschlag der Abgeordneten zur Kenntnis, eine mögliche Beeinträchtigung des auszuweisenden Schutzgebiets als solchem durch zusätzliche Gebiete entlang der Traun für die Brachvögel auszugleichen. Gemäß Artikel 6 Absatz 3 der Habitatrichtlinie  (294) erfordern Ausgleichsmaßnahmen für Pläne oder Projekte, die ein Natura‐2000‐Gebiet beeinträchtigen, eine angemessene Prüfung und den Plänen oder Projekten wird nur dann zugestimmt, wenn die Prüfung ergibt, dass keine Alternativlösung vorhanden ist, und wenn zwingende Gründe des überwiegenden öffentlichen Interesses, einschließlich solcher sozialer oder wirtschaftlicher Art, für die Durchführung des Plans oder Projekts bestehen. Des Weiteren obliegt es gemäß Artikel 6 Absatz 4 der Habitatrichtlinie den Mitgliedstaaten festzustellen, ob die vorgeschlagene Ausgleichsmaßnahme sicherstellt, dass die globale Kohärenz von Natura 2000 geschützt bleibt.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010097/12
to the Commission
Paul Rübig (PPE), Karin Kadenbach (S&D) and Franz Obermayr (NI)
(7 November 2012)

Subject:  DG Environment review of a bird reservoir for the Curlew in Wels (Upper Austria)
DG Environment is currently reviewing the need to set aside an area of the city of Wels as a reservoir for the Curlew. Its findings will serve as an important basis for a subsequent final decision by the regional nature conservation authorities in Upper Austria. Most of the area concerned is currently being used as an airfield for amateur pilots, which is surrounded by a motorway, a military training zone and an industrial park. The local business situation is healthy; companies in the area are looking to expand their activities, and will therefore require additional business premises. This would also mean the creation of several hundred new jobs in Wels. However, without a decision facilitating such expansion, a significant number of redundancies may result. Unfortunately, the only reasonable option would be to use part of the airfield. In the case of a major transport and construction company, the building of a transhipment terminal would even shift a significant amount of heavy haulage from road to rail. This would bring substantial relief to the sorely affected local population in terms of fewer exhaust fumes and less noise. In this context, we would like to stress that Wels is, of course, also very concerned about the fate of the Curlew.
Therefore, municipal officials have agreed to a compromise solution, with only 24.9 of the airfield’s 106 hectares being used for business purposes. In addition, the equally suitable military training zone in the north of the airfield (not included in the 106 hectares) may be included in a future Curlew reservoir. These 26.5 hectares would more than compensate for the abovementioned business areas. Irrespective of the details of any definitive solution, everything possible should be done to facilitate business activities along the two marginal strips (24.9 hectares).
In return, the Wels authorities, in consultation with ornithologists, would be more than willing to adapt areas in the immediate surroundings of the zone concerned to the specific needs of the Curlew. Wels’ commitment to bird protection in general is also demonstrated by the fact that 2 300 hectares, including 93 hectares in the city itself, have been dedicated to this purpose. Within a few years it would be feasible to develop spacious open meadows in this area, which could possibly encourage the migration and breeding of the Curlew along the Traun river.






1.


What action does the Commission plan to take in this specific case?










2.


Is the Commission willing to support the compromise solution outlined above? If so, when will the decision be published? And if not, what other specific solution does the Commission envisage?




Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
On 21 November 2012, the Commission opened an infringement procedure against Austria by sending a letter of formal notice for not having designated the airport of Wels and an adjacent military training area as a Special Protection Area (SPA) for the Curlew, according to the Birds Directive (295).
The Commission is taking note of the proposal by the Honourable Members, which suggests a scenario to compensate for a possible adverse effect to the integrity of the SPA to be designated, by dedicating additional areas along the river Traun to the Curlew. In line with the provisions of Article 6.3 of the Habitats Directive (296), any compensatory measures for a plan or project negatively affecting a Natura 2000 site shall only be adopted if an appropriate assessment of this plan or project were to conclude on the absence of alternative solutions, and if there were imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature, for implementing the plan or project. Furthermore, according to Article 6.4 of the Habitats Directive, it is for the Member State to determine whether the proposed compensation measures will ensure that the overall coherence of Natura 2000 remains protected.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010098/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(7 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Nuevos datos del desempleo en España
Los últimos datos sobre el desempleo en España que han sido publicados por el Instituto Nacional de Estadística el pasado viernes 26 de octubre han lanzado el espeluznante dato de los 5 778 100 parados. Este dato supone la cifra más alta que ha sufrido el país en los últimos años.
Dicha cifra supone el fracaso de la política que el Gobierno de España está implementando tanto en el ámbito económico como en el ámbito laboral. Dicha política económica no está encaminada a la creación de empleo, sino al abaratamiento de los costes laborales para una clase empresarial que es incapaz de generar desarrollo económico. Los principales empresarios del país solo han sabido hacer especulación inmobiliaria, en lugar de desarrollar una economía capaz de competir a nivel internacional en uno de los países con mayor formación de capital humano del mundo. Esto ha hecho absolutamente necesario el sector público para generar innovación tecnológica, investigación, etc.; sin embargo, las políticas implementadas van encaminadas a la eliminación de los pocos yacimientos de empleo que el sector público podía generar.
Se han implantado medidas de un absoluto contrasentido económico para forzar el adelgazamiento inmediato del sector público a costa de cualquier esperanza de generación de crecimiento económico. Un ejemplo de esto es el incremento de la edad de jubilación en uno de los países con mayor paro juvenil del mundo, así como una reforma laboral que solo atendía a la facilitación del despido y que, lógicamente, solo ha conducido al despido masivo de miles de trabajadores, agravando aún más la desesperada situación. Este agravamiento del paro solo ha conducido a la disminución del consumo de las familias, motor básico de la economía española, que junto a la drástica reducción del gasto público ha hecho disminuir la demanda agregada, llevando a la quiebra a miles de empresas que se han visto sin clientes para sus productos.
Esta absurda política económica que ha llevado a cabo el Gobierno de España cumple, prácticamente al pie de la letra, las recomendaciones realizadas por la Comisión, exceptuando algunos puntos como el desarrollo de un «plan de acción juvenil», medidas encaminadas a la «disminución de la pobreza», establecimiento de una institución fiscal independiente, etc.
Pese a que la Comisión no tiene competencia, el Gobierno ha implementado las recomendaciones realizadas. Por tanto, a la luz de los nuevos datos sobre desempleo, ¿asume la Comisión algún tipo de responsabilidad por el incremento del paro en España? 
En opinión de la Comisión, ¿cuál ha sido el error?
Respuesta del Sr. Rehn en nombre de la Comisión
(17 de enero de 2013)
La situación económica en España sigue siendo difícil. A finales del año 2011, España volvió a caer en recesión por segunda vez en tres años. El desempleo continúa en aumento y actualmente se sitúa en un 26,6 % (Eurostat, noviembre de 2012). La mayor parte de la destrucción de empleo está vinculada al colapso de la burbuja inmobiliaria y a la no renovación de los contratos temporales.
Hoy en día, el crecimiento económico en España se ve frenado por la necesidad de corregir los muy grandes desequilibrios externos e internos acumulados durante el periodo de auge. En este contexto, el 10 de julio de 2012, el Consejo adoptó ocho recomendaciones específicas por país dirigidas a España y también abordó los desequilibrios macroeconómicos. Las recomendaciones hechas a España y a otros Estados miembros son parte del proceso de coordinación de las políticas de la UE (el Semestre Europeo) en el cual los Estados miembros coordinan sus políticas económicas y de empleo para el año siguiente. Las recomendaciones se adaptan a los retos concretos a los que se enfrentan los Estados miembros. Las correspondientes al año 2012 dirigidas a España hacen especial hincapié en la política activa del mercado de trabajo y en las reformas estructurales en los mercados de productos y servicios para que la economía española vuelva a crecer y a crear puestos de trabajo.
Se puede consultar más información sobre las actuales recomendaciones específicas por país dirigidas a España en las siguientes páginas web:
http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-your-country/espana/index_en.htm
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1194&furtherNews=yes
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010098/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: New Spanish unemployment figures
The latest Spanish unemployment figures, published on Friday 26 October by the National Statistics Institute, reveal the chilling fact that 5 778 100 people are out of work. This figure is the highest that the country has seen in recent years.
This figure shows the failure of the Spanish Government’s policies on the economy and employment. This economic policy is not aimed at job creation, but at cheaper labour costs for a business class that is incapable of generating economic development. The country’s major employers have focused on property speculation instead of developing an economy which can compete internationally, in a country with one of the world’s highest levels of human capital development. This has made the public sector essential in generating technological innovation and research. However, the implemented policies aim to eliminate the few sources of employment that the public sector could generate.
Completely contradictory economic measures have been implemented to force an immediate slimming down of the public sector while dashing any hopes of generating economic growth. An example of this is the increase in the retirement age in a country with one of the world’s highest levels of youth unemployment, and a labour reform that only serves to make it easier to dismiss workers. Logically, this has only led to the mass dismissals of thousands of workers, thus making a desperate situation even worse. Deepening unemployment has only resulted in reduced household consumption, the driving force behind the Spanish economy, which, along with the drastic reduction in public spending, has caused aggregate demand to fall. This has led to the bankruptcy of thousands of companies that have no customers for their products.
This ridiculous economic policy implemented by the Spanish Government follows the Commission’s recommendations virtually to the letter, except in some areas such as the development of a ‘youth action plan’, measures aimed at ‘reducing poverty’ and establishing an independent fiscal institution.
Although the Commission has no competence, the Government has implemented these recommendations. Therefore, in view of the new unemployment figures, does the Commission take any responsibility for Spain’s increased unemployment rate? 
In its view, what went wrong?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
The economic situation in Spain remains difficult. At the end of 2011 Spain slipped back into recession for the second time in three years. Unemployment keeps growing and currently stands at 26.6% (Eurostat, November 2012). Most of the job destruction is linked to the collapse of the housing bubble and the non-renewal of temporary contracts.
Economic growth in Spain is currently held back by the need to correct very large external and internal imbalances accumulated during the boom period. Against this background, on 10 July 2012, the Council adopted eight country-specific recommendations addressed to Spain, also addressing macroeconomic imbalances. The recommendations given to Spain as well as other Member States are part of the EU policy coordination process, the European Semester, within which Member States coordinate their economic and employment policies for the year to come. The recommendations are tailored to the particular challenges Member States are facing. The 2012 recommendations addressed to Spain put strong emphasis on active labour market policy and structural reforms in product and service markets, so that the Spanish economy re-starts growing and creating jobs.
More background on the current country specific recommendations addressed to Spain can be found on the following websites:
http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/europe-2020-in-your-country/espana/index_en.htm 
http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1194&furtherNews=yes 
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010099/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(7 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Impunidad de la Fundación Nacional Francisco Franco
La Fundación Nacional Francisco Franco es una entidad privada sin ánimo de lucro e incluso «sin adscripción política o partidista» creada en España en 1976, un año después de la muerte del dictador. Su función según sus objetivos es «la difusión de la memoria y obra de Francisco Franco».

Este objetivo, pese a suponer el ensalzamiento de la figura del dictador, ha sido considerado una importante labor por los diferentes partidos que han gobernado España desde el final de la dictadura, puesto que ha sido financiada repetidamente por el Estado. Dicha financiación alcanzó la considerable cifra de 147 000 euros entre 2001 y 2004.


Esta fundación hace apología explícita del fascismo, celebrando los trágicos hechos de la Guerra Civil y la represión durante la dictadura como victorias de la patria. Además, califica a cualquier ideología que no comparta sus ideales fascistas de enemigos e incentiva al odio y la violencia, insultando a todo aquel que constituya un 
«
amenaza
»
 para la 
«
unidad de España
»
.


Ante la impunidad de esta fundación fascista financiada por el Estado, 16 000 españoles han decidido cursar una petición al Presidente del Parlamento Europeo solicitando la condena y el rechazo público de la fundación, así como instar al Gobierno de España a la ilegalización de la fundación. El Parlamento Europeo y el Consejo de Europa condenaron el franquismo en 2006, pero pese a esta condena explícita la fundación ha continuado su actividad financiada por los diferentes Gobiernos españoles. Este tipo de actividades de apología de la ideología fascista son comúnmente financiados con fondos públicos, no solo en España, sino también en otros muchos Estados miembros, lo que incrementa la preocupación ciudadana por la financiación de organizaciones fascistas que colaboran a nivel europeo para extender su ideología. 







1.


¿Está la Comisión informada de las organizaciones y actividades de dichas organizaciones que gozan de financiación pública por parte de los diferentes Estados miembros y extienden su actividad fuera de sus fronteras?










2.


¿Está la Comisión informada de la cooperación transnacional entre las organizaciones que pretenden extender la ideología fascista en Europa? ¿Piensa la Comisión a proponer legislación sobre el tema que evite la propagación de la ideología fascista en la Unión? ¿Considera la Comisión que las organizaciones europeas que hacen apología del fascismo cumplen con el espíritu del Derecho europeo?




Respuesta de la Sra. Reding en nombre de la Comisión
(5 de febrero de 2013)
La Comisión no dispone de información específica acerca de las actividades de la Fundación Nacional Francisco Franco.
La Comisión se compromete a apoyar los valores de la democracia, los derechos fundamentales y la no discriminación consagrados en los Tratados de la UE. En concreto, la Comisión se compromete a luchar contra el racismo, controlando la aplicación de la legislación de la UE sobre la incitación al odio racista y la delincuencia (297), proporcionando apoyo financiero a las actividades de las partes interesadas cuyo objetivo es combatir el racismo y la xenofobia sobre el terreno y apoyando la recogida de datos sobre estas cuestiones por parte de la Agencia de los Derechos Fundamentales de la Unión Europea (298).
La Comisión también se compromete a apoyar la memoria de los crímenes cometidos por los regímenes totalitarios, en particular, a través de la acción «Memoria histórica activa de Europa» del Programa «Europa con los ciudadanos». Dicha acción está destinada a conmemorar a las víctimas del nazismo y el estalinismo, como medio para superar el pasado y transmitir la memoria a las generaciones jóvenes de europeos. Para el futuro Programa «Europa con los ciudadanos» 2014-2020, la Comisión ha propuesto una estructura diferente del programa, compuesta de dos líneas de acción principales en lugar de las cuatro del programa actual. Una de las dos líneas de acción del futuro Programa está dedicada a la Memoria, a los valores de la UE y a su historia. Esta línea de acción permitirá abarcar toda la experiencia europea adquirida en el pasado con los regímenes totalitarios y autoritarios.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010099/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Impunity of the Francisco Franco National Foundation
The Francisco Franco National Foundation is a private, non-profit entity ‘without political or party affiliation’ which was founded in Spain in 1976, a year after the dictator’s death. According to its objectives, the role of the foundation is to ‘promote the memory and achievements of Francisco Franco’.
This objective, despite involving the exaltation of the dictator, has been considered an important task by the various parties that have governed Spain since the end of the dictatorship, given that the State has repeatedly funded the foundation. This funding reached the considerable sum of EUR 147 000 between 2001 and 2004.
This foundation explicitly condones fascism, celebrating the tragic events of the civil war and the repression during the dictatorship as victories for the homeland. It also vilifies any ideology which does not share its fascist ideals and encourages hate and violence, insulting anyone who constitutes a ‘threat’ to the ‘unity of Spain’. 
Given the impunity of this state-financed fascist foundation, 16 000 Spaniards have decided to petition the President of the European Parliament, calling for condemnation and public rejection of the foundation, and to urge the Spanish Government to ban it. The European Parliament and the Council of Europe condemned the Franco regime in 2006, but despite this explicit condemnation, the foundation has continued its activities financed by various Spanish Governments. This type of activity condoning fascist ideology regularly receives public funding, not only in Spain but also in many other Member States, heightening popular concern at the provision of funding to fascist organisations which work together at European level to disseminate their ideology.






1.


Is the Commission aware of these organisations and the activities organised by them, which receive public funding from the various Member States and carry out activities outside their national borders?










2.


Is the Commission aware of the transnational cooperation amongst these organisations, which seek to extend fascist ideology throughout Europe? Does the Commission intend to propose legislation on this matter and prevent the propagation of fascist ideology in Europe? Does the Commission consider that European organisations which condone fascism comply with the spirit of European law?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(5 February 2013)
The Commission has no specific information concerning the activities of the Francisco Franco National Foundation.
The Commission is committed to support the values of democracy, fundamental rights and non-discrimination enshrined in the EU treaties. In particular, the Commission is committed to fighting racism and by monitoring the implementation of the EU legislation on racist hate speech and crime (299), by providing financial support to stakeholders' activities aimed at combating racism and xenophobia on the ground, and by supporting the data collection on these issues by the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (300). 
The Commission is also committed to support the memory of the crimes committed by totalitarian regimes in particular through the ‘Active European Remembrance’ action of the Europe for Citizens Programme. This Action is intended to commemorate the victims of Nazism and Stalinism, as a means of moving beyond the past and pass the memory on to young generations of Europeans. For the future Europe for Citizens Programme 2014-2020, the Commission has proposed a different structure of the programme consisting of two main strands instead of four actions as in the current programme. One of the two strands of the future programme is dedicated to Remembrance, EU values and history. This strand will allow to cover all European past experience with totalitarian and authoritarian regimes. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010101/12
aan de Raad
Ivo Belet (PPE)
(7 november 2012)

Betreft: Steun Europese Investeringsbank aan Ford Turkije
Onlangs kondigde de Europese directie van autoconstructeur Ford aan dat het bedrijf twee vestigingen in Europa — in Genk en Southampton — zal sluiten.
Ondertussen is duidelijk geworden dat de Europese Investeringsbank een lening van 100 miljoen euro heeft goedgekeurd voor de modernisering van een Ford fabriek in Turkije.






1.


Hoe beoordeelt de Raad het feit dat de EU op deze manier indirect de delocalisatie van automotive productie in de hand werkt, op een ogenblik dat autoconstructeurs met name in de Unie betrokken zijn in moeilijke herstructureringen en het afbouwen van capaciteit en werkgelegenheid?










2.


Welke initiatieven gaat de Raad nemen ten aanzien van het beleid van de directie van de EIB om een herhaling van soortgelijke ongelukkige beslissingen in de toekomst te vermijden?




Antwoord
(30 januari 2013)
De Raad heeft deze aangelegenheid niet besproken.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010101/12
to the Council
Ivo Belet (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: European Investment Bank support for Ford Turkey
The European board of the car manufacturer Ford recently announced that the concern plans to shut down two plants in Europe, in Genk and Southampton.
In the meantime it has emerged that the European Investment Bank (EIB) has approved an EUR 100 million loan to fund the modernisation of a Ford plant in Turkey.






1.


What view does the Council take of the fact that by granting this loan the EU is indirectly encouraging the relocation of automobile production at a time when manufacturers in the Union, in particular, are in the throes of difficult restructuring programmes and are shedding capacity and jobs?










2.


What steps will the Council take with a view to persuading the Board of Governors of the EIB to change its policy and so prevent any repeat of this unfortunate decision?




Reply
(30 January 2013)
The Council has not discussed the issue.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010102/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Kommende drastische Budgetdefizite in Spanien
Die Kommission rechnet schon ,heute' für Spanien für dieses Jahr mit einem Budgetdefizit von 8 % — für 2013 mit 6 % — und für 2014 mit 5,8 %.
Die spanische Regierung hingegen berechnet das Defizit mit 7,3 % für 2012, 4,5 % für 2013 und 2,8 % für 2014.






1.


Wie erklärt sich die Kommission diese doch gravierenden Unterschiede zwischen ihrer Berechnung und jener der spanischen Regierung?










2.


Auf welcher Basis fußt die Berechnung der Kommission?










3.


Welche Schritte gedenkt die Kommission hier der spanischen Regierung zu empfehlen, um diesen Belastungen durch entsprechende Maßnahmen schon heute entgegenzuwirken?










4.


Was gedenkt die Kommission an dieser Stelle vor allem für die Bürger zu tun, um einer durchaus daraus resultierenden noch gravierenderen Arbeitslosigkeit entgegenzusteuern?




Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission
(15. Januar 2013)
In ihrer Herbstprognose 2012 rechnet die Kommission für die Jahre 2012-2014 mit einem gesamtstaatlichen Defizit von 8,0 %, 6,0 % bzw. 6,4 % des BIP. Dabei geht sie davon aus, dass das reale BIP 2012 und 2013 um jeweils 1,4 % schrumpfen wird, bevor dann 2014 wieder ein bescheidenes Positivwachstum erzielt wird. Verglichen mit der Prognose der spanischen Regierung setzt die Kommission die Einnahmenentwicklung 2012 sowie das Wirtschaftswachstum und die Sozialversicherungsprojektionen für 2013-14 vorsichtiger an. Hinzu kommt, dass der im August 2012 vorgelegte mehrjährige Haushaltsplan keine ausreichenden Angaben zu den Konsolidierungsplänen für 2014 enthielt, die bei der Prognose hätten berücksichtigt werden können.
Nach der jüngsten Empfehlung im Rahmen des Verfahrens bei einem übermäßigen Defizit (Defizitverfahren), die am 10. Juli 2012 angenommen wurde, sollte Spanien das übermäßige Defizit bis 2014 korrigieren, wobei es in den Jahren 2012, 2013 und 2014 Defizitziele von 6,3 %, 4,5 % bzw. 2,8 % des BIP erreichen und seinen strukturellen Saldo um 2,7, 2,5 bzw. 1,9 BIP-Prozentpunkte verbessern sollte. Am 14. November 2012 stellte die Kommission fest, dass Spanien wirksame Maßnahmen ergriffen habe und vorerst keine weiteren Schritte im Rahmen des Defizitverfahrens erforderlich seien.
Nach Auffassung der Kommission wird eine erfolgreiche Haushaltskonsolidierung in Kombination mit ambitionierten Strukturreformen entsprechend den länderspezifischen Empfehlungen, die im Rahmen des Europäischen Semesters an Spanien gerichtet wurden, dazu beitragen, dass sich die Lage der spanischen Wirtschaft wendet und damit auch wieder Arbeitsplätze und ein höheres Wirtschaftswachstum entstehen.
Weitere Informationen zur Wirtschaftsprognose der Kommission für Spanien und zum Defizitverfahren finden sich auf folgenden Websites:
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/eu/forecasts/2012_autumn/es_en.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/economic_governance/sgp/deficit/countries/spain_en.htm
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010102/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Looming drastic budget deficits in Spain
The Commission currently estimates that Spain’s budget deficit will be 8% this year, 6% in 2013 and 5.8% in 2014.
By contrast, the Spanish Government estimates that the deficit will be 7.3% in 2012, 4.5% in 2013 and 2.8% in 2014.






1.


How does the Commission explain these major discrepancies between its calculation and that of the Spanish Government?










2.


On what does the Commission base its calculation?










3.


What steps does the Commission intend to recommend that the Spanish Government take to address these problems immediately with appropriate action?










4.


What action does the Commission intend to take at this juncture, especially on behalf of citizens who are facing increasingly severe unemployment?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(15 January 2013)
The Commission's 2012 Autumn Forecast projects a general government deficit of 8.0%, 6.0% and 6.4% of GDP in the years 2012-2014. This is based on real GDP expected to contract by 1.4% in both 2012 and 2013, before returning to modest positive growth in 2014. Compared with the authorities' forecast, the Commission forecast seems to be more cautious regarding revenue developments in 2012 and economic growth as well as social security projections in 2013-14. Moreover, for 2014, the multi-annual Budget Plan presented in August 2012 did not sufficiently specify consolidation measures for 2014 to be taken into account in the forecast.
According to the latest recommendation under the Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP) adopted on 10 July 2012, Spain should put an end to the excessive deficit situation by 2014, achieving intermediate deficit targets of 6.3%, 4.5% and 2.8% of GDP in 2012, 2013 and 2014, respectively and an improvement in the structural balance by 2.7, 2.5 and 1.9 percentage points of GDP in the respective years. On 14 November 2012, the Commission reached the conclusion that Spain had taken effective action and that no further steps in the excessive deficit procedure were necessary at this stage.
The Commission considers that successful fiscal consolidation combined with ambitious structural reforms, in line with the country-specific recommendations addressed to Spain in the framework of the European Semester, should be conducive to turn around the economic situation in Spain, including a return to job creation and higher economic growth.
More information on the Commission's economic forecast for Spain and the excessive deficit procedure can be found on the following websites:
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/eu/forecasts/2012_autumn/es_en.pdf
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/economic_governance/sgp/deficit/countries/spain_en.htm
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010103/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Defizit der USA übersteigt 1 Billion USD
Jüngsten Meldungen zufolge beträgt das Defizit der USA wieder mehr als 1 Billion USD. Dies entspricht einem ungefähren Wert von 840 Mrd. EUR sowie 7 % des BIP der USA.






1.


Welche Auswirkungen kann dieser neuerliche Schuldenanstieg nach Einschätzung der Kommission auf die Wirtschaftsbeziehungen mit der EU und den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten haben, zumal noch in diesem Jahr mit dem Abschluss eines Berichts gerechnet wird, der u. a. eine Vertiefung der Handelsbeziehungen fordert (P7_TA(2012)0388)?




— Sind konkrete negative Effekte für europäische oder nationale Wirtschaftssysteme zu erwarten?






2.


Wie sind die Einschätzungen der Kommission, dass sich dieser neuerliche Schuldenanstieg auf den Finanzmarkt der Europäischen Union auswirkt?




(Bitte um ausführliche Erläuterung).
Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission
(4. Januar 2013)






1.


Wenn es den USA gelingt, die sogenannte „Fiskalklippe“ (fiscal cliff) zu umschiffen, werden kurzfristig keine besonderen negativen Auswirkungen auf die EU erwartet. Die EU und die Vereinigten Staaten stehen vor der gleichen Herausforderung, die Schulden unter Kontrolle zu bringen und gleichzeitig das Wachstum wiederzubeleben und neue Arbeitsplätze zu schaffen. Aufgrund der starken gegenseitigen Abhängigkeit der Volkswirtschaften der EU und der USA können sowohl positive als auch negative Entwicklungen starke finanzpolitische Auswirkungen haben. Daher ist es sehr wichtig, dass man sich in den USA schnell auf eine glaubwürdige Strategie zur Konsolidierung ihres Haushalts einigt. Diesbezügliche Bedenken sollten einem Ausbau der Handelsbeziehungen zwischen der EU und den USA nicht im Wege stehen; in der aktuellen Situation könnte eine Stärkung der Beziehungen auf beiden Seiten starke positive Wirkung auf Wachstum und Beschäftigung entfalten.










2.


Der jüngste Anstieg des US-amerikanischen Schuldenstands wird auf dem europäischen Finanzmarkt keine direkten Folgen haben. Kann jedoch keine Einigung auf eine glaubwürdige Strategie der Haushaltskonsolidierung erzielt werden, so könnte dies das Vertrauen der Finanzmärkte in die Rolle der USA als „sicherer Hafen“ erschüttern. 




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010103/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: The US deficit exceeds USD 1 trillion
According to the latest reports, the US deficit is again topping USD 1 trillion. This is equivalent to approximately EUR 840 billion and 7% of the US’s GDP.






1.


What effects does the Commission believe this latest increase in debt will have on economic relations with the EU and individual Member States, especially this year which sees the release of a report calling, amongst other things, for the strengthening of trade relations (P7_TA(2012)0388)? 




— Are specific negative effects on European or national economies to be expected?






2.


What is the Commission’s assessment of the impact of this latest increase in debt on the European financial market?




(Please provide a detailed explanation.)
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)






1.


If the so-called 




‘fiscal cliff’ is averted in the US, no specific negative effect on the EU is expected in the short term. The EU and the United States (US) face the common challenge of bringing debt under control while re-launching growth and creating new jobs. The strong interdependence of the EU and US economies means that the potential impact of both positive and negative developments on fiscal issues is large. It is therefore very important that the US quickly agrees on a credible fiscal consolidation strategy. These concerns should not hinder the strengthening of EU-US trade relations, which, at this juncture, can have a significant mutual beneficial impact on growth and employment.






2.


The latest increase in US debt is not going to have a direct impact on the European financial market. However, failure to reach agreement on a credible fiscal consolidation strategy may shake financial markets' confidence in the US 




‘safe haven’ status. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010104/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Bewertung der Türkei durch die Rating-Agentur „Fitch“
Jüngst hat die Rating-Agentur FITCH die Einschätzung für die wirtschaftliche Lage der Türkei verbessert. Die übrigen großen Rating-Agenturen haben sich dieser Einschätzung nicht angeschlossen.






1.


Wie bewertet die Kommission die aktuelle wirtschaftliche Lage der Türkei?










2.


Hält die Kommission die Bewertung der Rating-Agentur FITCH für angemessen? Wenn ja, worin sieht die Kommission den Grund für die Verbesserung der Einstufung?




Antwort von Herrn Füle im Namen der Kommission 
(4. Januar 2013)
FITCH begründet die Heraufstufung der türkischen Volkswirtschaft mit der in jüngster Zeit festzustellenden Verringerung ihrer Finanzrisiken, dem weiteren Rückgang der Staatsschuldenquote sowie der Stärke des türkischen Bankensektors. Andere Rating‐Agenturen wie auch die Kommission sind bei den meisten Punkten ebenfalls dieser Auffassung. 
Wie die Kommission die wirtschaftliche Lage der Türkei bewertet, ist dem Fortschrittsbericht 2011 über die Türkei zu entnehmen, der am 10. Oktober vorgelegt wurde. Der Bericht kann unter folgendem Link aufgerufen werden: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2012/package/tr_rapport_2012_en
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010104/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Assessment of Turkey by the rating agency Fitch
The rating agency Fitch has recently upgraded its assessment of the economic situation in Turkey. The other major rating agencies have not associated themselves with this assessment.






1.


What is the Commission’s assessment of the current economic situation in Turkey?










2.


Does the Commission believe that the Fitch assessment is correct? If so, what, in the opinion of the Commission, is the basis for the rating upgrade?




Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
According to Fitch, the Turkish economy merited this upgrade because its financial risks have recently improved, the public debt ratio to gross domestic product (GDP) continues to fall, and it has a strong banking sector. Other credit rating agencies and the Commission agree on most of these points. 
The Commission's assessment of the economic situation in Turkey has been published in the 2012 Progress report on Turkey, issued on 10 October. You can find the report under the following link : 
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2012/package/tr_rapport_2012_en
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010105/12
an die Kommission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Neuer Schuldenschnitt für Griechenland
Erneut wurde nun ein Schuldenschnitt für Griechenland vorgeschlagen. Konkret bedeutet dies, dass die europäischen Steuerzahler nun doch einen großen Teil bezahlen müssen. Vor allem öffentliche Gläubiger sollen auf ihre Forderungen verzichten.






1.


Kann die Kommission ungefähr heute schon abschätzen, welche wirtschaftlichen Bereiche im restlichen Europa davon betroffen sein werden?










2.


Hat die Kommission Berechnungen angestellt, wie viel dieser Schuldenschnitt den einzelnen Steuerzahler kosten wird?




Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission
(18. Januar 2013)
Am 27. November 2012 hat die Euro-Gruppe ein umfassendes Maßnahmenpaket für den Schuldenabbau vorgeschlagen, mit dem der Schuldenstand Griechenlands bis 2020 von 144 % des Bruttoinlandsprodukts auf 124 % gesenkt werden soll (301).
Die Umsetzung dieses Maßnahmenbündels erfordert, dass alle wichtigen Akteure einen Teil der Lasten tragen:

Private Gläubiger und ausländische Investoren: Die griechischen Banken sollen im Rahmen des sogenannten Schuldenrückkaufprogramms griechische Staatsanleihen unter Nennwert an die Regierung verkaufen. Bei der Rekapitalisierung griechischer Banken werden Maßnahmen zum Passiv-Management in Bezug auf die nachrangigen Verbindlichkeiten getroffen, um eine faire Lastenverteilung zu gewährleisten.

Öffentliche Gläubiger aus dem Euro-Währungsgebiet werden die Zinsspanne auf die Darlehensfazilität für Griechenland (GLF) verringern, Zinsen auf EFSF-Darlehen stunden und die Laufzeit von GLF‐ und EFSF-Darlehen verlängern. Zudem werden sie ab dem Haushaltsjahr 2013 einen Betrag in Höhe der Erträge überweisen, die den nationalen Zentralbanken aus dem Programm für die Wertpapiermärkte (Securities Markets Programme) zufließen würden.

Griechischer Staat: Griechenland kann diese Maßnahmen zur Schuldenreduzierung nur in Anspruch nehmen, wenn die vereinbarten Reformen im Programmzeitraum und dem anschließenden Überwachungszeitraum konsequent umgesetzt werden. Die Auszahlungstranchen sind eng an die Erfüllung der im Memorandum of Understanding eingegangenen Verpflichtungen geknüpft.
Die Maßnahmen zum Schuldenabbau umfassen keine allgemeine Erhöhung der für das Programm bereitgestellten Mittel.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010105/12
to the Commission
Angelika Werthmann (ALDE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: New debt relief for Greece
Proposals have again been submitted for debt relief for Greece. This specifically means that a large part of this payment will have to be met by the European taxpayer. Public creditors in particular are supposed to waive their claims.






1.


Can the Commission currently estimate which economic sectors will be affected by this in the rest of Europe?










2.


Has the Commission calculated how much this debt relief will cost the individual taxpayer?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(18 January 2013)
On 27 November 2012, the Eurogroup proposed a comprehensive package of debt-reducing measures that is projected to reduce the Greek 2020 debt to GDP ratio from 144.0% of GDP to 124.0% (302). 
This package requires burden-sharing by all the major stakeholders involved:

Private creditors and foreign investors: Greek banks to sell outstanding Greek Government bonds at a discount relative to face value to the Government — the so-called debt buy-back operation. In recapitalising Greek banks, liability management exercises will be conducted in respect to subordinated debt holders so as to ensure a fair burden sharing.

Eurozone official creditors will reduce the interest margin required on the Greek Loan Facility (GLF), defer interest on EFSF loans and extend the maturities of both GLF and EFSF loans. Furthermore, they will pass an amount equivalent to the income on the SMP portfolio accruing to they National Central Bank as from budget year 2013.

Greek Government: This package of debt-reducing measures would accrue to Greece only conditional on strong implementation of the agreed reform measures in the programme period as well as in the post-programme surveillance period. Tranches of the disbursement are closely linked to the implementation of MoU commitments. 

The debt-reducing measures do not foresee any overall increase in the financing envelope of the programme.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010106/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(7 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Prácticas esclavistas en Brasil por parte del grupo Inditex
La compañía española Inditex, una de las más florecientes compañías del país debido a su importante expansión internacional, está siendo investigada recientemente por el Ministerio de Trabajo de Brasil por supuestas prácticas esclavistas en sus talleres del país latinoamericano.
Dicho Ministerio del Gobierno brasileño ha interpuesto ya 52 multas por diversas irregularidades en el ámbito laboral, entre ellas: «jornadas de trabajo extenuantes», «pagos irregulares de salarios», «falta de seguridad e higiene en el lugar de trabajo», «discriminación étnica» e incluso parece haber indicios de trabajo infantil. Esta increíble colección de violaciones de los más mínimos derechos laborales parece ser la práctica habitual de la compañía, pero no se trata de los delitos más graves.
El pasado mes de mayo se hizo pública una investigación que liberó a 52 trabajadores bolivianos de la esclavitud a la que eran sometidos por la compañía AHA, suministradora directa de Zara. La compañía española ha tratado de evadir su responsabilidad arguyendo que las irregularidades solo ocurrieron en un 0,03 % de sus proveedores, pero el Gobierno brasileño considera clara la responsabilidad de la empresa española en dichas prácticas y por tanto continuará con las investigaciones pertinentes en el ámbito laboral para esclarecer completamente la responsabilidad de la compañía fundada por Amancio Ortega en estas prácticas esclavistas detectadas en Brasil.
En octubre del año pasado la Comisión Europea lanzó una comunicación para la promoción de la Responsabilidad Social Corporativa en las compañías europeas. Partiendo de que los hechos presentados suponen la violación de la mayoría de normativas internacionales sobre el tema como la guía para compañías multinacionales de la OECD o la Declaración de principios tripartita de la OIT sobre compañías internacionales y política social.






1.


¿Considera la Comisión que el grupo Inditex está cumpliendo la propuesta sobre Responsabilidad Social Corporativa lanzó en dicha comunicación?










2.


¿Piensa la Comisión actuar al respecto y ponerse en contacto con la compañía española para asegurar que incluyen algún tipo de Responsabilidad Social Corporativa?, si no es así, ¿cómo pretende la Comisión que las empresas europeas introduzcan principios de Responsabilidad Social Corporativa si las más competitivas no lo hacen, obteniendo costes más bajos que las demás?




Respuesta del Sr. Tajani en nombre de la Comisión
(21 de diciembre de 2012)
La Comisión no tiene ni el mandato ni los medios para investigar las denuncias en relación con el incumplimiento por parte de determinadas empresas de directrices y principios de responsabilidad social de las empresas reconocidos a escala internacional.
Las Directrices de la OCDE para las empresas multinacionales, uno de los conjuntos de instrumentos de responsabilidad social de las empresas que gozan de reconocimiento internacional, respaldadas por la Comisión en su Comunicación de 2011 sobre la responsabilidad social de las empresas (303), van acompañadas de un mecanismo de reclamación que permite que las alegaciones de incumplimiento se pongan en conocimiento de un punto de contacto nacional establecido por los Gobiernos que se adhieran a las Directrices. El punto de contacto nacional debe investigar las alegaciones e intentar mediar entre la empresa y las demás partes interesadas.
La Comisión observa que, según la información facilitada en la pregunta de Su Señoría, el Gobierno brasileño está adoptando medidas para garantizar el cumplimiento de las normas laborales en su territorio. Brasil y España se han adherido a las Directrices de la OCDE y sus puntos de contacto nacionales respectivos pueden ayudar a resolver los asuntos relacionados con el incumplimiento de las Directrices.
La Comisión mantiene conversaciones con los países y regiones asociados, también en el contexto de las negociaciones para los acuerdos de comercio e inversión, encaminadas a procurar que prevalezcan, en líneas generales y en todas partes, las expectativas que se depositan en las empresas en lo relativo a una actitud responsable.
En particular, la UE y Brasil mantienen unas conversaciones anuales sobre derechos humanos en las que se debaten cuestiones de política general relacionadas con el trabajo infantil. Está previsto celebrar en Brasilia del 8 al 10 de octubre de 2013 la Conferencia mundial sobre trabajo infantil, que se centrará en la erradicación de las peores formas de trabajo infantil. La UE ha manifestado su voluntad de cooperar con Brasil en la organización de esta conferencia.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010106/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Slavery practices in Brazil by the Inditex group
The Spanish company Inditex, one of Spain’s most successful companies due to its significant international expansion, has recently been under investigation by the Brazilian Ministry of Labour and Employment for alleged slave labour practices in its workshops in the Latin American country.
The Brazilian Government Ministry has already imposed 52 fines for different workplace irregularities, including: gruelling working days, irregular salary payments, lack of safety and hygiene in the workplace and ethnic discrimination, and there also seems to be indications of child labour. This incredible series of violations of the most basic working rights seems to be the company’s customary practice, but it is not their most serious crime.
Last May, an investigation was made public concerning the release of 52 Bolivian workers subjected to slavery by the company AHA, a direct supplier of Zara. The Spanish company has tried to evade its responsibility by arguing that the irregularities only occurred in 0.03% of its suppliers. However, the Brazilian Government believes that the Spanish company’s responsibility is clear and will therefore continue to conduct the relevant workplace investigations to clarify fully the responsibility of the company, founded by Amancio Ortega, as regards the slave labour practices uncovered in Brazil.
In October 2011, the Commission issued a communication to promote Corporate Social Responsibility in European companies. Assuming that the facts presented involve the violation of most international standards on the issue, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises or the International Labour Organisation Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy:







Does the Commission believe that the Inditex group is complying with the proposal on Corporate Social Responsibility issued in this communication?











Will it therefore act and contact the Spanish company to ensure that its practices take account of Corporate Social Responsibility? If not, how does it expect European companies to introduce Corporate Social Responsibility principles, when the most competitive companies do not do so and therefore obtain lower costs than these companies?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The Commission does not have the mandate or the resources to investigate allegations regarding the non-respect of internationally recognised corporate social responsibility guidelines and principles by individual enterprises.
The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, one of the sets of internationally recognised corporate social responsibility instruments endorsed by the Commission in 2011 CSR communication (304), have an accompanying grievance mechanism whereby allegations of non-respect of the Guidelines can be brought to the attention of a National Contact Point established by adhering governments. The National Contact Point should investigate the allegations and seek to mediate between the enterprise and other concerned parties.
The Commission notes that, according to the information given in the question, the Brazilian government is taking measures to ensure compliance with labour standards within its territory. Both Brazil and Spain adhere to the OECD Guidelines and their respective National Contact Points can assist in resolving matters related to non-respect of the Guidelines.
The Commission engages with partner countries and regions, also in the context of negotiations for trade and investment agreements, with the aim of moving towards a situation in which the expectations on enterprises in terms of responsible behaviour are broadly similar everywhere. 
In particular, the EU and Brazil hold a yearly human rights dialogue in which general policy issues related to child labour are discussed. On 8-10 October 2013, the Global Conference on the elimination of the Worst Forms of Child Labour will be organised in Brasília and the EU has expressed its willingness to cooperate with Brazil.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010108/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Esilio per il Presidente siriano Bashar al-Assad
Il 6 novembre 2012 l'Associated Press ha reso noto che il Primo ministro britannico David Cameron ha suggerito la possibilità di concedere al Presidente siriano Bashar al-Assad di lasciare il paese in sicurezza se ciò potrà quanto meno contribuire a porre fine alla guerra civile in Siria.
Almeno 36 000 persone sono state uccise dall'inizio della rivolta siriana nel marzo 2011. Il conflitto si trova in una situazione di stallo e i ribelli antigovernativi hanno lamentato lo scarso accesso alle armi, che ha provocato il protrarsi degli scontri.
Il Primo ministro britannico ritiene che la richiesta di esilio per il Presidente siriano possa contribuire a porre fine al massacro in atto nel paese. Tuttavia, ha anche affermato di essere a favore del fatto che al-Assad affronti «la piena forza del diritto e della giustizia internazionali per ciò che ha fatto».






1.


Qual è la posizione del Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante in merito alla proposta del Primo ministro David Cameron di offrire una via di fuga sicura al Presidente Bashar al-Assad?










2.


Quali azioni è pronto a intraprendere il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante per creare consenso tra gli Stati membri riguardo alla possibilità di offrire una via di fuga sicura al Presidente Bashar al-Assad?










3.


Intende discutere della questione con il Segretario di Stato degli Stati Uniti Hillary Clinton e/o con il Segretario generale delle Nazioni Unite Ban Ki-Moon?




Risposta dell'Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(17 gennaio 2013)
L’Unione europea continua a sostenere le iniziative di Lakhdar Brahimi, rappresentante speciale congiunto dell’ONU e della Lega araba, volte a trovare una soluzione politica pacifica alla crisi siriana, fondata sui principi espressi nel comunicato di Ginevra del 30 giugno 2012. L’UE ha preso nota delle proposte avanzate da Brahimi nel suo intervento al Consiglio di sicurezza delle Nazioni Unite il 30 giugno scorso e continua a esortare tutti i membri del Consiglio di sicurezza a farsi carico delle loro responsabilità.
L'UE ha più volte affermato che nel futuro della Siria non vi è più posto per il presidente Assad, le cui pacifiche dimissioni sono nell’interesse di tutti.
L’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente mantiene regolari contatti con i principali partner internazionali al fine di trovare una soluzione politica alla crisi siriana e sostiene l’azione intrapresa in tal senso dal rappresentante speciale congiunto Brahimi.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010108/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Fiorello Provera (EFD)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Exile for Syrian President Bashar al-Assad
On 6 November 2012, the Associated Press reported that British Prime Minister David Cameron had suggested that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad could be allowed safe passage out of the country if it would at least help to bring an end to the civil war in the country.
At least 36 000 people have been killed since the start of the Syrian uprising in March 2011. The conflict is locked in a stalemate and anti-government rebels have complained about a lack of access to weapons, which has protracted the conflict.
The British Prime Minister believes that calling for the exile of the Syrian president would help to end the slaughter taking place inside Syria. However, he has also said that he is in favour of al-Assad facing the ‘full force of international law and justice for what he’s done’.






1.


What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative regarding the suggestion by Prime Minister David Cameron that President Bashar al-Assad be granted safe passage?










2.


What steps is the Vice-President/High Representative prepared to take in order to build consensus among the Member States regarding the offer of safe passage for President Bashar al-Assad?










3.


Does the Vice-President/High Representative intend to discuss this matter with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and/or UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
The EU continues to support the efforts of the UN/League of Arab States Joint Special Representative L. Brahimi in finding a peaceful political solution to the Syrian crisis based on the principles included in the Geneva communiqué of 30 June 2012. The EU has taken note of the proposals made by Brahimi in his briefing to the UN Security Council on 30 June 2012. It continues to call on all members of the UNSC to uphold their responsibilities 
The EU has repeatedly stated that President Assad has no place in the future of Syria, and his peaceful stepping aside is in the interest of everyone.
The HR/VP is in regular contact with key international partners in trying to find a political solution to the Syrian crisis and support JSR Brahimi in his endeavours. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010109/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(7 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Έλληνες των Σκοπίων
Ο πρώην Πρόεδρος των Σκοπίων Κ. Γκλιγκόροφ είχε δημοσίως αναφέρει το 1992 ότι «110 000 Έλληνες ζουν στα Σκόπια». Σε επιτόπιο ρεπορτάζ ελληνικών τηλεοπτικών δικτύων είχε αναφερθεί ότι οι Έλληνες στα Σκόπια ίσως και να ξεπερνούν τις 200 000, αλλά το κράτος αυτό δεν τους παρέχει εκπαίδευση στην ελληνική, δεν αναγνωρίζει την εθνική ιδιαιτερότητα τους, κ.λπ.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:
Οι υπηρεσίες της έχουν ασχοληθεί με την καταγραφή των μειονοτήτων που ζουν στα Σκόπια αλλά και με την επισήμανση, στις αρχές του κράτους αυτού, ότι επείγει η δημιουργία των απαραίτητων υποδομών ώστε να παρέχονται τα στοιχειώδη ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, όπως είναι η εκπαίδευση;
Απάντηση του κ. Füle εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(4 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η Επιτροπή παρακολουθεί εκ του σύνεγγυς τις εξελίξεις στον τομέα της προστασίας των μειονοτήτων. Την ευθύνη για την απογραφή των πολιτών, είτε ανήκουν σε κάποια μειονότητα είτε όχι, φέρουν οι κυβερνήσεις και όχι η Επιτροπή. Η τελευταία απογραφή στην πρώην Γιουγκοσλαβική Δημοκρατία της Μακεδονίας πραγματοποιήθηκε το 2002, με διεθνή επιτήρηση και παρακολούθηση από διεθνείς παρατηρητές σε όλες τις φάσεις της απογραφής. Η διευθύνουσα επιτροπή επιτήρησης, στην οποία προεδρεύει η Eurostat, αξιολόγησε ως επιτυχή την απογραφή του πληθυσμού, με την οποία δόθηκε στους πολίτες η δυνατότητα να δηλώσουν την εθνοτική καταγωγή τους. 
Όλες οι υποψήφιες χώρες οφείλουν να πληρούν τα πολιτικά κριτήρια της Κοπεγχάγης τα οποία απαιτούν μεταξύ άλλων τον σεβασμό και την προστασία των μειονοτήτων. Η Επιτροπή και η Αντιπροσωπεία της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης στα Σκόπια υποβάλλουν τακτικά εκθέσεις και παρακολουθούν τις εξελίξεις σχετικά με τα συγκεκριμένα θέματα. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010109/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: FYROM Greeks
In 1992 the former president of FYROM, K. Gligorov, had publicly mentioned that there were ‘110 000 Greeks’ living in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). An on-the-spot investigation by Greek television networks had reported that there were maybe over 200 000 Greeks living in FYROM, but that that State was not providing them with education in Greek, refused to recognise their ethnic specificity, etc.
In view of the above, will the Commission say:
Have its services undertaken the registration of minorities living in FYROM and pointed out to the authorities of that State that they urgently need to create the necessary infrastructure so as to provide basic human rights, such as education?
Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The Commission is closely following the developments in the area of protection of minorities. 
The registration of citizens, minority or others, is the responsibility of governments, not the Commission. The last census in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia was conducted in 2002, with international monitoring and observation by international observers covering all phases of the census. The Steering committee of the monitoring operations, chaired by Eurostat, assessed the population census as a successful operation. The census allowed people to declare their ethnicity. 
All candidate countries are expected to fulfil the Copenhagen political criteria which among other things require respect for and protection of minorities. The Commission and the European Union Delegation in Skopje regularly report on and monitor developments in this area. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010110/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(7 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Τελωνειακή ένωση ΕΕ-Τουρκίας, προϊόντα υδατοκαλλιέργειας και αθέμιτος ανταγωνισμός
Επιζήμια για τα προϊόντα χωρών όπως της Ελλάδας, της Πορτογαλίας, της Ισπανίας κ.λπ. έχει αποδειχτεί η εφαρμογή της τελωνειακής ένωσης με την Τουρκία. Πληροφορίες αναφέρουν ότι η Τουρκία προχώρησε σε επιδοτήσεις στον τομέα της υδατοκαλλιέργειας με αποτέλεσμα τη νόθευση του ανταγωνισμού και ζημία για ομοειδή προϊόντα χωρών μελών της ΕΕ.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:







Το θέμα ερευνήθηκε από τις υπηρεσίες της;











Ποια απάντηση δόθηκε από τις τουρκικές αρχές;




Απάντηση του κ. De Gucht εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(10 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Σύμφωνα με το άρθρο 10 του βασικού κανονισμού κατά των επιδοτήσεων (Κανονισμός (ΕΚ) αριθ. 597/2009 του Συμβουλίου), η Επιτροπή κινεί συνήθως έρευνα κατά των επιδοτήσεων βάσει καταγγελίας που υποβάλλεται από τον ενωσιακό κλάδο παραγωγής, η οποία πρέπει να περιλαμβάνει επαρκή, εκ πρώτης όψεως, στοιχεία σχετικά με τις αντισταθμίσιμες επιδοτήσεις και τις επιπτώσεις αυτών στην απόδοση του ενωσιακού κλάδου παραγωγής. Κατά τη διάρκεια αυτής της διαδικασίας, οι τουρκικές αρχές θα έχουν την ευκαιρία να απαντήσουν. Καμία έρευνα κατά των επιδοτήσεων δεν έχει διεξαχθεί στο παρελθόν και καμία έρευνα δεν βρίσκεται σε εξέλιξη καθώς, μέχρι σήμερα, η Επιτροπή δεν έχει λάβει καμία επίσημη καταγγελία για τις, κατά τους ισχυρισμούς, επιδοτήσεις που έχουν ληφθεί από τον τομέα υδατοκαλλιέργειας της Τουρκίας.
Παρακαλώ να λάβετε υπόψη ότι έχουν δοθεί απαντήσεις σε παρόμοιες ερωτήσεις όπως οι E-5876/12 και E-8889/12 (305).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010110/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: EU-Turkey Customs Union, aquaculture products and unfair competition
The entry into effect of the customs union with Turkey has proved detrimental to products from countries like Greece, Portugal, and Spain. Turkey has reportedly been subsidising the aquaculture sector, resulting in a distortion of competition and losses for producers of similar products from the EU Member States.
In view of the above, will the Commission state:







Has this matter been investigated by its services?











If so, how have the Turkish authorities responded?




Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
Pursuant to Article 10 of Basic Anti-subsidy Regulation (Council Regulation (EC) No 597/2009), the Commission normally initiates an anti-subsidy investigation on the basis of a complaint lodged by the Union Industry containing sufficient prima facie evidence concerning countervailable subsidies and its injurious impact on the performance of the Union industry. Under this proceeding, the Turkish authorities would be given the opportunity to respond. There has been no anti-subsidy investigation in the past nor is there one ongoing and, as of today, no formal complaint has been received by the Commission on subsidies allegedly received by the Turkish aquaculture sector.
Please note that answers were provided to similar questions E-5876/12 and E-8889/12 (306).
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010111/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(7 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Κυκλοφορία οχημάτων με κοινοτικούς αριθμούς κυκλοφορίας σε όλη την ΕΕ
Πολλές είναι οι διαμαρτυρίες από πολίτες της Ένωσης οι οποίοι κυκλοφορούν με το όχημά τους που έχει αριθμό κυκλοφορίας ενός κράτους της ΕΕ σε άλλη χώρα της ΕΕ και υφίστανται συνεχείς ελέγχους, απειλούνται με πρόστιμα, κ.λπ.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:
Γιατί δεν παίρνει νομοθετική πρωτοβουλία η οποία να στοχεύει στην εντελώς ελεύθερη και ακώλυτη κυκλοφορία όλων των οχημάτων με κοινοτικούς αριθμούς κυκλοφορίας σε όλες τις χώρες της Ένωσης;
Απάντηση του κ. Tajani εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(7 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η Επιτροπή θα ήθελε να ενημερώσει τον κ. βουλευτή ότι, στις 4 Απριλίου 2012, εξέδωσε πρόταση κανονισμού για την απλούστευση της μεταφοράς, στο εσωτερικό της ενιαίας αγοράς, μηχανοκίνητων οχημάτων που είναι ταξινομημένα σε άλλο κράτος μέλος (307).
Η πρόταση αυτή ορίζει ότι ένα κράτος μέλος μπορεί να απαιτήσει την ταξινόμηση ενός οχήματος που είναι ήδη ταξινομημένο σε ένα άλλο κράτος μέλος, μόνο εάν ο κάτοχος της άδειας κυκλοφορίας έχει τη συνήθη κατοικία του στο έδαφος του. Επιπλέον, η πρόταση προβλέπει ότι, εάν ο κάτοχος της άδειας κυκλοφορίας μεταφέρει τη συνήθη κατοικία του σε άλλο κράτος μέλος, ο ίδιος οφείλει να ζητήσει ταξινόμηση του οχήματος που έχει ήδη ταξινομηθεί σε άλλο κράτος μέλος εντός περιόδου έξι μηνών από την άφιξή του. Η εν λόγω πρόταση συμπληρώνεται από διατάξεις για την απλούστευση των διαδικασιών επαναταξινόμησης οχημάτων και τη μείωση των διοικητικών και γραφειοκρατικών διατυπώσεων για τους πολίτες.
Κατά τη διάρκεια της προετοιμασίας της εν λόγω πρότασης, αρκετές επιλογές αξιολογήθηκαν στην μελέτη επιπτώσεων, με μία από αυτές να προτείνει μία ταξινόμηση του οχήματος στην ΕΕ. Ωστόσο, αυτή η επιλογή δεν εγκρίθηκε, διότι η μελέτη κατέδειξε ότι κάτι τέτοιο θα είχε αρνητικές επιπτώσεις στην οδική ασφάλεια, στην οδική κυκλοφορία και στην κλοπή αυτοκινήτων, στην ασφάλιση των αυτοκινήτων, καθώς και στη δυνατότητα άσκησης από τα κράτη μέλη της φορολογικής αρμοδιότητάς τους που αφορούν την ταξινόμηση και την κυκλοφορία των οχημάτων.
Η πρόταση αυτή εξετάζεται, επί του παρόντος, από το Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και το Συμβούλιο.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010111/12
to the Commission
Nikolaos Salavrakos (EFD)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Movement of vehicles fitted with the number plates of an EU Member State throughout the EU
EU citizens driving cars fitted with the number plates of an EU Member State to another EU country have found that they are subjected to repeated controls, threatened with fines, etc. There have been frequent complaints about this.
In view of the above, will the Commission say:
Why does it not take a legislative initiative aimed at allowing all vehicles fitted with the number plates of an EU Member State to circulate in complete freedom and without impediment in all countries of the Union?
Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that, on 4 April 2012, it adopted a proposal for a regulation simplifying the transfer of motor vehicles registered in another Member State within the single market (308). 
This proposal provides that a Member State may only require the registration of a vehicle already registered in another Member State if the holder of the registration certificate is normally resident in its territory. The proposal also provides that, where the holder of the registration certificate moves and becomes normally resident in another Member State, the holder shall request registration of a vehicle already registered in another Member State within a period of six months following arrival. This is complemented by provisions simplifying procedures for the re-registration of vehicles and reducing the administrative and bureaucratic formalities on citizens.
When preparing this proposal, several options were analysed in the impact assessment, one of those being a single registration of the vehicle in the EU. However, this option was not retained because the analysis indicated that it would lead to negative impacts on road safety, traffic enforcement and car crime, motor insurance, and on the possibility of exercising by the Member States their taxation competences linked to registration and circulation of vehicles.
The proposal is currently being discussed in the European Parliament and the Council.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-010112/12
alla Commissione
Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Riforma spagnola della legge delle coste e concessioni balneari
Il Governo spagnolo ha presentato, all'inizio di ottobre, un progetto di riforma alla legge delle coste del 1988, che consentirebbe di estendere per altri 75 anni la concessione agli attuali titolari di edifici situati sul litorale (area demaniale protetta). Verrebbe introdotta inoltre la possibilità di cedere, previa autorizzazione, tale diritto su questi beni e di ristrutturare gli edifici ubicati in questa zona, sempre che ciò non comporti modifiche in termini di volume, altezza o superficie.
Considerando le misure previste nella direttiva 123/2006/CE relativa ai servizi nel mercato interno e in particolare l'articolo 12 di tale direttiva che impone, per le autorizzazioni di numero limitato, la procedura di gara ad evidenza pubblica con adeguata pubblicità, una durata limitata adeguata e il divieto del rinnovo automatico;
considerando che tale proposta di legge mira a risolvere una situazione specifica di grande incertezza giuridica che era venuta a crearsi in Spagna e che colpiva sia i cittadini spagnoli che gli altri cittadini dell'Unione proprietari di beni situati lungo la costa spagnola;






1.


Ritiene la Commissione che tale normativa sia compatibile con la direttiva 123/2006/CE relativa ai servizi nel mercato interno e con i principi definiti nel trattato, in particolare con i principi di non discriminazione, parità di trattamento, trasparenza, mutuo riconoscimento e proporzionalità?










2.


Ritiene la Commissione che una misura del genere possa essere riprodotta anche in altri paesi, in particolare per quanto riguarda le concessioni balneari?










3.


Ritiene la Commissione che una durata delle concessioni balneari di 75 anni o l'estensione per altri 75 anni delle attuali concessioni balneari sarebbero misure compatibili con i principi del trattato, in particolare con il principio di proporzionalità, e con le misure stabilite nella direttiva 123/2006/CE relativa ai servizi nel mercato interno, in particolare per quanto riguarda il divieto di rinnovo automatico e la durata limitata adeguata?




Risposta di Michel Barnier a nome della Commissione
(4 febbraio 2013)
Il quesito posto dall'onorevole parlamentare fa riferimento alla proposta spagnola di riforma della Ley de Costas. In base alle informazioni in possesso della Commissione, e come ha spiegato la Commissione nella sua recente risposta all'interrogazione E-10266/2012, tale periodo si riferisce all'indennizzo concesso ai legittimi proprietari di fabbricati ubicati sul litorale demaniale per la conversione dei loro diritti di proprietà in diritti di occupazione del suolo (le cosiddette «concessioni») di durata limitata. 
Scopo del progetto di riforma è migliorare la tutela delle zone costiere, assicurare una maggiore certezza del diritto e generare fiducia e sicurezza per i proprietari di alloggi ubicati sulla costa e per lo sviluppo delle attività economiche.
La Commissione è consapevole del fatto che diversi Stati membri regolamentano la concessione di licenze di occupazione del demanio costiero per attività private di servizi. Nella misura in cui le attività disciplinate dalla direttiva sui servizi sono contemplate anche dalla Ley de Costas, il periodo di validità della licenza dovrebbe essere tale da consentire un ritorno sugli investimenti effettuati da prestatori di servizi per l'esercizio della loro attività. Occorre altresì tener conto del fatto che le licenze concesse in applicazione della Ley de Costas non possono essere ulteriormente rinnovate. Per pronunciarsi sulla compatibilità della durata delle licenze con la legislazione unionale, la Commissione dovrà attendere che vengano adottate misure di esecuzione della Ley de Costas. 
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010112/12
to the Commission
Sergio Gaetano Cofferati (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Spanish reform of the coastal law and beach concessions
In early October, the Spanish Government submitted a reform bill relating to the 1988 coastal law, which would allow the concessions granted to the current owners of buildings along the coast (a protected state area) to be extended for another 75 years. There would also be an option to sell, subject to prior authorisation, the entitlement to such properties and to renovate buildings in such areas, provided that this does not lead to any changes in volume, height or surface area.
The measures provided for in Directive 123/2006/EC on services in the internal market, and in particular Article 12 thereof, require, for a limited number of authorisations, a selection procedure involving appropriate publicity, an appropriate limited period and a ban on automatic renewal.
The aim of this Spanish legislative proposal is to resolve a specific situation of great legal uncertainty that had come about in Spain and that was affecting both Spanish citizens and other EU citizens who owned property along the Spanish coast.






1.


Does the Commission believe that this legislation is compatible with Directive 123/2006/EC on services in the internal market and with the principles laid down in the Treaty, in particular with the principles of non-discrimination, equal treatment, transparency, mutual recognition and proportionality?










2.


Does the Commission believe that such a measure could be reproduced in other countries, in particular with regard to beach concessions?










3.


Does the Commission believe that a term of 75 years for beach concessions, or a further 75-year extension for existing beach concessions would be compatible with the principles of the Treaty, in particular with that of proportionality, and with the provisions of Directive 123/2006/EC on services in the internal market, particularly with regard to the prohibition of automatic renewals and the appropriate limited period?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(4 February 2013)
The question of the Honourable Member refers to the Spanish proposal amending the Ley de Costas. According to the information in the Commission's possession, and as the Commission explained in its recent reply to Question E-10266/2012, this period refers to the compensation granted to lawful owners of constructions on the land sea public-domain for the transformation of their property rights into rights to occupy the land (commonly called ‘concessions’) for a limited period of time. 
The purpose of the draft reform is to reinforce protection of the coastline, increase legal security and generate confidence and certainty for legal homeowners on the coast and for the development of economic activity.
The Commission is aware that several Member States regulate the grant of licenses to occupy portions of the coastal public domain for private service activities. To the extent that service activities falling under the Services Directive are also covered by the Ley de Costas, the duration of the license granted should be such as may be necessary to allow for a return of the investment committed by service providers in order to exercise the service activity. The fact that the licenses granted by the Ley de Costas may not be renewed further is also to be taken into account. The Commission will wait until implementing measures to the Ley de Costas are adopted to take a view on the compatibility of the duration of the licenses with EU legislation. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-010113/12
an die Kommission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Effizienz des spanischen Bankenmarktes
Die Kommission wird gebeten, folgende Fragen zu beantworten, die sich auf ihre Diskussionen mit den spanischen Behörden während der ersten Überprüfung des Finanzhilfeprogramms beziehen. 






1.


Wie erklärt die Kommission die Angaben im Risikosteuerpult des Europäischen Ausschusses für Systemrisiken (ESRB), denen zufolge spanische Haushalte erheblich mehr für neue Kredite zahlen müssen als nichtfinanzielle Kapitalgesellschaften (siehe die meiner E-Mail beigefügte Grafik)? 










2.


Deutet dies auf mangelnde Markteffizienz des spanischen Bankenmarktes aus Sicht der Verbraucher hin?










3.


Welche Maßnahmen hat die Kommission mit den spanischen Behörden diskutiert, um für bessere Bedingungen für die spanischen Verbraucher zu sorgen?




Antwort von Herrn Barnier im Namen der Kommission
(6. Dezember 2012)






1.


Die Bonitätsanforderungen und Kreditkonditionen für Bankkredite an Haushalte haben sich in Spanien in den vergangenen Jahren deutlich verschärft. Wie in vielen anderen Ländern sind Kredite an Haushalte in der Regel teurer, und diese Differenz hat sich in den letzten Jahren sogar noch weiter vergrößert. Im Falle Spaniens ist diese Entwicklung eine direkte und logische Folge der in den vergangenen Jahren entstandenen extrem hohen Verschuldung der privaten Haushalte. Diese Kredite wurden vor allem für die Finanzierung von Immobilien aufgenommen. Durch den Abschwung auf dem Immobilienmarkt und die Tatsache, dass der Bankensektor den Fremdkapitalanteil abbauen musste, ist die Kreditvergabe inzwischen stärker eingeschränkt, was sich in strengeren Konditionen und ungünstigeren Modalitäten für neue Darlehen äußert.










2.


Auch wenn der spanische Bankensektor offenbar einige Schwachstellen und Ineffizienzen aufweist, sind die Anpassung der Kreditvergabe durch Banken in Spanien nach unten und die im Vergleich zur Vergangenheit insbesondere für Privathaushalte höheren Kreditzinsen kein Zeichen einer derartigen Marktineffizienz. Sie scheinen vielmehr die Folge eines hohen Schuldenüberhangs, schwierigerer wirtschaftlicher Rahmenbedingungen und strengerer Konditionen für die Kreditvergabe durch Banken zu sein. Vor diesem Hintergrund sind die auch auf höhere Kreditzinsen zurückzuführenden geringeren Kreditvolumen ein Weg, diesen Schuldenüberhang zu verringern.











3.


Das Programm für den Finanzsektor Spaniens wird für eine deutliche Rekapitalisierung und Stärkung des spanischen Bankensektors insgesamt sorgen. Damit werden sich mittelfristig indirekt auch die Aussichten für die Kreditvergabe an die Privatwirtschaft verbessern. Im Übrigen hat die Kommission mit dem Programm für den Finanzsektor nicht beabsichtigt, die Autonomie der Banken bei der Kreditvergabe oder beim Risikomanagement zu beeinflussen. Zur Förderung eines verantwortlicheren Umgangs mit Anleihen‐ und Darlehenstransaktionen hat die Kommission am 31. März 2011 einen Vorschlag für eine Richtlinie über Wohnimmobilienkreditverträge










3.


Das Programm für den Finanzsektor Spaniens wird für eine deutliche Rekapitalisierung und Stärkung des spanischen Bankensektors insgesamt sorgen. Damit werden sich mittelfristig indirekt auch die Aussichten für die Kreditvergabe an die Privatwirtschaft verbessern. Im Übrigen hat die Kommission mit dem Programm für den Finanzsektor nicht beabsichtigt, die Autonomie der Banken bei der Kreditvergabe oder beim Risikomanagement zu beeinflussen. Zur Förderung eines verantwortlicheren Umgangs mit Anleihen‐ und Darlehenstransaktionen hat die Kommission am 31. März 2011 einen Vorschlag für eine Richtlinie über Wohnimmobilienkreditverträge




 (309) vorgelegt.(English version)
Question for written answer P-010113/12
to the Commission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Efficiency of the Spanish banking market
Can the Commission, with reference to its discussions with the Spanish authorities during the first review of the financial assistance programme, answer the following questions? 






1.


How does the Commission explain the data appearing in the ESRB’s systemic risk dashboard to the effect that Spanish households have to pay significantly more than non-financial corporations for new loans (see graph attached to my email)?










2.


Does this point to a lack of market efficiency in the Spanish banking market from a consumer point of view?










3.


What measures has the Commission discussed with the Spanish authorities with a view to ensuring a better deal for Spanish consumers?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(6 December 2012)






1.


Credit standards and credit terms applied to bank loans to households have considerably tightened in Spain over the past years. As in many other countries, loans to households tend to be more expensive and that difference has even widened over recent years. In the case of Spain, this development is a direct and logical consequence of the excessively high debt accumulated by Spanish households in previous years, in particular for real estate purposes. The downturn in the real estate market and the need for banks to deleverage leads to some lending restraint that materialises in tighter conditions and less favourable terms for new loans. 










2.


While there seem to be several vulnerabilities and inefficiencies in the Spanish banking sector, the downward adjustment of bank lending in Spain and higher than in the past lending rates in particular to households are not a sign of such market inefficiency. They rather seem the consequence of the high debt overhang, more difficult economic conditions and tight funding conditions for banks. Against this background, more subdued lending volumes, also driven by higher lending rates, are a means of redressing this debt overhang. 











3.


The financial-sector programme for Spain will provide for a significant recapitalisation and overall strengthening of the Spanish banking sector. This will indirectly foster prospects for lending to the private economy over the medium term. Beyond that, the Commission did not seek to influence, via the financial sector programme, the banks' autonomous lending policies or risk management. To promote more responsible lending and borrowing the Commission came forward with a proposal for a directive on credit agreements relating to residential property on 31 March 2011










3.


The financial-sector programme for Spain will provide for a significant recapitalisation and overall strengthening of the Spanish banking sector. This will indirectly foster prospects for lending to the private economy over the medium term. Beyond that, the Commission did not seek to influence, via the financial sector programme, the banks' autonomous lending policies or risk management. To promote more responsible lending and borrowing the Commission came forward with a proposal for a directive on credit agreements relating to residential property on 31 March 2011




 (310). (Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης P-010114/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Niki Tzavela (EFD)
(7 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Νέο πακέτο μέτρων στην Ελλάδα
Αυτήν τη στιγμή, η ελληνική Βουλή καλείται να ψηφίσει τα επώδυνα μέτρα του τελευταίου πακέτου που συμφωνήθηκε με την τρόικα. Παρόλο που τα μέτρα αυτά είναι τα σκληρότερα που έχουν περάσει από κράτος μέλος της ΕΕ, ο ελληνικός λαός δείχνει γενικά μια γενναία ανοχή, αναμένοντας καλύτερες μέρες.
Αν δεν υπάρξει άμεση οικονομική στήριξη, η χώρα θα καταρρεύσει πολιτικά. Συνεπώς, θα πρέπει να υπάρξει εμφανής οικονομική επιβράβευση αυτής της πρόσφατης κοινοβουλευτικής ψήφου.
Ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:
Προτίθεται η ΕΕ να καταβάλει άμεσα την επόμενη δόση στην Ελλάδα, μετά την ψήφιση του νέου πακέτου μέτρων;
Απάντηση του κ. Rehn εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(8 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Την εβδομάδα 7-11 Νοεμβρίου 2012, το ελληνικό Κοινοβούλιο ψήφισε τμηματικά το νέο πακέτο δημοσιονομικών μέτρων το οποίο περιλαμβάνεται στο Μεσοπρόθεσμο Πλαίσιο Δημοσιονομικής Στρατηγικής. 
Μετά την ολοκλήρωση των εν λόγω ενεργειών το Eurogroup συζήτησε μία σειρά πιθανών μέτρων για την εξασφάλιση της βιωσιμότητας του ελληνικού δημόσιου χρέους. 
Το Eurogroup συμφώνησε να εκταμιευτεί η δόση από το ΕΤΧΣ στις 13 Δεκεμβρίου 2012, αφού είχαν ολοκληρωθεί οι σχετικές εθνικές διαδικασίες για την έγκριση της εκταμίευσης και είχε πραγματοποιηθεί επιτυχώς από τις ελληνικές αρχές η διαδικασία επαναγοράς χρέους.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010114/12
to the Commission
Niki Tzavela (EFD)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: New package of measures for Greece
The Greek Parliament is currently being called upon to vote on a number of painful cuts under the most recent package of measures agreed with the Troika. Although these measures are the harshest to have been imposed on an EU Member State, the Greek people are by and large accepting the situation with fortitude in the hope of better times ahead.
If no immediate financial support is given, the country will fall apart politically. It is therefore necessary to provide a clear financial reward for the measures recently voted in Parliament.
In view of this:
Will the EU will pay the next instalment to Greece immediately after adoption of the new package of measures?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The Greek Parliament passed through several steps the new package of fiscal measures included in the Medium-Term Fiscal Strategy in the week of 7-11 November 2012. 
Following the completion of the prior actions the Eurogroup discussed several possible measures to ensure the sustainability of the Greek public debt. 
The Eurogroup agreed on the EFSF disbursement on 13 December 2012, following the completion of the relevant national procedures for the approval of the disbursement and the successful outcome of the debt buy-back operation carried out by the Greek authorities.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010115/12
a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) y Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — progresos alcanzados en materia de cultura en las acciones exteriores de la UE
El 31 de marzo de 2011, el Parlamento aprobó una Resolución sobre las dimensiones culturales de las acciones exteriores de la UE (311), en la que se afirmaba que la cultura debe ser un elemento vital y horizontalmente integrado en el espectro amplio de las políticas que constituyen las políticas exteriores de la UE.






1.


¿Puede la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante informar al Parlamento y hacer públicas las medidas de seguimiento que ha adoptado para integrar racionalmente la cultura en las acciones exteriores de la UE? ¿Cuál es la respuesta de la VP/AR al llamamiento que la Resolución hace a la Comisión para que proponga y adopte un Libro Verde sobre una estrategia en materia de cultura y cooperación en las acciones exteriores de la UE, seguido de una comunicación?










2.


¿Puede la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante indicar y desarrollar qué medidas ha adoptado el Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior para coordinar el despliegue estratégico de los aspectos culturales de sus políticas exteriores? En particular, ¿puede indicar si las representaciones de la UE cuentan con personal encargado específicamente de la coordinación de los programas culturales?










3.


¿Qué medidas se han adoptado para eliminar obstáculos mediante la creación de un sistema específico de visados de corta duración para artistas y creadores, siguiendo el ejemplo del programa de visados científicos que se aplica desde 2005?










4.


¿Qué medidas tiene pensado adoptar la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante para divulgar información (mediante, por ejemplo, un sitio web accesible en todo el mundo) sobre los programas de ayuda de la UE con un componente cultural en el ámbito de las relaciones exteriores así como sobre la planificación y organización de actos culturales?










5.


¿Qué progresos se han alcanzado en la elaboración de una estrategia coherente de protección y promoción del patrimonio cultural y natural? ¿Cómo se utilizará el impulso generado por la creación del programa Europa Creativa para la inclusión de la cultura en las acciones exteriores de la UE?










6.


¿Se ha 




creado un grupo de trabajo interinstitucional sobre la cultura en las relaciones exteriores de la UE con el fin de desarrollar y ampliar la coordinación, la racionalización, la estrategia y el intercambio de buenas prácticas?
Respuesta de la Sra. Vassiliou en nombre de la Comisión
(31 de enero de 2013)
La Comisión estima que la cultura es un elemento esencial de las relaciones exteriores de la UE. En marzo de 2012, un grupo de expertos nacionales se reunió para reflexionar sobre un planteamiento estratégico de la cultura en las relaciones exteriores de la UE, tomando a China como caso de prueba. El informe del grupo, que se finalizó en noviembre de 2012, se está debatiendo con los Estados miembros. La ejecución de la acción preparatoria «Cultura en las relaciones exteriores», aprobada por el Parlamento Europeo, se pondrá en marcha a principios de 2013. Se está preparando una página web «La cultura en las relaciones exteriores» para mostrar las actividades en el ámbito de la diplomacia cultural (312).
La propuesta de la Comisión para Europa Creativa también prevé reforzar la cooperación cultural más allá de la UE, en particular con los países de la política europea de vecindad. 
En la mayoría de las delegaciones de la UE, al menos una persona se ocupa de asuntos culturales, en materia de diplomacia cultural o de prioridades de desarrollo. En el marco del Instrumento IPI+ (cooperación con los países industrializados), está prevista una iniciativa de diplomacia pública para Asia. En China, la delegación de la UE tiene previsto crear una ciberplataforma para recopilar información sobre la UE, incluida la cultura. 
Por lo que se refiere a la movilidad de los artistas y los profesionales de la cultura, el Código sobre visados (313) ha reforzado la aplicación armonizada de las normas comunes sobre visados en beneficio de todas las categorías de solicitantes, incluidos los artistas. La Comisión tiene intención de presentar una propuesta de revisión en 2013. Sin embargo, por el momento no está previsto un régimen específico de visados para artistas.
La Comisión concede gran importancia al patrimonio cultural. Si bien este es fundamentalmente responsabilidad nacional, los grupos de expertos están trabajando sobre la movilidad de bienes culturales entre los museos, la digitalización o la lucha contra el tráfico ilícito.
(České znění)
Otázka k písemnému zodpovězení E-010115/12
Komisi (Místopředsedkyně Komise / Vysoká představitelka)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) a Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7. listopadu 2012)

Předmět: Místopředsedkyně Komise / Vysoká představitelka – pokrok v oblasti kultury v rámci vnější činnosti EU 
Dne 31. března 2011 přijal Parlament usnesení o kulturních dimenzích vnější činnosti Unie (314) s tím, že kultura by měla být nepostradatelným a horizontálně spojujícím prvkem v širokém spektru vnějších politik, které tvoří zahraniční a bezpečnostní politiku EU. 






1.


Může místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoká představitelka informovat Parlament a uveřejnit zprávu o navazujících opatřeních, jež podnikla, aby byla kultura efektivně začleněna do oblasti vnějších činností EU? Jak bude místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoká představitelka reagovat na výzvu obsaženou v tomto usnesení, aby Komise vypracovala zelenou knihu o strategii pro kulturu a kulturní spolupráci ve vnějších činnostech EU a poté vydala sdělení? 










2.


Může místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoká představitelka uvést, jaké kroky byly ze strany ESVČ učiněny, aby byla v rámci vnějších politik zajištěna koordinace strategického využívání kulturních aspektů? Může se vyjádřit především k otázce, zda jsou v rámci zastoupení EU k dispozici úředníci pověřeni zvláštním úkolem koordinace kulturních programů? 










3.


Jaké byly učiněny kroky pro odstranění překážek pomocí specifického systému víz pro krátkodobé pobyty pro umělce a tvůrce, po vzoru dosavadního programu vědeckých víz, který se uskutečňuje od roku 2005? 










4.


Co hodlá místopředsedkyně Komise / vysoká představitelka podniknout pro zajištění poskytování informací (například prostřednictvím globálně přístupných webových stránek) o existujících podpůrných programech EU v oblasti vnějších vztahů, které zahrnují kulturní aspekt, a o plánování a organizaci kulturních akcí? 










5.


Jakého pokroku bylo dosaženo pro vytvoření koherentní strategie na ochranu a podporu kulturního a přírodního dědictví? Jakým způsobem hodlá využít zavedení programu Kreativní Evropa a začlenit kulturní aspekt do vnějších činností EU? 










6.


Byla pro oblast kultury v rámci vnějších činností EU zřízena interinstitucionální pracovní skupina, který by rozvíjela a rozšiřovala koordinaci, efektivnost, strategie a sdílení osvědčených postupů? 




Odpověď komisařky Vassiliou jménem Komise
(31. ledna 2013)
Komise se domnívá, že kultura je zásadním prvkem vnějších vztahů EU. V březnu 2012 byla svolána skupina odborníků z členských států, aby diskutovala o strategickém přístupu ke kultuře v rámci vnějších vztahů EU, přičemž jako modelový případ byla vybrána Čína. Zpráva této skupiny byla dokončena v listopadu 2012 a nyní je projednávána s členskými státy. Provádění přípravné akce „Kultura ve vnějších vztazích“, kterou schválil Evropský parlament, bude spuštěno začátkem roku 2013. Připravuje se internetová prezentace akce „Kultura ve vnějších vztazích“ o činnostech v oblasti kulturní diplomacie (315).
V návrhu programu „Kreativní Evropa“, který vypracovala Komise, se také počítá s posílením kulturní spolupráce se zeměmi mimo EU, zejména se zeměmi evropské politiky sousedství. 
Ve většině delegací EU je nejméně jedna osoba, která se zabývá kulturními záležitostmi, pokud jde o kulturní diplomacii nebo priority kulturního rozvoje. V rámci nástroje ICI+ (spolupráce s průmyslovými zeměmi) se plánuje iniciativa veřejné diplomacie pro Asii. V Číně plánuje delegace EU zřídit kybernetickou platformu pro shromažďování informací o EU, včetně oblasti kultury. 
Pokud jde o mobilitu umělců a odborníků z kulturního odvětví, zlepšil vízový kodex (316) harmonizované uplatňování společných vízových předpisů ve prospěch všech kategorií žadatelů, včetně umělců. Komise hodlá v roce 2013 předložit návrh na jeho revizi. O zvláštním vízovém režimu pro umělce se však zatím neuvažuje.
Komise přikládá velký význam kulturnímu dědictví. Jelikož toto spadá v první řadě do odpovědnosti jednotlivých států, skupiny odborníků se zabývají mobilitou kulturních statků mezi muzei, digitalizací či bojem proti nedovolenému obchodování.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-010115/12
til Kommissionen (Næstformand / Højtstående repræsentant)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) og Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7. november 2012)

Om: VP/HR — Fremskridt på kulturområdet i forbindelse med EU's eksterne aktioner
Den 31. marts 2011 vedtog Parlamentet en beslutning om de kulturelle dimensioner af EU's optræden udadtil, hvori det fastslås, at kultur bør være et afgørende og horisontalt integreret element blandt det brede spektrum af eksterne politikker, der udgør EU's udenrigspolitik. 






1.


Kan næstformanden/den højtstående repræsentant informere Parlamentet og fremlægge en status over de opfølgningsforanstaltninger, der er truffet med henblik på at strømline og integrere kulturen i EU's eksterne aktioner? Hvad er næstformandens/den højtstående repræsentants svar på den anmodning, der i beslutningen blev rettet til Kommissionen om en grønbog om en strategi for kultur og kultursamarbejde i EU's eksterne aktioner i 2011 efterfulgt af en meddelelse?










2.


Kan næstformanden/den højtstående repræsentant fremlægge nærmere oplysninger om, hvilke skridt der er taget af EU-Udenrigstjenesten med henblik på koordinering og strategisk anvendelse af kulturelle aspekter i politikken udadtil? Kan næstformanden/den højtstående repræsentant oplyse, om der er tjenestemænd ved EU-repræsentationerne, der har det som deres særlige opgave at koordinere kulturprogrammer?










3.


Hvilke skridt er der taget for at fjerne forhindringer ved at indføre særlige visa for kortvarige ophold til kunstnere og skabere efter de retningslinjer, der er anvendt i forbindelse med det videnskabsvisum, der har været i kraft siden 2005?










4.


Hvilke foranstaltninger agter næstformanden/den højtstående repræsentant at træffe for at informere om eksisterende EU-støtteprogrammer inden for det eksterne område, der har et kulturelt aspekt, samt om planlægningen og tilrettelæggelsen af kulturelle arrangementer (f.eks. via en offentligt tilgængelig webside)?










5.


Hvilke fremskridt er der gjort med henblik på at skabe en sammenhængende strategi for beskyttelse og fremme af kultur‐ og naturarven? 




Hvordan vil næstformanden/den højtstående repræsentant udnytte programmet »Et kreativt Europa« til at inddrage kulturen i EU's eksterne aktioner?






6.


Er der blevet oprettet en interinstitutionel taskforce for kultur i forbindelse med EU's forbindelser udadtil med henblik på at udvikle og udvide koordinering, streamlining, strategier og udveksling af bedste praksis?




Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Androulla Vassiliou
(31. januar 2013)
Kommissionen ser kulturen som et afgørende element i EU's eksterne forbindelser. I marts 2012 sammensatte man en gruppe af nationale eksperter, som skulle drøfte en strategisk tilgang til kultur i EU's eksterne forbindelser, idet man tog udgangspunkt i Kina som eksempel. Gruppens rapport lå klar i november 2012 og drøftes nu med medlemsstaterne. Gennemførelsen af den forberedende foranstaltning »Kulturen i de eksterne forbindelser«, som Europa-Parlamentet har vedtaget, vil blive iværksat i starten af 2013. Et »Kulturen i de eksterne forbindelser«-webudstillingsvindue om aktiviteter på området kulturelt diplomati er under udarbejdelse (317).
Kommissionens forslag vedrørende »Et Kreativt Europa« har også til hensigt at styrke det kulturelle samarbejde ud over EU's grænser, navnlig med de lande, der er omfattet af EU's naboskabspolitik. 
I de fleste af EU's delegationer beskæftiger mindst én person sig med det kulturelle område for så vidt angår kulturelt diplomati eller udviklingsprioriteringer. Der er inden for rammerne af ICI+-instrumentet (samarbejde med industrialiserede lande) planlagt et initiativ vedrørende offentligt diplomati for Asien. I Kina agter EU-delegationen at oprette en cyberplatform til indsamling af oplysninger om EU, herunder kultur. 
Med hensyn til mobiliteten for kunstnere og kulturarbejdere har visumkodeksen (318) øget den harmoniserede anvendelse af de fælles visumregler til gavn for alle kategorier af ansøgere, herunder også kunstnere. Kommissionen agter at fremsætte et forslag til ændring af kodeksen i 2013. Der er dog ikke p.t. planer om at indføre en særlig visumordning for kunstnere.
Kommissionen lægger stor vægt på kulturarven. Ansvaret for dette område ligger primært hos de enkelte medlemsstater, men der arbejdes i ekspertgrupper med mobilitet for kulturgoder mellem museer, digitalisering og bekæmpelse af ulovlig handel.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010115/12
an die Kommission
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) und Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin — Auswärtige Politik der EU: Fortschritte im Bereich der Kultur 
Das Europäische Parlament hat am 31. März 2011 eine Entschließung zur kulturellen Dimension der Außenpolitik der Union (319) angenommen, in der hervorgehoben wird, dass Kultur ein wesentlicher horizontal integrierter Bestandteil des breiten Spektrums der außenpolitischen Maßnahmen sein sollte, die die Außen‐ und Sicherheitspolitik der EU ausmachen. 






1.


Kann die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin das Parlament über die Folgemaßnahmen informieren, die es ergriffen hat, um die Kultur als Querschnittsaufgabe in die EU-Außenpolitik einzubeziehen und effizienter zu gestalten, und diese Maßnahmen veröffentlichen? Welche Reaktion ist auf den Aufruf zu einem Grünbuch über eine Strategie für die Kultur und kulturelle Zusammenarbeit in der EU-Außenpolitik, an das sich eine Mitteilung anschließen soll, beabsichtigt?










2.


Kann die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin aufzeigen, welche Schritte der EAD unternommen hat, um die strategische Entwicklung kultureller Aspekte in seiner auswärtigen Politik zu koordinieren, und diese Schritte näher erläutern? Dies insbesondere im Hinblick auf die Frage, ob die EU-Vertretungen über Mitarbeiter verfügen, die Ansprechpartner für Kulturprogramme sind.










3.


Welche Schritte wurden unternommen, um spezifische kurzfristige Visa für Künstler und Kulturschaffenden nach dem Vorbild des bereits existierenden Programms für Wissenschaftlervisa, das seit 2005 in Kraft ist, zur Beseitigung von Hindernissen einzuführen?










4.


Welche Maßnahmen beabsichtigt die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin, um Informationen (beispielsweise auf einer allgemein zugänglichen Website) zu den bestehenden EU-Förderprogrammen mit kulturellem Bezug im Bereich der Außenbeziehungen sowie zur Planung und Organisation kultureller Veranstaltungen zur Verfügung zu stellen?










5.


Welche Entwicklungen sind bei der Auflegung einer kohärenten Strategie für den Schutz und die Förderung des Kultur‐ und Naturerbes zu verzeichnen? Und wie wird sie den Schwung nutzen, in dem das Kreative Europa eingerichtet wird, um den Bereich der Kultur in die EU-Außenpolitik einzugliedern?










6.


Wurde im Rahmen der EU-Außenbeziehungen eine interinstitutionelle Taskforce für Kultur eingesetzt, um die Koordinierung, eine rationellere Gestaltung, Strategien und den Austausch bewährter Praktiken zu entwickeln und auszuweiten?




Antwort von Frau Vassiliou im Namen der Kommission
(31. Januar 2013)
Die Kommission betrachtet Kultur als ein zentrales Element der EU-Außenbeziehungen. Im März 2012 wurde eine Gruppe nationaler Sachverständiger einberufen, um über einen strategischen Ansatz zum Thema Kultur in den Außenbeziehungen der EU auszuarbeiten. China fungierte hierbei als Testfall. Der Bericht der Gruppe wurde im November 2012 fertiggestellt und wird derzeit mit den Mitgliedstaaten erörtert. Mit der Durchführung der vorbereitenden Maßnahme „Kultur und Außenbeziehungen“, die das Europäische Parlament verabschiedet hat, wird Anfang 2013 begonnen. Eine „Kultur und Außenbeziehungen“-Internetpräsenz zu Kulturdiplomatieaktivitäten ist in Vorbereitung (320).
Der Vorschlag der Kommission für das Programm „Kreatives Europa“ sieht ferner die Verstärkung der kulturellen Zusammenarbeit über die Grenzen der EU hinaus vor, insbesondere mit den Ländern der Europäischen Nachbarschaftspolitik. 
In den meisten EU-Delegationen befasst sich mindestens eine Person mit kulturellen Angelegenheiten, was die kulturelle Diplomatie oder Entwicklungsprioritäten anbelangt. Im Rahmen des Instruments ICI+ (Zusammenarbeit mit industrialisierten Ländern) ist eine Public-Diplomacy-Initiative für Asien angedacht. In China plant die EU-Delegation die Einrichtung eines Cyberforums mit Informationen zur EU, auch zur Kultur. 
In Bezug auf die Mobilität von Künstlerinnen und Künstlern bzw. Kulturschaffenden stärkte der Visakodex (321) die einheitliche Anwendung der gemeinsamen Vorschriften über Visa zum Nutzen aller Kategorien von Antragstellern, einschließlich der Künstler. Die Kommission beabsichtigt, einen Vorschlag zur Überarbeitung dieses Kodex im Jahr 2013 vorzulegen. Allerdings ist derzeit eine spezielle Visumregelung für Künstlerinnen und Künstler nicht vorgesehen.
Die Kommission misst dem kulturellen Erbe eine große Bedeutung bei. Zwar sind in erster Linie die Mitgliedstaaten dafür zuständig, doch werden in Expertengruppen derzeit die Mobilität von Kulturgütern zwischen Museen, die Digitalisierung und die Bekämpfung des illegalen Handels thematisiert.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010115/12
à la Commission (Vice-Présidente / Haute Représentante)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) et Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7 novembre 2012)

Objet: VP/HR — Progrès accomplis en matière de culture dans les actions extérieures de l'Union
Le 31 mars 2011, le Parlement a adopté une résolution sur les dimensions culturelles des actions extérieures de l'UE (322), indiquant que la culture doit être un élément vital et faire l'objet d'une intégration horizontale dans le vaste éventail des politiques extérieures qui façonnent la politique étrangère et de sécurité de l'Union. 






1.


La Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante peut-elle informer le Parlement et publier un rapport sur les mesures de suivi qu'elle a prises pour rationaliser et intégrer la culture dans les actions extérieures de l'Union? Quelle est sa réponse à l'appel lancé à la Commission dans la résolution lui demandant de présenter un Livre vert sur la stratégie en matière de culture et de coopération culturelle dans les actions extérieures de l'Union, lequel devra être suivi d'une communication?










2.


La Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante peut-elle indiquer et expliquer les mesures prises par le SEAE pour coordonner le déploiement stratégique des aspects culturels dans ses politiques extérieures? En particulier, peut-elle préciser si les représentations de l'Union comptent des fonctionnaires expressément chargés de la coordination des programmes culturels?










3.


Quelles dispositions ont été adoptées pour supprimer les obstacles par la création d'un régime spécifique de visas de court séjour pour les artistes et les créateurs, à l'instar du programme de visa scientifique en vigueur depuis 2005?










4.


Quelles mesures la Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante compte-t-elle prendre pour fournir des informations (à l'aide, par exemple, d'un site Internet accessible partout dans le monde) sur les programmes européens de soutien à dimension culturelle actuellement mis en œuvre dans les relations extérieures de l'Union européenne ainsi que sur la programmation et l'organisation de manifestations culturelles?










5.


Quels progrès ont été accomplis dans l'établissement d'une stratégie cohérente de protection et de promotion du patrimoine culturel et naturel? Comment l'impulsion créée par l'établissement du programme Europe créative sera-t-elle mise à profit pour inclure la culture dans les actions extérieures de l'Union?










6.


Un groupe de travail interinstitutionnel pour la culture dans le cadre des relations extérieures de l'Union a-t-il été créé en vue de développer et d'élargir la coordination, la rationalisation, les stratégies et le partage des meilleures pratiques?




Réponse donnée par Mme Vassiliou au nom de la Commission
(31 janvier 2013)
La Commission voit dans la culture un élément vital des relations extérieures de l'Union. Un groupe d'experts nationaux a été convoqué en mars 2012 afin de réfléchir à la stratégie à retenir pour traiter la culture dans les relations extérieures de l'UE, en prenant la Chine comme cas test. Ce groupe a mis la dernière main à son rapport en novembre 2012, lequel est actuellement débattu avec les États membres. L'action préparatoire «La culture dans les relations extérieures», votée par le Parlement européen, sera lancée au début de l'année 2013. Un site vitrine «La culture dans les relations extérieures» au sujet des activités diplomatiques dans le domaine de la culture est en cours de préparation (323).
Dans sa proposition en vue d'une «Europe créative», la Commission prévoit également de renforcer la coopération culturelle hors UE, en particulier avec les pays couverts par la politique européenne de voisinage. 
La plupart des délégations de l'UE confient la gestion de la culture — diplomatie culturelle ou priorités en matière de développement — à au moins une personne. Une initiative de diplomatie publique est prévue pour l'Asie au titre de l'instrument IPI+ (coopération avec les pays industrialisés). La délégation de l'UE présente en Chine envisage de créer une cyber-plateforme de collecte d'informations sur l'UE, y compris dans le domaine de la culture. 
Pour ce qui est de la mobilité des artistes et des professionnels de la culture, le code des visas (324) a permis une application plus uniforme des règles communes relatives aux visas pour toutes les catégories de demandeurs, y compris les artistes. La Commission a l'intention de soumettre, en 2013, une proposition de révision dudit code. Cependant, aucun régime de visas spécifique n'est prévu pour les artistes à l'heure actuelle.
La Commission attache une grande importance au patrimoine culturel. Alors qu'il s'agit principalement d'une compétence nationale, des groupes d'experts réfléchissent à la mobilité des biens culturels entre les musées, à la numérisation, ou encore à la lutte contre le trafic illicite.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010115/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) e Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Progressi in materia di cultura nelle azioni esterne dell'UE
Il 31 marzo 2011, il Parlamento europeo ha adottato una risoluzione sulla dimensione culturale delle azioni esterne dell'Unione (325), affermando che la cultura dovrebbe essere un elemento vitale e trasversalmente integrato nell'ampio spettro delle politiche esterne che compongono la politica estera e la politica di sicurezza dell'Unione europea. 






1.


Può il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante informare il Parlamento e pubblicare un resoconto sulle misure di follow-up adottate per razionalizzare e integrare la cultura nelle azioni esterne dell'UE? In che modo intende il VP/AR rispondere all'invito rivolto alla Commissione, formulato nella risoluzione, di adottare un Libro verde su una strategia per la cultura e la cooperazione culturale nell'ambito delle azioni esterne dell'Unione europea, cui dovrebbe far seguito una comunicazione?










2.


Può il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante indicare ed esplicitare quali misure sono state adottate dal SEAE per coordinare l'attuazione strategica degli aspetti culturali nelle sue politiche esterne? In particolare, può il VP/AR indicare se presso le rappresentanze dell'UE sono presenti funzionari specificatamente incaricati del coordinamento dei programmi culturali?










3.


Quali azioni sono state intraprese per rimuovere gli ostacoli tramite l'istituzione di regimi di visto specifici e a breve termine per artisti e creatori, secondo il modello dell'attuale programma di visti scientifici in vigore dal 2005?










4.


Quali misure intende adottare il Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante per fornire informazioni (ad esempio tramite un sito web accessibile a livello globale) sugli attuali programmi di sostegno dell'Unione nell'ambito delle relazioni esterne con una componente culturale, nonché sulla programmazione e l'organizzazione di eventi culturali?










5.


Quali progressi sono stati compiuti nell'istituzione di una strategia coerente per la protezione e la promozione del patrimonio culturale e naturale? In che modo verrà utilizzato lo slancio derivante dall'istituzione del programma Europa creativa per includere la cultura nelle azioni esterne dell'Unione europea?










6.


È stata istituita una task force interistituzionale per la cultura nell'ambito delle relazioni esterne dell'Unione europea al fine di sviluppare e ampliare il coordinamento, la razionalizzazione, le strategie e la condivisione delle buone pratiche?




Risposta di Androulla Vassiliou a nome della Commissione
(31 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione ritiene che la cultura sia un elemento vitale delle relazioni esterne dell'UE. Nel marzo 2012 è stato convocato un gruppo di esperti nazionali per riflettere su un approccio strategico alla cultura nell'ambito delle relazioni esterne dell'UE, prendendo la Cina come caso modello. La relazione del gruppo è stata completata nel novembre 2012 ed è ora in corso di discussione con gli Stati membri. L'implementazione dell'azione preparatoria «Cultura nelle relazioni esterne», votata dal Parlamento europeo, sarà avviata all'inizio del 2013. È in preparazione un sito web dedicato «Cultura nelle relazioni esterne» che tratterà delle attività condotte nel campo delle diplomazia culturale (326).
La proposta della Commissione in merito al programma «Europa creativa» contempla anche il rafforzamento della cooperazione culturale fuori dell'UE, in particolare con i paesi oggetto della politica di vicinato europea.
Nella maggior parte delle delegazioni dell'UE, almeno una persona è incaricata di questioni culturali con attribuzioni in tema di diplomazia culturale o di priorità di sviluppo. Nell'ambito dello strumento ICI+ (cooperazione con i paesi industrializzati) è prevista un'iniziativa di diplomazia pubblica per l'Asia. In Cina la delegazione UE progetta di creare una ciber-piattaforma in cui riunire informazioni sull'UE, comprese quelle di ordine culturale.
Per quanto concerne la mobilità degli artisti e degli operatori culturali, il codice dei visti (327) ha promosso l'applicazione armonizzata delle regole comuni in materia di visti a vantaggio di tutte le categorie di richiedenti, compresi gli artisti. La Commissione intende presentare una proposta di revisione nel 2013. Per il momento però non è contemplato un regime specifico di visti per gli artisti.
La Commissione attribuisce una grande importanza al patrimonio culturale. Anche se esso rientra per l'essenziale nelle responsabilità nazionali, gruppi di esperti stanno lavorando sulla mobilità dei beni culturali tra musei, la digitalizzazione o la lotta contro il traffico illecito.
(Magyar változat)
Írásbeli választ igénylő kérdés E-010115/12
a Bizottság számára (Alelnök/Főképviselő)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Bagó Zoltán (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) és Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(2012. november 7.)

Tárgy: VP/HR – az EU külső fellépéseiben a kultúra terén elért eredmények
A Parlament 2011. március 31-én elfogadott egy, az EU külső fellépéseinek kulturális dimenzióiról szóló határozatot (328), amely szerint a kultúrának elengedhetetlen és horizontálisan integrált elemnek kell lennie az EU kül‐ és biztonságpolitikáját alkotó külpolitikák széles spektrumában. 






1.


Tudja-e az alelnök/főképviselő tájékoztatni a Parlamentet, és közzé tudna-e tenni beszámolót a kultúra által az EU külső fellépéseiben betöltött szerep érvényesítésére és ésszerűsítésére irányuló eddigi nyomon követési intézkedésekről? Mi az alelnök/főképviselő válasza arra a Bizottsághoz intézett felhívásra, amely szerint a Bizottság javasoljon és fogadjon el egy zöld könyvet az EU külső fellépései során megvalósítandó kulturális és kulturális együttműködési stratégiáról, ezt követően pedig adjon ki közleményt?










2.


Meg tudja-e jelölni és részletezni tudja-e az alelnök/főképviselő, hogy az Európai Külügyi Szolgálat mely, a külpolitikájában megvalósuló kulturális szempontok stratégiai kiaknázására irányuló lépéseket tett eddig? Különösképpen ismertetné-e, hogy vannak-e olyan tisztviselők az Európai Unió képviseleteiben, akiknek kifejezetten a kulturális programok koordinálása a feladata?










3.


Milyen lépéseket tettek eddig annak érdekében, hogy a 2005 óta végrehajtás alatt álló 




„tudományos vízum” program mintájára a művészek és alkotók számára konkrét, rövid távú tartózkodásra jogosító vízum előtt megszüntessék az akadályokat?






4.


Milyen lépéseket tervez tenni az alelnök/főképviselő annak érdekében, hogy tájékoztatást nyújtson (például egy világszerte hozzáférhető honlap segítségével) a külkapcsolatok területén a kulturális tartalommal rendelkező, meglévő uniós támogatási programokról, valamint kulturális események tervezéséről és szervezéséről?










5.


Milyen haladást értek el a kulturális és természeti örökség védelmére és előmozdítására irányuló koherens stratégia létrehozásában? Hogyan fogja használni a Kreatív Európa program létrehozása során kialakult lendületet, hogy belefoglalja a kultúrát az Unió külső fellépéseibe?










6.


Létrehozott-e már az EU külkapcsolatainak vonatkozásában egy intézményközi munkacsoportot annak érdekében, hogy fejlessze és kiszélesítse a koordinációt, az ésszerűsítést, a stratégiákat, valamint a bevált gyakorlatok megosztását?




Andrula Vasziliu válasza a Bizottság nevében 
(2013. január 31.)
A Bizottság az EU külkapcsolatainak lényeges elemeként tekint a kultúrára. 2012 márciusában nemzeti szakértők egy csoportja gyűlt össze, hogy az EU külkapcsolataiban stratégiai megközelítést dolgozzanak ki a kultúrára vonatkozóan, Kínát véve alapul. A csoport jelentését 2012 novemberében véglegesítették, az egyeztetés a tagállamokkal jelenleg is folyik. Az Európai Parlament által megszavazott „Kultúra a külkapcsolatokban” elnevezésű előkészítő tevékenység végrehajtását 2013 elejére tervezik. Jelenleg előkészítés alatt áll a kulturális diplomáciai tevékenységeket bemutató, „Kultúra a külkapcsolatokban” információs honlap (329).
A Bizottságnak a Kreatív Európáért programra irányuló javaslata az EU-n kívüli, különösen az európai szomszédságpolitika országaival való kulturális együttműködést is erősíteni szándékozza.
A legtöbb EU-kirendeltségen legalább egy ember foglalkozik kulturális ügyekkel, tekintettel a kulturális diplomáciára vagy a fejlesztési prioritásokra. Az ICI+ eszköz (iparosodott országokkal való együttműködés) keretében nyilvános diplomácia kezdeményezését tervezik Ázsiával. Kínában az EU-kirendeltség egy olyan online platform felállítását tervezi, amelyen az EU-ról – többek között a kultúráról – lehet információhoz jutni.
Tekintettel a művészek és a kulturális ágazatban dolgozó szakemberek mobilitására, a vízumkódex (330) a kérelmezők valamennyi kategóriájára vonatkozóan, a művészeket is beleértve, javította a közös vízumszabályok harmonizált alkalmazását. A Bizottság 2013-ban a vízumkódex módosítására irányuló javaslatot tervez benyújtani. Egyelőre azonban egy, a művészekre vonatkozó konkrét vízumszabályozás kidolgozását nem tervezik.
A Bizottság nagy fontosságot tulajdonít a kulturális örökségnek. Jóllehet ez elsősorban nemzeti feladat, szakértői csoportok a múzeumok közötti kulturális áruk mobilitásán és a digitalizáláson dolgoznak, valamint a tiltott kereskedelem ellen küzdenek.
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010115/12
aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter / Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) en Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7 november 2012)

Betreft: VP/HR — Vooruitgang op het gebied van cultuur binnen het externe optreden van de EU
Op 31 maart 2011 heeft het Europees Parlement een resolutie aangenomen over de culturele dimensies van het externe optreden van de EU (331), waarin werd benadrukt dat cultuur moet worden aangemerkt als essentieel onderdeel van en moet worden geïntegreerd in alle externe beleidsmaatregelen die het buitenlands‐ en veiligheidsbeleid van de EU vormen. 






1.


Kan de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger het Parlement op de hoogte brengen van de vervolgmaatregelen die zij sindsdien heeft genomen om cultuur te integreren en een prominentere plaats te geven in het externe optreden van de EU, en kan zij deze maatregelen publiceren? Wat is haar reactie op het verzoek aan de Commissie dat in de resolutie wordt gedaan om een groenboek aan te nemen over een strategie voor cultuur en culturele samenwerking in het externe optreden van de EU, gevolgd door een mededeling?










2.


Kan de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger aangeven en toelichten welke maatregelen de EDEO heeft genomen om de strategische integratie van culturele aspecten in zijn externe optreden te coördineren? Kan de EDEO met name aangeven of in de vertegenwoordigingen van de EU personen zijn aangewezen die specifiek verantwoordelijk zijn voor de coördinatie van culturele programma's?










3.


Welke maatregelen zijn genomen om belemmeringen uit de weg te ruimen door specifieke regelingen voor kortdurende visa op te zetten voor artiesten en kunstenaars, naar het voorbeeld van het Programma voor visa voor wetenschappers, dat sinds 2005 bestaat?










4.


Welke stappen wil de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger nemen om informatie te verstrekken (bijvoorbeeld op een algemeen toegankelijke website) over bestaande steunprogramma's van de EU op het gebied van externe betrekkingen die een culturele component hebben, alsmede over de planning en organisatie van culturele evenementen?










5.


Welke vooruitgang is geboekt met de ontwikkeling van een coherente strategie voor de bescherming en bevordering van cultureel en natuurlijk erfgoed? Hoe zal worden aangehaakt bij de oprichting van Creatief Europa om cultuur te integreren in het externe optreden van de EU?










6.


Is een interinstitutionele task force voor cultuur in het kader van de externe betrekkingen van de EU opgericht, met als doel om de coördinatie, stroomlijning, strategieën en het delen van optimale werkwijzen te verbeteren en te verbreden?




Antwoord van mevrouw Vassiliou namens de Commissie
(31 januari 2013)
De Commissie beschouwt cultuur als een wezenlijk element van de externe betrekkingen van de EU. In maart 2012 is een groep van nationale deskundigen bijeengeroepen om zich te bezinnen op een strategische benadering inzake cultuur in de externe betrekkingen van de EU, met China als testcase. Het verslag van de groep is afgerond in november 2012, en wordt momenteel besproken met de lidstaten. De voorbereidende actie „Cultuur in de externe betrekkingen” die door het Europees Parlement is goedgekeurd, zal begin 2013 van start gaan. Een webshowcase „Culture in External Relations” over culturele diplomatie is eveneens in voorbereiding (332).
Het voorstel van de Commissie voor Creatief Europa is eveneens gericht op het versterken van de culturele samenwerking buiten de EU, met name met de landen van het Europees nabuurschapsbeleid.
In de meeste EU-delegaties is ten minste één persoon belast met culturele zaken, voor wat betreft culturele diplomatie of ontwikkelingsproriteiten. In het kader van het ICI+-instrument (samenwerking met geïndustrialiseerde landen) is een publieksdiplomatie-initiatief voor Azië gepland. De EU-delegatie in China is van plan een cyberplatform op te zetten voor het verzamelen van informatie over de EU, ook over cultuur. 
Wat de mobiliteit van artiesten en culturele professionals betreft, heeft de Visumcode (333) de geharmoniseerde toepassing bevorderd van de gemeenschappelijke regels inzake visa voor alle aanvragers, inclusief artiesten. De Commissie is voornemens om in 2013 een voorstel voor herziening in te dienen. Een specifieke visumregeling voor artiesten is momenteel echter niet gepland.
De Commissie hecht groot belang aan cultureel erfgoed. Dit is weliswaar vooral een nationale verantwoordelijkheid, maar er zijn werkgroepen van deskundigen op EU-niveau die zich bezig houden met de mobiliteit van cultuurgoederen tussen musea, digitalisering en de bestrijding van illegale handel.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-010115/12
adresată Comisiei (Vicepreședintelui/Înaltului Reprezentant)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) şi Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: VP/HR — Progrese realizate în domeniul culturii în cadrul acțiunilor externe ale UE
La 31 martie 2011, Parlamentul European a adoptat o rezoluție referitoare la dimensiunile culturale ale acțiunilor externe ale UE (334), în care se subliniază caracterul transversal și importanța pe care ar trebui să le aibă cultura în cadrul tuturor politicilor externe cuprinse în politicile externe și de securitate ale UE. 






1.


Este în măsură Vicepreședintele/Înaltul Reprezentant să informeze Parlamentul și să publice un raport cu privire la măsurile ulterioare adoptate în vederea raționalizării și integrării culturii în acțiunile externe ale UE? Care este răspunsul VP/ÎR la invitația adresată Comisiei, cuprinsă în rezoluție, de a adopta o carte verde referitoare la o strategie privind cultura și cooperarea culturală în cadrul acțiunilor externe ale UE, care să fie urmată de o comunicare?










2.


Este în măsură Vicepreședintele/Înaltul Reprezentant să precizeze și să prezinte detalii asupra măsurilor adoptate de către SEAE pentru coordonarea desfășurării strategice a aspectelor culturale în politicile sale externe? În special, poate preciza dacă în reprezentanțele UE există funcționari însărcinați în mod specific cu coordonarea programelor culturale?










3.


Ce măsuri au fost adoptate în vederea înlăturării obstacolelor prin instituirea unor regimuri de viză specifice de scurtă durată pentru artiști și creatori, după modelul actualului program de vize științifice în vigoare din 2005?










4.


Ce măsuri intenționează să adopte Vicepreședintele/Înaltul Reprezentant pentru a prezenta informații (de exemplu, prin intermediul unui web site accesibil de oriunde din lume) cu privire la programele de sprijin ale UE în domeniul relațiilor externe care au o componentă culturală, precum și cu privire la planificarea și organizarea de evenimente culturale?










5.


Ce progrese s-au înregistrat în elaborarea unei strategii coerente pentru protejarea și promovarea patrimoniului cultural și natural? Cum se va folosi de impulsul dat de crearea Europei creative pentru a include cultura în acțiunile externe ale UE?










6.


A fost creat un grup operativ interinstituțional pentru cultură în contextul relațiilor externe ale UE, în vederea dezvoltării și extinderii coordonării, raționalizării, strategiilor și transmiterii bunelor practici?




Răspuns dat de dna Vassiliou  în numele Comisiei 
(31 ianuarie 2013)
Comisia consideră cultura drept un element vital în cadrul relațiilor externe ale UE. În martie 2012, a fost convocat un grup de experți naționali pentru a se gândi la o abordare strategică a culturii în cadrul relațiilor externe ale UE, luând China ca studiu de caz. Raportul grupului a fost finalizat în noiembrie 2012 și este în prezent discutat cu statele membre. Punerea în aplicare a acțiunii pregătitoare „Cultura în relațiile externe”, votată de Parlamentul European, va fi lansată la începutul anului 2013. Este în curs de elaborare un website „Cultura în relațiile externe” pe tema activităților diplomatice în domeniul culturii (335).
Propunerea Comisiei referitoare la programul „Europa creativă” prevede, de asemenea, consolidarea cooperării culturale dincolo de granițele UE, în special cu țările care fac obiectul politicii europene de vecinătate. 
În majoritatea delegațiilor UE, cel puțin o persoană are atribuții în domeniul culturii — diplomație culturală sau priorități de dezvoltare. Este avută în vedere o inițiativă de diplomație publică pentru Asia, în cadrul instrumentului ITI + (cooperare cu țările industrializate). În China, delegația UE intenționează să înființeze o platformă electronică cuprinzând informații despre UE, inclusiv informații culturale.
În ceea ce privește mobilitatea artiștilor și a profesioniștilor din domeniul cultural, Codul de vize a îmbunătățit aplicarea armonizată a normelor comune privind vizele, venind astfel în sprijinul tuturor categoriilor de solicitanți, inclusiv al artiștilor. Comisia intenționează să prezinte o propunere de revizuire a acestuia în 2013. Cu toate acestea, nu este prevăzut pentru moment un sistem aparte de vize pentru artiști.
Comisia acordă o importanță deosebită patrimoniului cultural. Pe de o parte, aceasta este în primul rând o responsabilitate națională. Pe de altă parte, grupuri de experți sunt implicate în activități legate de mobilitatea bunurilor culturale între muzee, de digitizare sau de lupta împotriva traficului ilicit.
(Suomenkielinen versio)
Kirjallisesti vastattava kysymys E-010115/12
komissiolle (Varapuheenjohtajalle / Korkealle edustajalle)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) ja Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7. marraskuuta 2012)

Aihe: VP/HR – Kulttuuriasioissa aikaansaatu edistys EU:n ulkoisessa toiminnassa
Parlamentti antoi 31. maalikuuta 2011 päätöslauselman (336) EU:n ulkoisten toimien kulttuuriulottuvuudesta. Päätöslauselmassa todetaan, että kulttuuria tulisi edistää keskeisenä osatekijänä EU:n ulkosuhteissa, jotka muodostavat ulko‐ ja turvallisuuspolitiikan. 






1.


Voiko varapuheenjohtaja / korkea edustaja kertoa parlamentille jatkotoimista, jotka hän on toteuttanut kulttuurin virtaviivaistamiseksi ja huomioon ottamiseksi kaikessa EU:n ulkoisessa toiminnassa, ja julkaista toimista yhteenvedon? Mikä on varapuheenjohtajan / korkean edustajan vastaus päätöslauselmassa komissiolle esitettyyn vaatimukseen, joka koskee kulttuuristrategiaa ja kulttuuriyhteistyötä EU:n ulkoisessa toiminnassa koskevan vihreän kirjan laatimista ja sitä seuraavaa tiedonantoa?










2.


Voiko varapuheenjohtaja / korkea edustaja kertoa ja kommentoida, mihin toimenpiteisiin Euroopan ulkosuhdehallinto on ryhtynyt kulttuurinäkökohtien strategisen käytön koordinoimiseksi ulkoisissa toimissaan? Voiko vp/ke eritoten kertoa, onko EU:n edustoissa virkamiehiä, joiden tehtävänä on erityisesti kulttuuriohjelmien koordinointi?










3.


Tiedeviisumiohjelma on ollut voimassa vuodesta 2005 ja siinä on linjattu taiteilijoille ja muille kulttuurialan ammattilaisille tarkoitettu lyhytaikaisen oleskelun mahdollistava viisumi. Mihin toimiin on ryhdytty tämän järjestelmän tiellä olevien esteiden poistamiseksi?










4.


Mihin toimiin varapuheenjohtaja / korkea edustaja aikoo ryhtyä tarjotakseen tietoa nykyisistä EU:n ulkosuhteiden alan tukiohjelmista, joihin kuuluu kulttuurialan toimia, sekä kulttuuritapahtumien suunnittelusta ja järjestämisestä esimerkiksi maailmalaajuisesti käytettävissä olevan verkkosivun kautta?










5.


Miten kulttuuri‐ ja luonnonperinnön suojelemista ja edistämistä koskevan johdonmukaisen strategian laatimisessa on edistytty? Miten strategiassa hyödynnetään Luova Eurooppa ‐ohjelmaa kulttuurialan sisällyttämiseksi EU:n ulkoiseen toimintaan?










6.


Onko EU:n ulkosuhteiden yhteydessä perustettu toimielinten välinen kulttuurityöryhmä, jonka tehtävänä on kehittää ja laajentaa parhaiden käytänteiden koordinointia, virtaviivaistamista, strategioita ja jakamista?




Androulla Vassilioun komission puolesta antama vastaus
(31. tammikuuta 2013)
Komissio katsoo, että kulttuuri on EU:n ulkosuhteisiin olennaisesti kuuluva osatekijä. Maaliskuussa 2012 kutsuttiin koolle ryhmä kansallisia asiantuntijoita pohtimaan strategista lähestymistapaa kulttuuriin osana unionin ulkosuhteita. Testitapaukseksi otettiin Kiina. Ryhmän raportti valmistui marraskuussa 2012, ja siitä keskustellaan parhaillaan jäsenvaltioiden kanssa. Euroopan parlamentissa hyväksytyn valmistelutoimen ”Kulttuuri ulkosuhteissa” täytäntöönpano aloitetaan vuoden 2013 alussa. Tähän valmistelutoimeen liittyen on kehitteillä kulttuuridiplomatiaa käsittelevä internet-esitys. (337)

Myös Luovaa Eurooppaa koskevan komission ehdotuksen mukaan kulttuuriyhteistyötä olisi vahvistettava EU:n ulkopuolisten maiden, erityisesti Euroopan naapuruuspolitiikan maiden kanssa. 
Useimmissa EU:n edustustoissa työskentelee vähintään yksi kulttuuriasioista – kulttuuridiplomatiasta tai ensisijaisista kehittämistarpeista – vastaava henkilö. ICI+ ‐välineen (teollisuusmaiden kanssa tehtävä yhteistyö) yhteydessä suunnitellaan Aasiaa koskevaa julkisuusdiplomatia-aloitetta. EU:n Kiinassa sijaitsevan edustuston on tarkoitus luoda verkkopohjainen järjestelmä, johon kootaan tietoa EU:sta, kulttuuri mukaan lukien. 
Taiteilijoiden ja kulttuurialan ammattilaisten liikkuvuuden kannalta viisumisäännöstö (338) on parantanut yhteisten viisumisääntöjen yhdenmukaista soveltamista kaikkien hakijoiden, myös taiteilijoiden, eduksi. Komissio aikoo tehdä ehdotuksen säännöstön tarkistamiseksi vuonna 2013. Toistaiseksi ei ole kuitenkaan suunnitelmissa ottaa taiteilijoita varten käyttöön erityistä viisumijärjestelyä.
Komissio pitää kulttuuriperintöä erittäin tärkeänä. Vaikka tämä onkin ensisijaisesti jäsenvaltioiden vastuulle kuuluva ala, asiantuntijaryhmissä tehdään työtä kulttuuriesineiden liikkuvuuden lisäämiseksi museoiden välillä, digitoinnin edistämiseksi ja laittoman kaupan torjumiseksi.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010115/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Marietje Schaake (ALDE), Doris Pack (PPE), Hannu Takkula (ALDE), Morten Løkkegaard (ALDE), Marco Scurria (PPE), Seán Kelly (PPE), Olga Sehnalová (S&D), Claudiu Ciprian Tănăsescu (S&D), Santiago Fisas Ayxela (PPE), Zoltán Bagó (PPE), Bernd Posselt (PPE), Malika Benarab-Attou (Verts/ALE), Marie-Thérèse Sanchez-Schmid (PPE), Elisabeth Morin-Chartier (PPE), Hans-Peter Martin (NI) and Marek Henryk Migalski (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Progress made on culture in the EU's external actions
On 31 March 2011, Parliament adopted a resolution on the cultural dimensions of the Union’s external actions (339), stating that culture should be a vital and horizontally integrated element among the broad spectrum of external policies which make up the EU’s foreign and security policies. 






1.


Can the Vice-President/High Representative inform Parliament and publish an account of the follow-up measures she has taken to streamline and mainstream culture in the EU’s external actions? What is the VP/HR’s response to the call on the Commission, made in the resolution, for a Green Paper on a strategy on culture and cultural cooperation in the EU’s external actions, to be followed by a communication?










2.


Can the Vice-President/High Representative indicate and elaborate on which steps have been taken by the EEAS to coordinate the strategic deployment of cultural aspects in its external policies? In particular, can it indicate whether there are officials present in the EU representations who are specifically tasked with coordinating cultural programmes?










3.


What steps have been taken to remove obstacles by creating specific, short-term stay visa schemes for artists and creators, along the lines of the existing Scientific Visa Programme in force since 2005?










4.


What measures does the Vice-President/High Representative intend to take to provide information (by means, for example, of a globally accessible website) on existing EU support programmes in the external relations sphere which have a cultural component, as well as on the planning and organisation of cultural events?










5.


What progress has been achieved in establishing a coherent strategy for the protection and promotion of the cultural and natural heritage? How will it use the momentum of establishing Creative Europe to include culture in the EU’s external actions?










6.


Has an interinstitutional task force for culture in the context of the EU’s external relations been established in order to develop and widen coordination, streamlining, strategies and the sharing of best practices?




Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission
(31 January 2013)
The Commission sees culture as a vital element of EU external relations. In March 2012, a group of national experts was convened to reflect on a strategic approach to culture in EU external relations, taking China as a test case. The group’s report was finalised in November 2012, and is being discussed with Member States. The implementation of the preparatory action ‘Culture in External Relations’, voted by the European Parliament, will be launched in early 2013. A ‘Culture in External Relations’ web showcase on cultural diplomacy activities is under preparation (340).
The Commission’s proposal for Creative Europe also envisages strengthening cultural cooperation beyond the EU, in particular with European Neighbourhood Policy countries. 
In most EU Delegations, at least one person deals with cultural matters, with regard to cultural diplomacy or development prorities. Under the ICI+ Instrument (cooperation with industrialised countries), a public diplomacy initiative for Asia is envisaged. In China, the EU Delegation plans to set up a cyber-platform gathering information about the EU, including culture. 
With regard to the mobility of artists and cultural professionals, the Visa Code (341) has enhanced the harmonised application of the common rules on visas for the benefit of all categories of applicants, including artists. The Commission intends to submit a proposal for its revision in 2013. However, a specific visa scheme for artists is not envisaged for the time being.
The Commission attaches high importance to cultural heritage. While this is primarily a national responsibility, expert groups are working on mobility of cultural goods between museums, digitisation or fight against illicit trafficking.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010116/12
à la Commission
Michel Dantin (PPE)
(7 novembre 2012)

Objet: Mise en œuvre du règlement (UE) no 1003/2010
Le règlement (UE) n° 1003/2010 concernant les exigences pour la réception relatives à l'emplacement et au montage des plaques d'immatriculation arrière des véhicules, est entré vigueur dans l'ensemble des États membres de l'Union européenne le 29 novembre 2010.
Depuis bientôt deux ans, les nouveaux véhicules doivent être munis d'une plaque d'immatriculation dite «européenne», afin de se conformer au présent règlement.






1.


La Commission peut-elle fournir des données statistiques concrètes sur le nombre de véhicules concernés par ces nouvelles plaques d'immatriculation?










2.


Par ailleurs, quel est l'état des lieux de la mise en application de l'ensemble du règlement?




Réponse donnée par M. Tajani au nom de la Commission
(19 décembre 2012)







1.


Le règlement (UE) n










1.


Le règlement (UE) n




o 1003/2010 de la Commission (342) concernant les exigences pour la réception relatives à l'emplacement et au montage des plaques d'immatriculation arrière des véhicules à moteur et de leurs remorques ne couvre pas les plaques d'immatriculation elles-mêmes, mais uniquement l'emplacement prévu pour le montage des plaques d'immatriculation délivrées dans les États membres. Les caractéristiques (taille, couleur, etc.) des plaques d'immatriculation relèvent seulement des législations nationales.À l'échelle nationale, la notion de plaque d'immatriculation dite européenne est parfois utilisée pour faire référence à une plaque de même taille que l'emplacement prévu par le règlement (UE) no 1003/2010. Toutefois, cette notion est dépourvue d'existence juridique dans le droit de l'UE et il n'existe à proprement parler aucune statistique sur les véhicules équipés de telles plaques d'immatriculation.







2.


La législation qui couvre l'emplacement prévu pour le montage des plaques d'immatriculation délivrées dans les États membres et les véhicules ayant obtenu la réception CE par type est en vigueur depuis de nombreuses années. En fait, le règlement (UE) n










2.


La législation qui couvre l'emplacement prévu pour le montage des plaques d'immatriculation délivrées dans les États membres et les véhicules ayant obtenu la réception CE par type est en vigueur depuis de nombreuses années. En fait, le règlement (UE) n




o 1003/2010 qui, en vertu de l'article 13, paragraphe 2, du règlement (CE) no 661/2009, s'applique à de nouveaux types de véhicule à partir du 1er novembre 2012, a été adopté principalement en vue d'intégrer des adaptations aux progrès techniques et reprend, en substance, la directive 70/222/CEE (343), qui sera abrogée le 1er novembre 2014.(English version)
Question for written answer E-010116/12
to the Commission
Michel Dantin (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Implementation of Regulation (EU) No 1003/2010
Commission Regulation (EU) No 1003/2010 concerning type-approval requirements for the space for mounting and the fixing of rear registration plates on motor vehicles entered into force in all EU Member States on 29 November 2010.
Since that date, any new vehicles are required to have a ‘European’ registration plate in accordance with the regulation.






1.


Does the Commission have specific data on how many vehicles have been registered with the new plates?










2.


What stage has been reached with regard to the application of the regulation as a whole?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)







1.


Regulation (EU) 1003/2010










1.


Regulation (EU) 1003/2010




 (344) concerning type-approval requirements for the space for mounting and the fixing of rear registration plates on motor vehicles and their trailers does not cover registration plates themselves, but only the dedicated space for mounting of registration plates issued in the Member States. The characteristics (size, color, etc) of the registration plate are covered by national legislation only.The reference to ‘European’ Registration plate is sometimes used nationally to make reference to a plate with a size as big as the dedicated space foreseen by Regulation (EU) 1003/2010. However such a notion does not legally exist in EU legislation. As such no data on vehicles fitted with such plates exists.







2.


Legislation covering the dedicated space for mounting of registration plates issued in the Member States and EU type-approved vehicles has been in force for many years. In fact, Regulation (EU) 1003/2010 which, according to Article 13(2) of (EC) 661/2009, is applicable for new types of vehicles as from 1 November 2012, was adopted mainly to include adaptations to technical progress and reproduces the same substance of Directive 70/222/EEC










2.


Legislation covering the dedicated space for mounting of registration plates issued in the Member States and EU type-approved vehicles has been in force for many years. In fact, Regulation (EU) 1003/2010 which, according to Article 13(2) of (EC) 661/2009, is applicable for new types of vehicles as from 1 November 2012, was adopted mainly to include adaptations to technical progress and reproduces the same substance of Directive 70/222/EEC




 (345), which will be repealed on 1 November 2014. (English version)
Question for written answer E-010117/12
to the Commission
Emer Costello (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Current status of negotiations on a future PEACE programme






1.


What is the current status of negotiations on a future PEACE programme, to succeed the successful PEACE III programme in Ireland and Northern Ireland?










2.


Does the Commission envisage further negotiations or a decision on a successor programme to PEACE III over the coming months?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)






1.


To date, the Commission has not entered into negotiations with the two Member States on a potential continuation of the PEACE programme.










2.


The Commission considers that, since it was introduced in 1995, PEACE has made a significant contribution to the peace process throughout Northern Ireland and the border region of Ireland. This is reflected in the results achieved which show that the PEACE programmes have helped considerably to bring the two communities closer together. 




Furthermore the projects and activities supported by the programmes have provided the means whereby a true sense of engagement and ownership of the peace process has been promoted amongst the communities and areas most directly concerned.
The Commission considers that it should be possible in the 2014-2020 period to continue supporting the types of projects and actions co-financed by the PEACE programmes. Any decision on a successor programme will largely depend on the funding arrangements agreed between the Member States within the overall framework of the multiannual financial framework for the 2014-2020 period.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010118/12
an den Rat
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Drohnen






1.


Welche Position bezieht der Rat zur Nutzung von Drohnen? Welche Position vertritt der Rat insbesondere in der Frage der Nutzung von Drohnen




a) zur Beobachtung der eigenen Zivilbevölkerung,
b) zur Beobachtung von Situationen in Drittländern, wenn beispielsweise bestimmte Gebiete aufgrund von Kriegszuständen oder aus politischen Gründen unzugänglich sind, 
c) zur gezielten Tötung von Individuen?






2.


Wenn der Rat einen der Punkte a) bis c) noch nicht besprochen hat: Wann wird er dieses Thema besprechen?




Antwort
(4. Februar 2013)
Der Rat hat den Einsatz von Drohnen zur Beobachtung unserer Zivilbevölkerung nicht erörtert. Ihm ist nicht bekannt, dass Mitgliedstaaten Drohnen zu einem solchen Zweck einsetzen.
Drohnen wurden 2005 in den Bedarfskatalog der militärischen Fähigkeiten der Europäischen Union aufgenommen. Sie sind für den Einsatz bei EU-geführten Militäroperationen vorgesehen. Die gängigsten Aufgaben, die Drohnen übernehmen könnten, sind Nachrichtengewinnung, Über‐wachung, Zielaufklärung und Aufklärung (ISTAR), Kampfaufgaben, Mehrzweckaufgaben (Abriegelung, bewaffnete Aufklärung, Aufklärung, Überwachung und Zielaufklärung), Radarbild‐ und Kommunikationsübertragung, Versorgung auf dem Luftweg und Nachschub. Der konkrete Charakter der Aufgaben, die Drohnen im Rahmen von EU-geführten militärischen Operationen zugewiesen werden, leitet sich aus dem Einsatzmandat ab, wie es gemäß Planungsdokumenten und Einsatzregeln umgesetzt wird.
Ferner gelten für die Anwendung von Gewalt im Rahmen von EU-geführten militärischen Operationen die Regeln des Völkerrechts, gegebenenfalls auch das humanitäre Völkerrecht und die Menschenrechtsnormen, die ihren Niederschlag in den Einsatzregeln finden.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010118/12
to the Council
Hans-Peter Martin (NI)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Drones
What is the Council’s position on the use of drones? In particular, what are the Council’s views on the issue of the use of drones:







to monitor our own civilian population;











to monitor situations in third countries, if for example specific areas are inaccessible due to a state of war or for political reasons; 











for the targeted killing of individuals?




If the Council has yet to discuss one of points A to C, when will it discuss this issue?
Reply
(4 February 2013)
The Council has not discussed the use of drones to monitor our civilian population. It is not aware of any such use by Member States.
Drones were added to the Military Capability Requirement Catalogue of the European Union in 2005. Their use is envisaged in EU-led military operations. The most common types of mission that could be assigned to drones are intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance (ISTAR), combat, multi-purpose (interdiction, armed reconnaissance, reconnaissance, surveillance and target acquisition), radar and communication relay, and aerial delivery and resupply. The exact nature of the missions assigned to drones in the framework of EU-led military operations would be in conformity with the mandate of the operation as implemented by the operational planning documents and rules of engagement.
Furthermore, any use of force in EU-led military operations is governed by the rules of international law, including as appropriate the law of armed conflict and human rights law, which are reflected in the rules of engagement.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-010119/12
til Kommissionen
Ole Christensen (S&D)
(7. november 2012)

Om: Vikarbureauer og skatteforhold inden for luftfart
Brugen af ansættelse gennem vikarbureauer er en stigende tendens i international luftfart. Det slører imidlertid ofte relationerne mellem arbejdstager og bopælsland og kan i værste fald bidrage til, at det enkelte individ kan unddrage sig skattebetaling i det reelle bopælsland.
Grundreglen er ofte, at den enkeltes bopæl bestemmer beskatningsstedet, men håndhævelse afhænger af, at myndighederne har indsigt i forholdet bopæl og registreringsland (hvor kontrakten er registreret). Konstruktionen med kontraktansatte slører derimod ofte relationerne og besværliggør dermed indsigt for myndighederne.






1.


I lyset af ovenstående bedes Kommissionen redegøre for i, hvilket omfang piloter og kabinepersonale i EU, der er ansat igennem vikarbureauer, reelt betaler skat til den stat, de er bosiddende i?




For nylig vedtog EU endvidere opdaterede regler om social sikring (forordning nr. 465/2012). Forordningen indfører begrebet om hjemmebase, der betyder, at flypersonale fremover har krav på adgang til de sociale sikringsydelser, hvor man har sit udgangspunkt.






2.


I lyset af de nye regler bedes Kommissionen endvidere redegøre for, hvordan de nye regler om hjemmebase gælder for flypersonale ansat igennem vikarbureauer?




Svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Algirdas Šemeta
(10. januar 2013)






1.


Kommissionen har ikke oplysninger om, hvorvidt piloter og kabinepersonale i EU, som er ansat gennem vikarbureauer, faktisk betaler skat i det land, hvor de har bopæl. Medlemsstaterne kan selv fastsætte regler for beskatning af arbejdstagere og dele beskatningsrettighederne med andre lande gennem bilaterale dobbeltbeskatningsaftaler, så længe disse regler ikke strider mod EU-lovgivningen ved enten at forskelsbehandle på grund af nationalitet eller indføre ubegrundede begrænsninger i EU-traktatens friheder. Beskatning af luftfartsmedarbejdere hører normalt under de bilaterale dobbeltbeskatningsaftaler, der er indgået mellem de pågældende medlemsstater. Ifølge artikel 15 i OECD's modelkonvention, som mange bilaterale dobbeltbeskatningsaftaler er baseret på, bliver indkomst som regel beskattet i arbejdstagerens bopælsstat. Indkomst for arbejde ombord på et luftfartøj kan imidlertid beskattes i den stat, hvor luftfartsselskabets ledelse reelt har sæde. 










2.


De nye regler for, hvilken lovgivning om social sikring der gælder for flyvebesætningsmedlemmer, er indarbejdet i forordning (EF) nr. 883/2004 ved forordning (EU) 465/2012 og er fuldt ud gyldige for flyvebesætningsmedlemmer, der er ansat via vikarbureauer. 




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010119/12
to the Commission
Ole Christensen (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Temporary employment agencies and taxation in the aviation sector
The use of temporary employment agencies for recruitment is a growing trend in international aviation. It does, however, often blur relations between workers and their country of residence and at worst can help individuals avoid paying tax in their real country of residence.
The basic rule is generally that the individual’s place of residence determines the place of taxation, but enforcement depends on the authorities having information about the relationship between the place of residence and the country of registration (where the contract is registered). The use of contract staff, on the other hand, often blurs this relationship and thus makes it difficult for the authorities to obtain information.






1.


In light of the above, can the Commission explain to what extent pilots and cabin crew in the EU who are employed through temporary employment agencies actually pay taxes to the state in which they reside?




The EU also recently adopted updated rules on social security (Regulation No 465/2012). This regulation introduces the concept of home base, which means that flight crew are in future entitled to access social security benefits in the country from which they normally depart.






2.


Given these new rules, can the Commission also explain how the new rules on home base apply to flight crew employed through temporary employment agencies?




Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)






1.


The Commission does not have information on the extent to which pilots and cabin crew in the EU who are employed through temporary employment agencies actually pay taxes to the state in which they reside.




 Member States are free to design their rules for the taxation of employees as they choose, and to share taxing rights with other countries under bilateral double taxation treaties, as long as those rules do not conflict with EC law by, for example, discriminating on the basis of nationality or introducing unjustified restrictions to the exercise of the EU Treaty freedoms. The tax treatment of airline workers will usually be governed by bilateral double taxation treaties between the Member States concerned. The OECD Model Convention upon which many bilateral tax treaties are based provides in Article 15 that employment income is generally taxed in the state of residence of the recipient but that remuneration derived in respect of an employment exercised aboard an aircraft may be taxed in the country where the airline company has its effective place of management. 






2.


The new rules on the determination of applicable social security legislation for flight crew, incorporated into the regulation (EC) No 883/2004 by the regulation (EU) No 465/2010, are fully applicable also to flight crew employed through temporary employment agencies. 




(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010120/12
an die Kommission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Marktmacht von Unternehmen in den Krisenländern
Der jüngste Bericht des IMK „Quo vadis Krise“? (346) argumentiert auf S. 12, dass ein Teil der Anpassungseffekte in der Krise in gestiegenen Gewinn‐ und Kapitaleinkommen zum Ausdruck kommt. Dies sei auch Ausdruck der starken Marktmacht der Unternehmen in den Krisenländern.
In diesem Zusammenhang wird die Kommission Folgendes gefragt:







Wie beurteilt sie diesen Zusammenhang? Bitte gesondert zu beantworten für Griechenland, Portugal, Spanien, Slowenien und Irland.











Welche Maßnahmen wurden in den Krisenländern vonseiten der Kommission unterstützt — etwa im Zuge der Troika-Missionen und/oder der wirtschaftspolitischen Empfehlungen, um die Marktmacht der Unternehmen zu reduzieren bzw. die Elastizität des Preisniveaus zu fördern? Bitte gesondert zu beantworten für Griechenland, Portugal, Spanien, Slowenien und Irland.











Welche Maßnahmen plant die Kommission darüber hinaus zu befördern? Bitte gesondert zu beantworten für Griechenland, Portugal, Spanien, Slowenien und Irland.




Antwort von Herrn Rehn im Namen der Kommission
(12. Februar 2013)
Anstrengungen zur Förderung des Wettbewerbs und zur Öffnung der Märkte sind Kernstück der Maßnahmen, die vom Rat im Rahmen der Koordinierung der Wirtschaftspolitik der Mitgliedstaaten verlangt werden. (347) Entsprechende Anstrengungen sind auch Gegenstand der wirtschaftspolitischen Anpassungsprogramme (Economic Adjustment Programmes — EAPs).
IRLAND
Im Durchführungsbeschluss des Rates über einen finanziellen Beistand für Irland sind spezifische Initiativen zur Steigerung des Wettbewerbs vorgesehen. (348) Die entsprechenden Maßnahmen werden auch im EAP beschrieben. (349) Irland macht zwar gute Fortschritte, doch kann noch mehr getan werden, insbesondere im Sektor der nicht handelbaren Güter, in dem die Kommission weitere Maßnahmen fordert.
GRIECHENLAND
Der Beschluss 2011/734/EU des Rates wie auch das EAP sehen zahlreiche Reformen vor, die auf eine Stärkung des Wettbewerbs abzielen (350). Im Fokus der nächsten Überprüfung werden Seeschifffahrt, Einzelhandel und die Privatisierung der Gasversorgung stehen. Die Regierung wird zudem Unterstützung von der OECD erhalten, um rechtliche Hindernisse zu ermitteln, die den Wettbewerb in bestimmten Sektoren beeinträchtigen.
PORTUGAL
Der Durchführungsbeschluss des Rates über einen finanziellen Beistand für Portugal und das EAP enthalten einen umfassenden Katalog struktureller Reformen zur Förderung des Wettbewerbs. (351) Mit dem EAP wurde außerdem ein neues Wettbewerbsgesetz auf den Weg gebracht.
SLOWENIEN
Die Empfehlung des Rates zum nationalen Reformprogramm 2012 enthält unter anderem eine Empfehlung zur Marktöffnung und zur Neuorganisation von beruflichen Dienstleistungen. (352) Der Prozess zur Behebung von Ungleichgewichten ist aufgrund der verminderten Preiswettbewerbsfähigkeit mit potenziellen Risiken behaftet, die in der eingehenden Überprüfung aufgezeigt wurden. (353)

SPANIEN
Wichtig für ein besseres Funktionieren der Produktmärkte sind die Verbesserung des Unternehmensumfelds und eine Reform der Marktregulierungs‐ und Wettbewerbsinstitutionen. Darauf zielt auch die Empfehlung des Rates zum nationalen Reformprogramm 2012 ab. (354) Was die diese Bereiche betreffenden Vorschläge anbelangt, steht die Kommission weiterhin in Kontakt mit den zuständigen Behörden.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010120/12
to the Commission
Sven Giegold (Verts/ALE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Market power of companies in the crisis countries
The latest Macroeconomic Policy Institute report ‘Crisis, quo vadis?’ (355) argues on page 12 that the effects of adjustment in the crisis are partly reflected in increased profits and capital income. This is also an expression of the significant market power of companies in the crisis countries.
In this context, can the Commission answer the following:







What is its opinion on the above statements? Please answer separately for Greece, Portugal, Spain, Slovenia and Ireland.











What measures have been supported by the Commission in the crisis countries — perhaps in conjunction with the Troika missions and/or economic policy recommendations — to reduce the market power of companies or promote the flexibility of price levels? Please answer separately for Greece, Portugal, Spain, Slovenia and Ireland.











What additional measures is the Commission planning to promote? Please answer separately for Greece, Portugal, Spain, Slovenia and Ireland.




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(12 February 2013)
Efforts to increase competition and open markets are key to the measures requested by the Council in the context of coordination of the economic policies of the Member States (356). These efforts are also addressed in the Economic Adjustment Programmes (EAPs). 
IRELAND
The Council Implementing Decision on granting financial assistance specified initiatives to increase competition (357). These efforts are also described in the EAP (358). Ireland has made good progress. More can still be done, especially in the non-tradable sector, where the Commission has argued for further actions to be taken. 
GREECE 
The Council Decision 2011/734/EU and the EAP include many reforms linked to increasing competition (359). The next review will focus on maritime transport, retail sector and privatisation of gas undertaking. The government will also receive assistance from the OECD to identify regulatory obstacles to competition in some sectors.
PORTUGAL
The Council Implementing Decision on granting financial assistance and the EAP contains a wide set of structural reforms aimed at increasing competition (360). The EAP has also led to a new Competition Law. 
SLOVENIA
The Council Recommendation on the NRP 2012 includes a recommendation related to market opening and reorganisation of professional services (361). There are potential risks to the rebalancing process due to deteriorated price competitiveness, which have been highlighted in the In-depth Review (362).
SPAIN
Improving business environment and reforming market regulation and competition institutions are important to improve the functioning of product markets. This is addressed in the Council Recommendation on the NRP 2012 (363). The Commission continues to be in contact with the authorities regarding proposals in these areas.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010121/12
to the Commission
Syed Kamall (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: London Metropolitan University journalism funding
I have been contacted by a constituent who would like to create a multimedia experience for a group of London Metropolitan University journalism students. He would like to base this in and around the coverage of EU politics, and specifically the participation of London and Britain within it.
My constituent would like this experience to include the students spending a week in Brussels, putting on a daily student television programme and writing multimedia content related to the EU. He hopes that this project will increase understanding of EU politics among the students and make it more accessible to young people in London. My constituent also hopes that this initiative will expand the multi-platform journalistic skills of London Metropolitan students.
My constituent would like to apply for an EU grant to help gain access to a television studio facility in Brussels, with the ability to stream live to the Internet. He also requires funding for accommodation and living expenses for a group of up to 20 participants in Brussels for one week and a small amount to fund the project in London and to publicise the project.
Could the Commission confirm whether my constituent is able to apply for any EU funding to support this project? If so, how can my constituent request such funding?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(9 January 2013)
The Commission is very pleased that the Honourable Member's constituents are interested in getting involved with EU issues and understanding their importance to their lives. It invites your constituent to discuss his initiative directly with the Commission's Representation in the United Kingdom, which can also inform him about possibilities and conditions for visits to the Commission in Brussels.
The Honourable Member's constituent can also access the Audiovisual Library of the Commission to support any programme making around this topic in the future (364).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010122/12
to the Commission
Syed Kamall (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: EU visa-free travel regime with the Russian Federation
I have been contacted by a constituent who would like to know the latest state of play on an EU visa-free travel agreement, for both Schengen and non-Schengen Member States, with the Russian Federation.
Could the Commission state:







Whether it has conducted a cost-benefit analysis of having a visa-free travel agreement with Russia?











What other advantages it believes such an agreement would have, in terms of tourism, new business opportunities and EU-Russia relations?




Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(24 January 2013)






1.


The Commission has not conducted a cost-benefit analysis of a visa-free travel agreement with the Russian Federation. 










2.


On 7 November 2012, the Commission adopted a 




‘Communication from the Commission to the Council and European Parliament on the implementation and development of the common visa policy to spur growth in the EU’. The main issue addressed in this communication is how, in the context of the current economic difficulties, tourist flows to Europe can be increased through a smart visa policy while ensuring the security of our external borders and the good functioning of the Schengen area. In 2013 the Commission will present a proposal for the revision of the Visa Code, which will provide an opportunity to explore ways to improve and facilitate visa issuing procedures for legitimate travellers, including businessmen, young people, students and tourists. 
As an intermediate step towards a visa-free agreement with Russia, the EU and the Russian Federation concluded in 2007 a Visa Facilitation Agreement which has already proven to be very beneficial for Russian and EU citizens. In 2009-2011, the number of Schengen visas issued in Russia increased from 3.2 million to 5.2 million. Negotiations in view of upgrading this Visa Facilitation Agreement are underway. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010123/12
to the Commission
Syed Kamall (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: EU funding for trips to Rome in connection with the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development
I have been contacted by a constituent who understands that funding could be made available from EU funds to finance the travel of a group of British MPs to Rome to meet with Italian MPs to promote the work of the Catholic Agency for Overseas Development (CAFOD) in the coming months.
My constituent has been advised by CAFOD members of staff that these trips have been made possible in the past due to funding and sponsorship from the EU for MPs’ travel expenses.
Could the Commission confirm from what fund reimbursement of expenses might be forthcoming, and how this reimbursement might be applied for?
Answer given by Mr Lewandowski on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)
The Commission is not in a position to indicate any source of EU funding that could support expenses referred to in the question. 
The Commission makes direct financial contributions in the form of grants, to support projects or organisations which further EU interests or help implement an EU programme or policy.
Funding opportunities in different policy areas can be found at http://ec.europa.eu/contracts_grants/grants_en.htm whereas the names of beneficiaries of EU direct funding at http://ec.europa.eu/beneficiaries/fts/index_en.htm. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010124/12
to the Commission
Syed Kamall (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Differences in life expectancy and the calculation of annuities
I have recently been contacted by a constituent who is concerned that the statistical fact that women live longer than men will no longer be able to be taken into account by annuity providers when calculating entitlements.
Does the Commission have any plans to bring forward legislation to allow firms to recognise this fact when doing business, without being subjected to claims on anti-discrimination grounds?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
Directive 2004/113/EC lays down a framework for combating discrimination based on sex in the access to and supply of goods and services. Art. 5 of this directive provides for an exception to this principle, allowing for price differentiation between men and women in the calculation of premiums and benefits.
In the Test-Achat case (365), the Court of Justice of the European Union found that a permanent derogation is not compatible with the principle of non-discrimination between men and women and the unisex icing contained in the same legislation. As a consequence, for all new insurance contracts concluded as from 21 December 2012 (including life insurance and annuities), insurers will no longer be able to reflect the difference in life expectancy between men and women in individual premiums. 
After that Court ruling, the Commission is under the obligation to ensure that EC law, as interpreted by the Court, is properly implemented in all the Member States to ensure its uniform application. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010125/12
to the Commission
Syed Kamall (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Access to medicines in case of economic breakdown
I have been contacted by a constituent who is concerned about access to medicines if the economies of some EU countries collapse.






1.


Could the Commission confirm whether there is a contingency plan to help community pharmacies to dispense vital medicines such as insulin and cardiac drugs to patients living in countries like Greece and Spain in the event of economic breakdown?










2.


If not, does the Commission plan to draw up such a contingency plan, perhaps relying on supplies from other EU countries?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)
According to Article 168, paragraph 7 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (366), Union action shall respect the responsibilities of the Member States for the definition of their health policy and for the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care. Hence, the EU has no competence to draw up contingency plan for the supply of medicines. 
However, in the case of Greece, to which reference is made, the memorandum of understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality between Greece, the Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund highlights that maintaining universal access to healthcare is one the objectives to be met. 
In this respect, the Commission's Task Force for Greece has been working actively to support Greek reform efforts relevant to the supply of medicinal products, notably as regards the set-up and roll-out of an electronic prescription system as well as the implementation of measures for controlling pharmaceuticals expenditure. The Commission will continue to support Greece in its efforts to deliver healthcare to its citizens in an equitable manner.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010126/12
to the Commission
Syed Kamall (ECR)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Compensation for air passengers affected by the ash cloud in April 2010
I have been contacted by a constituent whose family has been offered inadequate compensation by their airline (Monarch) under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 following the ash cloud incident of April 2010.






1.


What steps is the Commission taking, and what procedures are in place, to ensure that both airlines and governments live up to their obligations under Regulation (EC) No 261/2004?










2.


Are there any pan-EU organisations which are responsible for resolving disputes between claimants and airlines?




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(20 December 2012)
Member States have an obligation to ensure air carriers comply with the requirements of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 through the appointment of a national enforcement body (NEB). The role of the Commission is to monitor the activities of NEBs and where there is evidence indicating that the regulation's obligations may not be met it engages with NEBs and national authorities to seek compliance. Where issues the Commission has identified cannot be satisfactorily resolved then the Commission may initiate infringement proceedings against a Member State in accordance with Article 258 of the TFEU.
Whilst the NEB network provides a cross EU enforcement framework, there is no pan-EU organisation as such responsible for resolving disputes between passengers and air carriers. Where an affected passenger is therefore unable to resolve a dispute with an air carrier directly, they have the right to pursue the matter through a national court. The European Small Claims Procedure allows passengers to pursue their claim in respect of a cross-border dispute. 
The Commission is currently undertaking a review of this regulation, one of the aims of which is to improve NEB enforcement on a pan-European basis. The Commission's intention is to put forward legislative proposals in this regard in early 2013. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010127/12
an die Kommission
Ismail Ertug (S&D)
(7. November 2012)

Betrifft: Grenzüberschreitende Fahrten mit Lang-LKW
In seinem Brief vom 18. Juni 2012 an den Vorsitzenden des Verkehrsausschusses hat Kommissionsmitglied Kallas seine Auslegung der Richtlinie 96/53/EG zur Festlegung der Abmessungen und des Gewichts von Straßenfahrzeugen und die zu erfüllenden Bedingungen für die Erlaubnis des grenzüberschreitenden Verkehrs von Lang-LKW zwischen zwei aneinander grenzenden Mitgliedstaaten dargelegt. Er erläutert, dass die Richtlinie unter zwei Bedingungen derartigem Transportbetrieb nicht entgegensteht, nämlich wenn der internationale Wettbewerb nicht maßgeblich beeinflusst wird und der Transportbetrieb ausschließlich zwischen zwei Mitgliedstaaten stattfindet. Darüber hinaus weist er darauf hin, dass diese Abweichung den Ausnahmefall nicht zur Norm werden lassen soll.
In seinem Brief vom 31. Juli 2012 an Präsident Schulz macht Präsident Barroso deutlich, dass „die aktuelle Richtlinie solange in Kraft ist, bis die Überarbeitung vollständig umgesetzt wurde. Die Kommission wird sicherstellen, dass die Richtlinie korrekt und ohne Ausnahme in den Mitgliedstaaten umgesetzt wird und wird — wenn nötig — Vertragsverletzungsverfahren einleiten“.






1.


Basiert die Kommission die aktuelle Anwendung und Umsetzung der Richtlinie 96/53/EG auf die Auslegung von Herrn Kallas vom 18. Juni?










2.


Sollte dies der Fall sein, wie werden die zwei Bedingungen für grenzüberschreitenden Verkehrsbetrieb (keinen Schaden für den Wettbewerb und maximal zwei Mitgliedstaaten) umgesetzt?










3.


Werden Mitgliedstaaten oder die Kommission regelmäßige Kontrollen, inklusive der Anzahl durchfahrener Staaten, an den Strecken durchführen, die von längeren und schwereren Fahrzeugen genutzt werden?










4.


Welche Maßnahmen sind bei Zuwiderhandlungen vorgesehen?










5.


Welche Folge hat es für Fahrer, wenn sie mehr als eine Grenze überschreiten?










6.


Beobachtet die Kommission die Entwicklung des grenzüberschreitenden Verkehrs von längeren und schwereren Fahrzeugen, um den Einfluss auf den Wettbewerb festzustellen?










7.


Sind derartige Statistiken öffentlich verfügbar?




Antwort von Herrn Kallas im Namen der Kommission
(15. Januar 2013)
Die Kommission beobachtet die Umsetzung der Richtlinie auf der Grundlage des Schreibens vom 18. Juni 2012 an den Vorsitzenden des Verkehrsausschusses. Für die Anwendung der Richtlinie sind die Mitgliedstaaten zuständig, die Kontrollen anhand von Beförderungspapieren und Aufzeichnungen (Frachtbriefe, Daten digitaler Fahrtenschreiber) durchführen. Die Behörden können mit den Behörden benachbarter Mitgliedstaaten zusammenarbeiten, um sicherzustellen, dass die Lkw nur innerhalb von zwei Mitgliedstaaten verkehren. Für Fahrer von Lang-Lkw, die mehr als eine Grenze überschreiten, gelten die Sanktionen des Mitgliedstaates, in dem sie überprüft werden. Sollte eindeutig nachgewiesen werden, dass ein Mitgliedstaat die Richtlinie nicht ordnungsgemäß anwendet, wird die Kommission geeignete Maßnahmen ergreifen und erforderlichenfalls gegen diesen Mitgliedstaat ein Vertragsverletzungsverfahren einleiten. 
Die Kommission wird über die neuen Entwicklungen in den Mitgliedstaaten, die generell längere Lkw einsetzen, aufgrund der Pflicht der Mitgliedstaaten informiert, der Kommission Maßnahmen nach Artikel 4 Absatz 4 der Richtlinie mitzuteilen. Die Kommission ist bereit, diese Informationen zu gegebenem Zeitpunkt an das Parlament weiterzuleiten. Die Mitgliedstaaten müssen der Kommission auch alle Entscheidungen im Zusammenhang mit dem versuchsweisen Einsatz von Fahrzeugen mitteilen, deren Abmessungen die zulässigen Höchstabmessungen überschreiten (Artikel 4 Absatz 5 der Richtlinie). In einigen Mitgliedstaaten werden auch Berichte (367) über den Markt für lange Fahrzeuge erstellt.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010127/12
to the Commission
Ismail Ertug (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Cross-border transport by HGV
In his letter of 18 June 2012 to the Chair of the Committee on Transport, Commissioner Kallas set out his interpretation of Directive 96/53/EC laying down dimensions and weights for road vehicles and the conditions to be met to allow cross-border HGV traffic between two adjoining Member States. In his view, the directive does not preclude this type of transport on two conditions, namely that international competition is not materially affected and that transport takes place exclusively between two Member States. He also notes that this derogation should be the exception, not the norm.
In his letter of 31 July 2012 to President Schulz, President Barroso makes it clear that ‘the current Directive remains in force until the revision has been fully implemented. The Commission will ensure that the directive is implemented correctly and without exception in the Member States and will initiate infringement proceedings where necessary’.






1.


Does the Commission base the current application and implementation of Directive 96/53/EC on the interpretation of Mr Kallas of 18 June 2012?










2.


If so, how are the two conditions for cross-border traffic (no deleterious effects on competition and a maximum of two Member States) to be implemented?










3.


Will Member States or the Commission carry out regular checks on the routes used by longer and heavier vehicles, including checks on the number of states travelled through?










4.


What actions will be taken in the event of infringements?










5.


What are the consequences for drivers crossing more than one border?










6.


Is the Commission monitoring the development of cross-border traffic of longer and heavier vehicles to assess the impact on competition?










7.


Are relevant statistics publicly available?




Answer given by Mr Kallas  on behalf of the Commission 
(15 January 2013)
The Commission monitors the implementation of the directive on the basis of the sent letter on 18 June 2012 to the Chair of the Committee on Transport. Enforcement of the directive is the responsibility of Member States who carry out checks based on evidence from road transport documents and records (consignment letters, data from the digital tachograph). They may also cooperate with authorities from neighbouring Member States to ensure that vehicles do not travel further than two Member States. Drivers of longer trucks crossing more than one border are subject to the sanctions applicable in the Member State where they are checked. Should substantive evidence show that a Member State is not correctly enforcing the directive, the Commission will take appropriate action and if necessary launch infringement proceedings against this Member State. 
The Commission is informed of new developments in Member States using longer trucks on a permanent basis, under the requirement for Member States to inform the Commission of measures taken pursuant to Art. 4(4) of the directive. The Commission is ready to share such information with the Parlimanent in due course. Member States must also notify the Commission of any decisions taken in the field of trials with vehicles exceeding the maximum dimensions (Art. 4(5) of the directive). Certain Member States also produce reports (368) on the market of longer vehicles.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-010128/12
à la Commission
Françoise Castex (S&D)
(7 novembre 2012)

Objet: Mandat d'arrêt européen — Implications politiques — Cas d'Aurore Martin
Aurore Martin, citoyenne française, membre du parti Batasuna, légal en France mais illégal en Espagne, faisait l'objet d'un Mandat d'arrêt européen (MAE) de la part des autorités espagnoles. Elle a été arrêtée le 1er novembre 2012 en France et remise aux autorités espagnoles. Elle encourt jusqu'à 12 ans de prison pour des «faits de participation à une organisation terroriste et terrorisme».
La Commission européenne, dans ses recommandations formulées dans le troisième rapport sur le mandat d'arrêt publié le 11 avril 2011, a insisté sur le devoir des États membres d'utiliser le mandat d'arrêt européen dans le respect des droits fondamentaux.
Or, de toute évidence, il existe des divergences dans l'application du MAE par les États membres qui créent des inégalités entre ressortissants de l'Union européenne. Ainsi, les Pays‐Bas, si l'accusé est néerlandais, peuvent refuser de le livrer «aux fins de l'exécution d'une peine privative de liberté infligée par une décision de justice définitive». Cette exception au mandat d'arrêt européen a été confirmée par la Cour européenne de justice, le 6 octobre 2009 (affaire C-123/08).






1.


Que prévoit de faire la Commission pour éviter ces différences de traitement entre ressortissants de l'Union européenne, certains étant protégés dans un État membre et non dans un autre? Autrement dit, que prévoit-elle de faire pour remédier aux disparités au sein de l'Union européenne dans la mise en conformité des législations nationales avec la décision-cadre établissant le mandat d'arrêt européen?










2.


Par ailleurs, dans les cas d'implications politiques, le mandat d'arrêt européen ne devrait-il pas comporter des exceptions plus larges et ne pas être délivré de manière automatique, afin de mieux garantir les droits fondamentaux, notamment la liberté d'opinion?




Réponse donnée par Mme Reding au nom de la Commission 
(6 décembre 2012)
La procédure du mandat d'arrêt européen (MAE), y compris toutes les voies de recours disponibles, est une procédure entièrement judiciaire. Ni la Commission ni les États membres ne peuvent intervenir dans un dossier individuel de MAE. Conformément à l'article 1er, paragraphe 3, et aux considérants 12 et 13 de la décision-cadre relative au MAE, toutes les décisions judiciaires émises par les juridictions nationales — qui sont également les juridictions de l'UE — reposent sur l'obligation de respecter les droits fondamentaux. 
La décision-cadre relative au MAE envisage (article 4, paragraphe 6) la possibilité, qui fait l'objet de l'affaire C-123/08, de refuser la remise d'une personne qui est ressortissante de l'État membre d'exécution, y réside ou y demeure, à condition que cet État s'engage à exécuter la peine prononcée. Toutefois, les États membres ne peuvent se prévaloir de cette marge d'appréciation pour traiter les citoyens d'une manière différenciée qui équivaudrait à une discrimination, et ce point de vue a été clairement exprimé par la grande chambre de la Cour de justice de l'Union européenne dans l'arrêt qu'elle a récemment rendu dans l'affaire Lopes da Silva, (affaire C-42/11 du 5 septembre 2012).
La décision-cadre relative au MAE établit clairement de nombreuses règles communes; au moyen de ses rapports d'exécution, de ses réunions d'experts et de son suivi permanent de la mise en œuvre du MAE, la Commission promeut sans relâche une application aussi uniforme que possible de cette décision-cadre.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010128/12
to the Commission
Françoise Castex (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: European arrest warrant — political implications — the case of Aurore Martin
A European arrest warrant (EAW) was issued for Aurore Martin, a French citizen and a member of the Batasuna party, which is legal in France but illegal in Spain. She was arrested in France on 1 November 2012 and handed over to the Spanish authorities. She faces up to 12 years in prison for ‘participation in a terrorist organisation and terrorism’.
In its recommendations set out in the third report on the arrest warrant, published on 11 April 2011, the Commission insisted on the obligation of the Member States to use the European arrest warrant in compliance with fundamental rights.
It seems, however, that there are differences between the Member States in how the EAW is applied which give rise to inequalities between citizens of the EU. For example, if a defendant is Dutch, the Netherlands might refuse to hand the person over ‘for the execution of a prison sentence passed by a definitive court ruling’. This exception to the EAW was confirmed by the European Court of Justice on 6 October 2009 (Case C-123/08).






1.


What action does the Commission plan to take in order to put an end to differences in treatment between citizens of the EU, with some being protected in one Member State and not in another? In other words, what does the Commission intend to do in order to resolve the disparities within the EU in terms of ensuring that national legislations conform to the framework decision establishing the EAW?










2.


Where there are political implications, should the EAW not encompass broader exceptions and not be issued automatically, in order better to ensure fundamental rights, in particular the freedom of opinion?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(6 December 2012)
The European arrest warrant (EAW) is an entirely judicial procedure — including exhausting all judicial avenues of appeal. Neither the Commission nor the Member States can interfere in an individual EAW case. Pursuant to Article 1(3) and recitals 12 and 13 of the framework Decision on the EAW (369) all judicial decisions by the national courts — which are also the courts of the EU — are underpinned by the obligation to respect fundamental rights. 
The framework Decision-EAW (Article 4.6) envisages the possibility, which is the subject of Case C-123/08, to refuse surrender in respect of a person who is a national, resident or staying in the executing Member State on condition that the Member State will take over the execution of the sentence. However Member States cannot use this discretion to apply differences in treatment of citizens that would amount to discrimination and this is the clear position of the ECJ Grand Chamber in its recent judgment in the case of Lopes da Silva (C-42/11 5/09/2012).
The framework Decision-EAW clearly lays down many common rules and the Commission, by way of its implementation reports (370), experts meetings and ongoing monitoring of the application of the EAW, consistently promotes as much uniformity as possible in the application of the framework Decision.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-010129/12
alla Commissione
Gianluca Susta (S&D)
(7 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Sentenza della Corte di Cassazione italiana sul marchio di origine
Premesso che:






—


 con sentenza 19650 del 2012 la Suprema Corte di Cassazione della Repubblica italiana ha stabilito che, sulla base della legge 55 dell'8 aprile 2010, il marchio «Made in Italy» può essere apposto soltanto quando le fasi di lavorazione per realizzare un prodotto finito hanno avuto luogo prevalentemente nel territorio nazionale, e nello specifico se «almeno due delle fasi di lavorazione per ciascun settore sono state eseguite nel territorio medesimo e se per le rimanenti fasi è verificabile la tracciabilità» (art. 1, comma 4 della citata legge);










—


 detto principio, mutuato dalla legge 55, è in palese contrasto con le attuali disposizioni sulla determinazione dell'origine non preferenziale delle merci nel vigente codice doganale comunitario, che prevede che il luogo di origine dei prodotti sia quello dove è avvenuta «l'ultima lavorazione sostanziale»,




può la Commissione far sapere:







quale valutazione faccia di detta sentenza e quali iniziative intenda intraprendere verso la Repubblica italiana a seguito di questa nuova giurisprudenza della Suprema Corte;











se intenda procedere alla modifica delle attuali disposizioni del vigente codice doganale relative alla determinazione dell'origine non preferenziale per i prodotti realizzati in due o più paesi al fine di rafforzare la tutela del consumatore per quanto riguarda la tracciabilità dei prodotti;











quali iniziative legislative intenda assumere per meglio tutelare la tracciabilità dei prodotti dei settori tessile-abbigliamento, calzaturiero, pellame, ceramico, legno‐arredamento, valvolame, orafo, occhialeria, che risultano fortemente penalizzati dai ben noti e crescenti fenomeni di contraffazione, alla luce del ritiro da parte della Commissione del regolamento sull'indicazione del paese di origine di taluni prodotti importati da paesi terzi?




Risposta di Antonio Tajani a nome della Commissione
(31 gennaio 2013)






1.


Attualmente la Commissione non è in posizione per commentare la decisione della Suprema Corte di Cassazione italiana cui fa riferimento l'onorevole deputato. Sulla base delle informazioni più recenti fornite dalle autorità italiane, la legge n. 55 dell'8 aprile 2010 non è entrata in vigore poiché non sono stati adottati provvedimenti attuativi. La Commissione sta esaminando la situazione attuale.











2.


La neoadottata proposta della Commissione relativa al Codice doganale dell'Unione










2.


La neoadottata proposta della Commissione relativa al Codice doganale dell'Unione




 (371) non modifica il criterio dell'ultima trasformazione sostanziale al fine di determinare l'origine dei prodotti nella cui produzione è coinvolto più di un paese. Regole più dettagliate su come interpretare il criterio dell'ultima trasformazione sostanziale per i beni importati possono essere incluse negli atti delegati o di attuazione da predisporre in seguito all'adozione ad opera del Consiglio e del Parlamento europeo del nuovo Codice doganale.3. La tracciabilità è stata rafforzata di recente per certi prodotti (372) e sono in corso i lavori per migliorare ulteriormente la legislazione settoriale dell'UE (373). La Commissione sta lavorando inoltre su norme, certificazioni e etichettature dei prodotti al fine di rafforzarne la tracciabilità (374).
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010129/12
to the Commission
Gianluca Susta (S&D)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: Italian Supreme Court decision regarding labelling of origin
In its Judgment 19650 of 2012, the Italian Supreme Court ruled that, under Law 55 of 8 April 2010, the ‘Made in Italy’ label was only admissible if most of the manufacturing stages of the finished article and specifically at least two manufacturing stages for each type of product had taken place on national territory and if the traceability of the other phases was verifiable (Article 1(4)).
This principle, taken from Law 55, is in clear contradiction with the current provisions of the EU customs code regarding the non-preferential determination of origin of goods, which state that the origin of a product is the place where the last substantial manufacturing stage was completed.
In view of this:







What view does the Commission take of the judgment and what action will it take with regard to Italy following this new body of case law established by the Supreme Court?











Will it modify the current provisions of the relevant customs code regarding determination of the non-preferential of origin in respect of products manufactured in two or more countries, with a view to increasing consumer protection regarding the traceability of products?











What steps will it take to improve the traceability of products such as textile/clothes, footwear, furs, ceramics, wooden furnishings, valves, gold and eyewear, which are, to an increasing extent, being hit by counterfeit goods, following the withdrawal by the Commission of the draft regulation on indication of country of origin with regard to certain imports from third countries?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(31 January 2013)






1.


At present the Commission is not in a position to comment on the decision of the Italian Supreme Court referred to by the Honourable Member. According to the latest information provided by the Italian authorities, Law no 55 of 8 April 2010 has not entered into force as implementing provisions were not adopted. The Commission is examining the current situation.











2.


The recently adopted Commission's proposal for a Union Customs Code










2.


The recently adopted Commission's proposal for a Union Customs Code




 (375) does not change the criterion of last substantial transformation to determine the origin of goods in the production of which more than one country is involved. More detailed rules on how to interpret the last substantial transformation criterion for imported goods may be included in the Delegated or Implementing Acts to be prepared following adoption by the Council and the European parliament of the new Customs Code.






3.


Traceability was reinforced recently for some products










3.


Traceability was reinforced recently for some products




 (376) and work is ongoing to further improve EU sectorial legislation (377). Moreover, the Commission is working on standards, certification and labels for products with a view to strengthening traceability (378).(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010132/12
à la Commission
Christine De Veyrac (PPE)
(7 novembre 2012)

Objet: Supervision européenne des paris sportifs
Le 23 octobre 2012, la Commission européenne publiait un rapport qui proposait un plan d'action afin d'encadrer les jeux de hasard en ligne au niveau européen. Les objectifs de ce plan d'action sont: (1) de protéger les mineurs; (2) de protéger les consommateurs et les citoyens au sein de l'Union, notamment contre l'addiction; (3) de prévenir la fraude et le blanchiment d'argent; et (4) de sauvegarder l'intégrité du sport en luttant contre le trucage des rencontres sportives.
Il est à noter que ce rapport vient d'être publié alors que le handball français est secoué par une affaire de paris sportifs présumés de la part de joueurs professionnels.
La Commission, par la voix du Commissaire Barnier, a déclaré qu'une recommandation portant sur de meilleures pratiques pour lutter contre les trucages de matchs devrait être adoptée en 2014. Le commissaire Barnier a également précisé travailler sur l'interdiction pour les sportifs et leurs entourages de pouvoir eux-mêmes parier sur les rencontres de leurs clubs ou équipes.
Dans l'affaire des paris sportifs touchant des joueurs de handball en France, la justice française a mis en examen certains de ces joueurs pour avoir eux-mêmes pariés sur une rencontre de championnat et le club concerné se réserve le droit de mettre fin unilatéralement aux contrats des joueurs incriminés pour faute professionnelle.






1.


Sachant que les lois concernant les jeux d'argent sont très disparates entre les États membres, la Commission a-t-elle comme projet d'harmoniser la législation en vigueur au sein des pays de l'Union européenne ou souhaite-t-elle seulement imposer une protection minimale standard au sein de l'Union?










2.


Si la Commission choisit une protection minimale standard, peut-elle d'ores et déjà informer des indicateurs retenus afin de proposer des recommandations ayant pour but la réalisation des objectifs fixés par le rapport de communication publié le mois dernier?




Réponse donnée par M. Barnier au nom de la Commission
(17 janvier 2013)







1.


Ainsi que l'annonçait la communication










1.


Ainsi que l'annonçait la communication




 (379), la protection des consommateurs et l'intégrité du sport sont deux domaines couverts par le plan d'action. La Commission adoptera deux recommandations en vue d'assurer un niveau élevé de protection aux consommateurs de services de jeux de hasard, notamment aux mineurs, et une publicité socialement responsable. Elle adoptera aussi une recommandation pour lutter contre le trucage de matches lié à des paris. Le but de ces recommandations est de fixer, au niveau de l'UE, des principes communs que les États membres et les entreprises concernées seront encouragés à appliquer.






2.


L'objectif de la Commission étant d'œuvrer en faveur d'un niveau élevé de protection des consommateurs, les principes qu'elle prévoit de définir dans la recommandation correspondante incluent notamment l'enregistrement des joueurs, la réalisation de contrôles pour vérifier leur âge et leur identité, la mise en place de possibilités d'autolimitation, l'envoi de messages de mise en garde et le renvoi à des lignes d'assistance téléphonique. Les réponses à la consultation lancée dans le cadre du livre vert, les ateliers organisés en 2011










2.


L'objectif de la Commission étant d'œuvrer en faveur d'un niveau élevé de protection des consommateurs, les principes qu'elle prévoit de définir dans la recommandation correspondante incluent notamment l'enregistrement des joueurs, la réalisation de contrôles pour vérifier leur âge et leur identité, la mise en place de possibilités d'autolimitation, l'envoi de messages de mise en garde et le renvoi à des lignes d'assistance téléphonique. Les réponses à la consultation lancée dans le cadre du livre vert, les ateliers organisés en 2011




 (380) et les réunions qui se sont tenues avec les instances de réglementation des États membres de l'UE et de l'EEE et avec les parties prenantes ont été des sources d'information utiles, comme le confirment le document de travail des services de la Commission joint à la Communication et le résumé des réponses au livre vert (381). La Commission entend aussi élaborer ces recommandations en concertation avec les États membres et, si nécessaire, avec le secteur, et s'inspirer des bonnes pratiques existantes. En ce qui concerne le trucage de matches en relation avec des paris, elle s'attachera à améliorer l'échange de bonnes pratiques, à garantir le signalement mutuel et le suivi des activités suspectes, notamment par l'établissement de statistiques fiables sur l'ampleur du phénomène, et à établir des dispositions minimales concernant les conflits d'intérêts, comme l'interdiction de parier pour les sportifs et les responsables sportifs.(English version)
Question for written answer E-010132/12
to the Commission
Christine De Veyrac (PPE)
(7 November 2012)

Subject: European supervision of sports betting
On 23 October 2012, the Commission published a report in which it set out an action plan to supervise online gambling at European level. The purpose of the action plan is to (1) protect minors, (2) protect EU consumers and citizens, particularly from gambling addiction, (3) prevent fraud and money laundering, and (4) safeguard the integrity of sports by combating match-fixing.
The report comes at a time when French handball is beset by a scandal over alleged betting by professional players.
Speaking on behalf of the Commission, Commissioner Barnier recently announced that a recommendation on best practice to combat match-fixing would be adopted in 2014. He also said that the Commission was working on a proposal to ban players and those close to them from placing bets on matches involving their own clubs or teams. 
In France, a number of handball players have been charged for placing bets on a championship match. Their club reserves the right to unilaterally cancel the contracts of the players accused of professional misconduct.






1.


Given that laws on gambling vary greatly from one Member State to another, does the Commission intend to harmonise existing legislation or does it simply wish to introduce uniform minimum safeguards in the Union?










2.


If the Commission opts for minimum safeguards, can it state now what criteria would beused as the basis for the recommendations on how to achieve the objectives laid down inthe report published in October 2012?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)







1.


As announced in the communication










1.


As announced in the communication




 (382) protecting consumers and sport integrity are two areas covered in the action plan. The Commission will adopt two recommendations with the aim of providing a high level of common protection of consumers of gambling services, including the protection of minors, and gambling advertising which is socially responsible. The Commission will also adopt a recommendation to fight against betting-related match fixing. The recommendations will aim to set out common principles at EU level which the Member States and industry as applicable will be encouraged to apply. 






2.


The Commission aims to work towards a high level of protection of consumers and therefore the principles envisaged to be elaborated in the recommendation include registration of players, age verification and identification controls, self-restriction possibilities, warning messages and helplines. The responses to the Green Paper consultation, the workshops held in 2011










2.


The Commission aims to work towards a high level of protection of consumers and therefore the principles envisaged to be elaborated in the recommendation include registration of players, age verification and identification controls, self-restriction possibilities, warning messages and helplines. The responses to the Green Paper consultation, the workshops held in 2011




 (383), the meetings with the regulatory authorities of EU/EEA Member States and with the stakeholders have provided useful information, as indicated in the Staff Working Document accompanying the communication and in the summary of responses to the Green Paper (384). The Commission also intends to work with Member States in drawing up the recommendations, as well as with industry where necessary and will draw from existing good practices. As regards betting-related match-fixing, the Commission seeks to promote efficient exchange of good practices, to ensure mutual reporting and follow-up actions of suspicious activities including reliable data on the scale of the problem and to establish minimum conflict of interest provisions, such as betting bans for sport people and sport officials.(English version)
Question for written answer P-010133/12
to the Commission
Emma McClarkin (ECR)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Implementation of the Industrial Emissions (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) Directive (2010/75/EU)
With regard to the implementation of the Industrial Emissions (Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control) Directive (2010/75/EU), can the Commission confirm that the implementation date is four years from the date of the adoption of BAT (best available techniques) conclusions for specific industrial sectors rather than four years from the date of agreement of the BREF (BAT reference document) for those sectors?
Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)
Under Article 21(3) of Directive 2010/75/EU on industrial emissions (385), competent authorities are required to reconsider permit conditions within four years of publication, in the Official Journal, of an implementing decision containing BAT conclusions related to the main activity of the installation. If necessary, permit conditions should be updated to ensure compliance with such BAT conclusions. The actual operation of the installation should also comply with any updated permit conditions within that four-year window.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010135/12
alla Commissione
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Incontrastati e gravissimi atti di caccia illegale diffusa in tutta Italia nei confronti di specie di mammiferi e uccelli rari, rarissimi e addirittura in via di estinzione
Nei soli due mesi di settembre e ottobre 2012 in Italia, a seguito dell'apertura della stagione venatoria, si sono registrati gravissimi atti di caccia illegale nei confronti di specie di mammiferi e uccelli protetti, rarissimi o in via di estinzione (386).
Solo a titolo esemplificativo in Sardegna sono stati uccisi due fenicotteri rosa (Phoenicopterus roseus) e un cigno nero (Cygnus atratus). In Sicilia è stato ucciso Pilar, un biancone (Circaetus gallicus) protagonista di un ambizioso progetto di monitoraggio con telemetria satellitare (387) e una cicogna bianca (Ciconia ciconia). In Liguria e in Campania sono stati abbattuti alcuni sparvieri (Accipiter nisus), in Calabria un falco di palude (Circus aeruginosus) e un falco pecchiaiolo (Pernis apivorus), mentre in Puglia una poiana (Buteo buteo) e un assiolo (Otus scops). In Toscana sono stati uccisi rapaci delle specie sparviere (Accipiter nisus), smeriglio (Falco columbarius), lodolaio (Falco subbuteo), poiana (Buteo buteo), gufo (Asio otus), falco di palude (Circus aeruginosus) e addirittura due esemplari di ibis eremita (Geronticus eremita) del progetto Waldrappteam (388) uno dei quali, Goja, era considerato il cavallo di battaglia dell'intero progetto essendo il primo ibis eremita ad aver compiuto tra il 2011 e il 2012 autonomamente la migrazione, imparata da giovane, da Burghausen in Baviera (Germania) all'oasi WWF di Orbetello (GR) in Italia (389). Due esemplari di lupo (Canis lupus) sono stati uccisi nelle Marche, mentre un terzo è stato ucciso in Veneto.
Si tratta di casi che rappresentano solo la punta dell'iceberg di un fenomeno diffuso da nord a sud della penisola, isole comprese, che dimostrano come le autorità italiane non abbiano ancora adottato provvedimenti realmente efficaci per porre rimedio alla caccia illegale di uccelli e mammiferi protetti e come continuino a non potenziare, come sarebbe invece urgente fare, i preposti organi di vigilanza per contrastare questo grave fenomeno.
Considerata la sistematica incapacità da parte dell'Italia e delle sue regioni di garantire il pieno rispetto delle direttive «Uccelli» e «Habitat», non ritiene la Commissione di dover prendere i dovuti provvedimenti previsti dal diritto comunitario?
Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione
(9 gennaio 2013)
A seguito delle raccomandazioni (390) della conferenza sul bracconaggio degli uccelli organizzata dal segretariato della convenzione di Berna a Larnaca nel luglio 2011, la Commissione sta elaborando un elenco di azioni, nell’ambito della direttiva 2009/147/CE del Consiglio («direttiva sugli uccelli selvatici») (391), per affrontare l’abbattimento illegale di volatili nell’UE, compreso in Italia. Si tratta di un elenco ancora in fase di discussione con gli Stati membri, BirdLife International, la Federazione delle associazioni di caccia e conservazione dell’UE (FACE) e la convenzione di Berna. L’elenco delle possibili azioni comprende aspetti quali il controllo delle attività illegali, lo scambio di informazioni, la sensibilizzazione, la prevenzione, il miglioramento del coordinamento e dell’attività di controllo del rispetto della normativa.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010135/12
to the Commission
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Serious cases of unopposed illegal hunting of rare, very rare and, in some cases, critically endangered mammal and bird species throughout Italy
In the two months of September and October 2012 since the hunting season began in Italy, a number of extremely serious cases have been reported of illegal hunting of protected, very rare and critically endangered mammal and bird species (392).
By way of example, two Greater Flamingos (Phoenicopterus roseus) and a Black Swan (Cygnus atratus) were killedin Sardinia. In Sicily, Pilar, a Short-toed Snake Eagle (Circaetus gallicus) and the main subject of an ambitious telemetric satellite tracking project (393) and a White Stork (Ciconia ciconia) were killed. In Liguria and Campania a number of Eurasian Sparrowhawks (Accipiter nisus) were killed, in Calabria a Western Marsh-Harrier (Circus aeruginosus) and a European Honey Buzzard (Pernis apivorus) were killed, and in Puglia a Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo) and a European Scops Owl (Otus scops) were killed. In Tuscany, birds of prey killed included a Eurasian Sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus), a Merlin (Falco columbarius), a Eurasian Hobby (Falco subbuteo), a Common Buzzard (Buteo buteo), a Long-eared Owl (Asio otus), a Western Marsh-Harrier (Circus aeruginosus) and even two Waldrapps (Geronticus eremita) from the Waldrappteam project (394), one of which, Goja, was the project's key subject, having been the first Waldrapp to have completed alone the migration it learned as a fledgling from Burghausen in Baveria (Germany) to the WWF oasis in Orbetello (GR) in Italy between 2011 and 2012 (395). Two wolves (Canis lupus) were killed in the Marche region and a third was killed in the Veneto.
These cases are just the tip of the iceberg of a situation that is affecting Italy from north to south, islands included. They demonstrate that the Italian authorities have not yet taken genuinely effective measures to address the illegal hunting of protected birds and mammals and that despite the urgent need they have still not equipped the bodies responsible for monitoring this serious situation to combat it.
Given the systematic failure of Italy and its regions to uphold the ‘Birds’ and ‘Habitats’ directives, does the Commission not consider it necessary to take the measures provided for under Community law?
Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(9 January 2013)
Further to recommendations (396) of a conference on Illegal Killing of Birds organised by the Secretariat of the Bern Convention in Larnaca in July 2011, the Commission is preparing a list of possible actions, in the framework of Directive 2009/147/EC (397) (‘Birds Directive’), aimed at addressing illegal killing of birds in the EU, including in Italy. This is still under discussion with the Member States, BirdLife International, the Federation of the Associations for Hunting and Conservation of the EU (FACE) and the Bern Convention. The list of possible actions covers areas such as monitoring of illegal activities, information exchange, raising-awareness, prevention, enforcement improvements and coordination.
(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010136/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: Dumping tar-roti
Fir-rigward tal-miżuri tal-antidumping fuq l-importazzjonijiet ta’ roti li joriġinaw mir-Repubblika Popolari taċ-Ċina, imposti mir-Regolament ta' Implimentazzjoni tal-Kunsill (KE) Nru 990/2011, il-Kummissjoni ħarġet ir-Regolament (UE) Nru 875/2012 tal-25 ta’ Settembru 2012, li jiftaħ investigazzjoni li tħares lejn l-evitar tal-miżuri mill-Indoneżja, il-Malasja, is-Sri Lanka u t-Tuneżija.
Il-Kummissjoni kif biħsiebha tiżgura li l-esportaturi u l-produtturi f’dawn il-pajjiżi rispettivi jikkooperaw mal-investigazzjoni tagħha?
Tweġiba mogħtija f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(18 ta' Diċembru 2012)
Qabel ma nbdiet din l-investigazzjoni, u malli nbdiet, il-Kummissjoni għamlet ħilitha biex tikseb il-kooperazzjoni tal-operaturi ekonomiċi kollha kkonċernati li jinstabu fl-Indoneżja, fil-Malażja, fi Sri Lanka u fit-Tuneżija. B'hekk, il-Kummissjoni kkuntattjat lill-kumpaniji kollha li ġew identifikati mill-industrija tal-UE fit-talba tagħha, li potenzjalment huma involuti fl-esportazzjoni ta' roti lejn l-Unjoni Ewropea, Barra minn hekk, qabel ma nbdiet l-investigazzjoni, il-Kummissjoni kkuntattjat lill-awtoritajiet tal-pajjiżi kkonċernati u għarrfithom li kien maħsub li tinbeda din l-investigazzjoni u stiednithom, fost affarijiet oħra, jidentifikaw xi produtturi esportaturi oħra li forsi mhumiex magħrufin mill-Kummissjoni.
In-notifika ta' bidu sussegwentement ġiet ippubblikata f' Il-Ġurnal Uffiċjali u l-partijiet interessati kollha ġew mistiedna li jikkooperaw fil-proċediment. Il-kwestjonarju ntbagħat lill-produtturi esportaturi kollha li kienu ġew identifikati u lill-awtoritajiet biex dawn jibagħtuhom lil kull produttur esportatur ieħor ikkonċernat.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010136/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Bicycle dumping
With regard to the anti-dumping measures against imports of bicycles from the People’s Republic of China, imposed by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 990/2011, the Commission issued Regulation (EU) No 875/2012 on 25 September 2012, which initiates an investigation looking at possible circumvention through Indonesia, Malaysia, Sri Lanka and Tunisia.
How does the Commission plan to ensure that exporters and producers in these respective countries cooperate with its investigation?
Answer given by Mr De Gucht on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
The Commission has made every effort prior and upon initiation of this investigation to seek the cooperation of all economic operators concerned located in Indonesia, Malaysia Sri Lanka and Tunisia. Thus, the Commission contacted all the companies identified by the EU industry in their request as being potentially involved in exports of bicycles to the European Union. In addition, prior to the initiation, the Commission contacted the authorities of the countries concerned informing them of the envisaged initiation of the investigation in question and invited them, inter alia, to identify any other possible exporting producers which would not yet be known to the Commission. 
The notice of initiation was subsequently published in the Official Journal and all interested parties were invited to cooperate in the proceeding. The questionnaire was sent to all identified exporting producers and to the authorities for transmission to any other exporting producer concerned. 
(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010137/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: Id-drittijiet tal-passiġġieri
F’Marzu 2012 l-UE għaddiet leġiżlazzjoni biex ittejjeb id-drittijiet tal-passiġġieri, inkluż kumpens għat-tħassir u d-dewmien ta’ titjiriet tal-kumpaniji tal-ajru. Waqt li din il-leġiżlazzjoni hija pass sinifikanti 'l quddiem fit-tisħiħ tad-drittijiet fl-UE, dawn id-drittijiet jistgħu jibqgħu mhux effettivi jekk il-passiġġieri ma jieħdux vantaġġ sħiħ minnhom.
Il-Kummissjoni kif biħsiebha tikkomunika dawn il-bidliet lill-passiġġieri, sabiex tagħtihom is-setgħa jifhmu u jeżerċitaw id-drittijiet tagħhom?
Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Kallas f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(10 ta' Diċembru 2012)
Id-drittijiet tal-passiġġieri għal assistenza u kumpens f’sitwazzjonijiet ta’ rifjut ta’ imbarkazzjoni, ta’ notifika ta’ kanċellazzjoni minn ftit qabel jew ta’ dewmien twil mil-linji tal-ajru huma rregolati bir-Regolament (KE) 261/2004. Dan ir-Regolament wassal għal titjib sinjifikanti fl-esperjenza tal-ivvjaġġar tal-passiġġieri li jiltaqgħu ma’ dawn il-problemi. Il-Kummissjoni bħalissa qed twettaq analiżi ta’ dan ir-Regolament sabiex tikkunsidra fejn dan jista’ jittejjeb, bl-intenzjoni li tressaq proposti leġiżlattivi fi stadju bikri fl-2013.
L-opinjoni tal-Kummissjoni hija li l-passiġġieri għandhom jiġu mgħarrfa dwar id-drittijiet tagħhom sabiex ikunu jistgħu jeżerċitawhom b’mod effettiv. Minkejja li r-Regolament attwali jesiġi li t-trasportaturi tal-ajru javżaw lill-passiġġieri affetwati dwar id-drittijiet tagħhom, il-Kummissjoni tirrikonoxxi li kien hemm problemi f’dan ir-rigward. Fl-analiżi tar-Regolament il-Kummissjoni għalhekk qed tikkunsidra kif id-distribuzzjoni ta’ din l-informazzjoni tista’ tiġi mtejba.
Il-Kummissjoni se tkabbar ukoll l-ambitu tal-kampanja eżistenti tagħha ta’ informazzjoni għall-passiġġieri li se terġa’ tiġi mnedija fl-2013. Din il-kampanja se tqajjem sensibilizzazzjoni dwar id-drittijiet tal-passiġġieri fil-mezzi kollha tat-trasport.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010137/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Passenger rights
In March 2012 the EU passed legislation to improve passenger rights, including compensation for cancellations and delays on airlines. While this legislation is a significant step towards strengthening the rights of passengers in the EU, those rights could remain ineffective if passengers do not take full advantage of them.
Accordingly, how does the Commission intend to communicate these changes to passengers, in order to empower them to understand and exercise their extended rights?
Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)
The rights of passengers to assistance and compensation in situations of denied boarding, short-notice cancellation or long-delay by airlines is governed by Regulation (EC) 261/2004. This regulation has led to significant improvements in the travel experience of passengers subjected to such disruption. The Commission is currently undertaking a review of this regulation to consider where it might be improved, with the intention of putting forward legislative proposals in early 2013.
The Commission's view is that passengers have to be made aware of their rights in order to be able to exercise them effectively. Although the current Regulation requires air carriers to advise affected passengers of their rights the Commission is aware that there have been problems in this regard. The Commission is therefore considering in the review of the regulation how the distribution of such information could be improved.
The Commission will also expand the scope of its existing passenger information campaign which will be re-launched in 2013. This campaign will raise awareness on passenger rights across all modes of transport.
(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010138/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: Biljettar integrat
Fi studju reċenti dwar il-biljettar integrat f’servizzi ta’ transport tal-passiġġieri fuq distanzi twal, il-Kumitat għat-Trasport u t-Turiżmu spjega l-problemi kurrenti assoċjati ma' vvjaġġar fuq distanzi twal u kif sistema ta’ biljettar integrat tgħin biex tnaqqashom. Il-Kumitat stqarr mill-ġdid il-ħames rakkomandazzjonijiet preeżistenti biex jiżdiedu l-effiċjenza u l-livell ta’ interkonnessjoni:







jiżdiedu l-kwalità u l-kwantità tal-informazzjoni dwar it-trasport;











l-integrazzjoni tal-prezz tal-biljetti bejn il-ferroviji għal vjaġġi internazzjonali ssir prijorità;











jiġu esplorati sistemi tekniċi li jgħinu l-istabbiliment ta’ pjattaforma operazzjonali komuni;











jittieħed approċċ multimodali għad-drittijiet tal-passiġġieri;











tiġi promossa kultura ta’ mobilità.




Madankollu, l-istudju jinnota wkoll li l-progress tal-Istati Membri lejn integrazzjoni aħjar ta’ biljettar fis-settur ta’ vvjaġġar fuq distanzi twal mexa bil-mod.
Minħabba dawn ir-riżultati, il-Kummissjoni kif biħsiebha tappoġġa l-Istati Membri fl-indirizzar tan-nuqqas ta’ progress persistenti f’dan il-qasam?
Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Kallas f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(21 ta' Diċembru 2012)
Il-Kummissjoni taqbel mal-fehma li biljetti integrati fis-servizzi tat-trasport fuq distanzi twal se jagħmlu l-użu tat-trasport pubbliku aktar faċli, aktar flessibbli, u aktar attraenti għall-passiġġieri. 
Il-Kummissjoni tinsab għaddejja bi studju li seta’ ġie inawgurat bis-saħħa ta’ baġit li sar disponibbli bl-inizjattiva tal-Parlament Ewropew (398). 
Il-Kummissjoni għandha żżomm lill-Parlament Ewropew aġġornat dwar il-progress f’dan ir-rigward.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010138/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Integrated ticketing
In a recent study on integrated ticketing on long-distance passenger transport services, the Committee on Transport and Tourism outlined the current problems associated with long-distance travel and how an integrated ticketing system would help alleviate them. The committee restated five pre-existing recommendations to increase efficiency and the degree of interconnectedness:







increase the quality and quantity of information about transportation;











make rail-rail fare integration for international journeys a priority;











explore technical systems that would help establish a common operational platform;











take a multimodal approach to passenger rights;











promote a mobility culture.




However, the study also points out that Member States’ progress towards better ticketing integration in the long-distance travel sector has been slow.
In view of these findings, how does the Commission intend to support Member States in tackling the persistent lack of progress in this area?
Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The Commission shares the view that integrated ticketing on long-distance transport services will make public transport use easier, more flexible, and more attractive for passengers. 
The Commission is progressing with a study that it was able to launch thanks to a budget made available under the initiative of the European Parliament (399). 
The Commission shall endeavour to keep the European Parliament updated on its progress.
(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010140/12
lill-Kummissjoni (Viċi President / Rappreżentant Għoli)
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: VP/HR — ftehim UE-Russja
Fl-2011, l-UE spjegat fil-qasir bosta prerekwiżiti li r-Russja għandha tissodisfa sabiex jintlaħaq ftehim dwar il-politiki tal-viża u dwar it-triq li għandha tittieħed għas-sħubija tar-Russja fl-Organizzazzjoni Dinjija tal-Kummerċ. Dawn il-prerekwiżiti nkudew it-tmiem ta' kull oppressjoni tal-oppożizzjoni politika u tal-korruzzjoni ġudizzjarja kif ukoll it-tneħħija ta' truppi mill-Ġeorġja, apparti politiki aktar stretti rigward faċilitajiet nukleari. F’Ġunju 2011, l-UE u r-Russja ltaqgħu għal darb’oħra biex jaraw il-progress li sar u f’Awwissu ta’ din is-sena r-Russja ngħaqdet mal-Organizzazzjoni Dinjija tal-Kummerċ. 
Il-Viċi President/Rappreżentant Għoli b’liema mod tistenna li l-elezzjoni reċenti ta’ mexxej tal-oppożizzjoni ġdid fir-Russja tħalli impatt fuq l-abilità tal-pajjiż li jissodisfa l-prerekwiżiti spjegati mill-UE?
Tweġiba mogħtija mir-Rappreżentanta Għolja/il-Viċi President Ashton f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(25 ta' Jannar 2013)
L-UE ssegwi l-iżviluppi domestiċi fil-Federazzjoni Russa mill-qrib ħafna. L-elezzjoni tal-Kunsill ta' Koordinament tal-oppożizzjoni f'Ottubru 2012 kien pass importanti għall-moviment tal-oppożizzjoni Russu. Dan kien sinjal ieħor li s-soċjetà ċivili Russa laħqet il-maturità u hija lesta u għandha r-rieda li tieħu sehem fi proċessi politiċi f'pajjiżha. 
L-iżviluppi leġiżlattivi reċenti llimitaw l-ambitu għal żvilupp u azzjoni tas-soċjetà ċivili. L-UE esprimiet tħassib dwar dawn il-proċessi u ħeġġet lill-gvern Russu biex, minflok, jidħol fi djalogu mal-poplu Russu. 
Dawn il-kwistjonijiet, flimkien ma' oħrajn imsemmija mill-Onorevoli membru, li jinkludu n-negozjati dwar il-Ftehim il-Ġdid u l-adeżjoni tar-Russja għad-WTO, ġew indirizzati fis-Samit bejn l-UE u r-Russja li seħħ nhar il-21 ta' Diċembru, fi Brussell.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010140/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — EU-Russia agreement
In 2011, the EU outlined several prerequisites for Russia to fulfil in order to reach agreement on visa policies and on paving the way for Russian membership of the World Trade Organisation. These requirements included ending all repression of political opposition and judicial corruption and the removal of troops from Georgia, in addition to stricter policies regarding nuclear facilities. In June 2012, the EU and Russia met again to monitor progress and in August of this year Russia joined the World Trade Organisation.
In what way does the Vice-President/High Representative expect the recent election of a new opposition leadership in Russia to impact upon the country’s ability to meet the prerequisites outlined by the EU?
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(25 January 2013)
The EU follows the domestic developments in the Russian Federation very closely. The election of the opposition Coordination Council in October 2012 was an important step for the Russian opposition movement. It was yet another signal that the Russian civil society has come to maturity and is ready and willing to take part in political processes in their country. 
The recent legislative developments have limited the space for the civil society development and action. The EU has expressed concern over these processes and urged the Russian government to engage in a dialogue with the Russian people instead. 
These issues, as well as others mentioned by the Honourable member, including the New Agreement negotiations and Russia’s WTO accession, were addressed at the EU-Russia Summit, which took place on 21 December, in Brussels.
(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010141/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: Indikatur Instantanju tal-Kunfidenza tal-Konsumaturi 
Il-Kummissjoni dan l-aħħar ippublikat l-Indikatur Instantanju tal-Kunfidenza tal-Konsumaturi (CCI) għax-xahar ta’ Ottubru. Filwaqt li l-indikatur baqa' bejn wieħed u ieħor stabbli fl-UE u fiż-żona euro, ir-riżultati għadhom aktar baxxi sew mill-medja tal-UE fuq terminu twil.
Fid-dawl ta’ dawn ir-riżultati, x’azzjoni konkreta biħsiebha tieħu l-Kummissjoni sabiex iżżid il-kunfidenza tal-konsumatur?
Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Rehnon f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(10 ta' Jannar 2013)
L-indikaturi tal-kunfidenza minn stħarriġiet tan-negozji u tal-konsumaturi jindikaw li l-attività ekonomika fl-UE u ż-żona tal-euro fit-trimestru attwali baqgħet dgħajfa. Madanakollu, f’Novembru 2012, l-Indikatur tas-Sentiment Ekonomiku kiber fis-setturi kollha ħlief fil-kostruzzjoni, li hija affettwata mill-iżviluppi fil-passat.
Il-Kummissjoni tinsab minn ta’ quddiem fl-isforzi biex timplimenta malajr il-miżuri miftiehma biex il-kunfidenza titreġġgħa lura. Ibbażat l-approċċ tagħha fuq reazzjoni komprensiva għall-kriżi msejsa fuq sforzi li jwasslu biex tiġi żgurata l-istabbiltà makroekonomika, riformi strutturali, inklużi fis-swieq tax-xogħol, u l-promozzjoni ta' investiment immirat. Proposti leġiżlattivi għal regolamentazzjoni u superviżjoni finanzjarji aħjar fl-UE kif ukoll għal koordinazzjoni u sorveljanza msaħħa tal-politika ekonomika (eż. l-hekk imsejħa regolamenti “six-pack” u “two-pack”) huma wkoll parti minn din ir-reazzjoni. Stħarriġ dwar it-Tkabbir Ekonomiku Annwali fl-2013 jistabbilixxi l-prijoritajiet għall-azzjoni ta' politika madwar l-UE għat-12-18-il xahar li ġejjin u li jtejbu t-tkabbir u l-ħolqien tal-impjiegi. 
Reċentement, fit-28 ta' Novembru 2012, il-Kummissjoni adottat pjan dettaljat lejn Unjoni Ekonomika u Monetarja aktar profonda u li huwa wkoll parti mill-isforzi biex tinbena l-kunfidenza.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010141/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Flash Consumer Confidence Indicator
The Commission recently published the Flash Consumer Confidence Indicator (CCI) for the month of October. Whilst the indicator has remained fairly stable both in the EU and the euro area, the results still remain far below the EU long-term average.
In light of these outcomes, what concrete action can the Commission take in order to increase consumer confidence?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
Confidence indicators from business and consumer surveys point to continued weakness of economic activity in the EU and the euro area in the current quarter. However, in November 2012, the Economic Sentiment Indicator increased across all sectors except construction, which is affected by the past developments.
The Commission is at the forefront of the efforts to swiftly implement the agreed measures in order to bring back confidence. It has based its approach on a comprehensive response to crisis based on efforts leading to ensuring macroeconomic stability, structural reforms, including on the labour markets, and promoting targeted investment. Legislative proposals for a strengthened financial regulation and supervision in the EU as well for a reinforced economic policy coordination and surveillance (e.g. the so-called six-pack and two-pack regulations) are also part of this response. The 2013 Annual Growth Survey sets the priorities for policy-action across the EU for the next 12-18 months that would enhance growth and job creation. 
Recently, on 28 November 2012, the Commission adopted a blueprint on the way forward towards a deeper Economic and Monetary Union which is also part of the confidence building. 
(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010142/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: Erasmus Mundus
Dan l-aħħar l-UE fetħet il-programm Erasmus Mundus għal applikazzjonijiet mill-istudenti Sirjani bħala parti mill-Politika Ewropea tal-Viċinat tagħha. L-Erasmus Mundus jipprovdi boroż ta’ studju għall-istudenti, l-għalliema u r-riċerkaturi. L-UE enfasizzat li l-kunflitt fis-Sirja mhux se jaffettwa d-disponibilità ta’ dawn il-boroż ta’ studju għall-istudenti Sirjani.






1.


Il-Kummissjoni b’liema mod tistenna li din l-inizjattiva taffettwa r-relazzjoni bejn l-UE u s-Sirja? 










2.


Il-Kummissjoni qiegħda tbassar xi tip ta’ tħassib potenzjali dwar is-sigurtà għal dawk l-istudenti li jiddeċiedu japplikaw?




Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Füle f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(17 ta' Jannar 2013)
1.Minn Mejju 2011, il-kooperazzjoni bilaterali tal-UE mal-Gvern Sirjan ġiet sospiża Madankollu, l-UE tibqa’ impenjata biex tappoġġa l-poplu Sirjan. Hija notevolment tqis li huwa importanti li tkompli tappoġġa l-mobilità tal-istudenti sabiex tippermetti lill-istudenti Sirjani, minkejja l-kriżi, li jżommu aċċess għall-edukazzjoni ta’ kwalità ogħla. L-appoġġ lill-istudenti Sirjani huwa wkoll importanti għall-futur tal-pajjiż, li jgħin biex jistabbilixxu u jibnu relazzjonijiet ma’ studenti Ewropej. Dawn tal-aħħar jista’ jkollhom irwol importanti fil-bini mill-ġdid tal-pajjiż tagħhom, u se jibbenefikaw minn relazzjonijiet mill-qrib kemm huma kif ukoll l-UE. Mill-2007, studenti Sirjani bbenefikaw minn boroż ta’ studju tal-“Erasmus Mundus” fil-livelli kollha ta’ studji u minħabba żieda fil-finanzjament, parteċipazzjoni akbar ta’ studenti Sirjani hija prevista fil-futur.
2.Meta wieħed iqis is-sitwazzjoni diffiċli ħafna li l-pajjiż għaddej minnha bħalissa, l-UE qed tagħmel sforzi akbar sabiex tassigura li l-bibien tagħha jinżammu miftuħa għal kandidati Sirjani eliġibbli biex ikunu jistgħu jistudjaw f'universitajiet Ewropej permezz ta’ boroż ta’ studju Erasmus Mundus. L-istudenti Sirjani kollha u speċjalment l-istudenti vulnerabbli, bħall-persuni spustati internament u r-refuġjati Sirjani barra s-Sirja, jibqgħu eliġibbli. Biex dan jiżgurawh, serje ta’ azzjonijiet huma meħuda biex jinfurmaw lill-istudenti Sirjani dwar il-programm. Barra minn hekk, l-istudenti kollha Sirjani issa jistgħu japplikaw bħala “studenti li jinsabu f’sitwazzjoni vulnerabbli” li jimplika li dawn ma jkollhomx jgħaddu mill-Università lokali tagħhom jew il-Gvern sabiex jiġu evitati problemi ta’ sigurtà potenzjali.
Minħabba ż-żieda fil-finanzjament, il-Kummissjoni tista’ toffri aktar boroż ta’ studji u qed tħares wkoll lejn il-possibbiltà li testendi l-perjodu tal-mobilità għall-istudenti Sirjani li bħalissa qed jistudjaw fl-Ewropa permezz ta’ Erasmus Mundus.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010142/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Erasmus Mundus
The EU recently opened the Erasmus Mundus programme to applications from Syrian students as a part of its European Neighbourhood Policy. Erasmus Mundus provides scholarships for students, teachers and researchers. The EU has stressed that the conflict in Syria will not affect the availability of these scholarships to Syrian students.






1.


In what way does the Commission expect this initiative to affect relations between the EU and Syria?










2.


Does the Commission foresee any potential security concerns for those students who decide to apply?




Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
1.Since May 2011, EU bilateral cooperation with the Syrian Government has been suspended. However, the EU remains committed to supporting the Syrian people. It notably considers it important to continue to support student mobility in order to enable Syrian students, despite the crisis, to maintain access to quality higher education. Supporting Syrian students is also key for the future of the country, helping to establish and build relationships with European students. The latter may play an important role in the re-building of their country, and close relations will benefit both them and the EU. Since 2007, Syrian students have benefited from ‘Erasmus Mundus’ scholarships at all levels of studies and due to increased funding higher participation of Syrian students is foreseen in the future.
2.Considering the very difficult situation the country is currently undergoing, the EU is making extra efforts to ensure that its doors are kept open for eligible Syrian candidates to enable them to study at European universities through Erasmus Mundus scholarships. All Syrian students and especially vulnerable students, such as internally displaced persons and Syrian refugees outside Syria, remain eligible. To ensure this, a series of actions are undertaken to inform Syrian students about the programme. Moreover, all Syrian students can now apply as ‘students in a vulnerable situation’ implying that they do not have to pass through their local University or Government in order to avoid potential security problems.
 Due to the increased funding, the Commission is able to offer more scholarships and it is also looking into the possibility of extending the mobility period for Syrian students currently studying in Europe through Erasmus Mundus.
(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010143/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: Aromatizzanti tal-ikel
Sustanzi aromatizzanti huma komuni fl-ikel. Fl-1 ta’ Ottubru 2012, il-Kummissjoni adottat żewġ regolamenti ġodda dwar l-aromatizzanti tal-ikel, li jinkludu lista ta’ sustanzi aromatizzanti permessi fl-UE. Din il-leġiżlazzjoni tistipula li l-industrija tal-ikel fl-UE tista’ tagħmel użu minn sustanzi li jinsabu fuq din il-lista biss u li kull sustanza mhux elenkata eventwalment se tiġi projbita.






1.


Il-Kummissjoni x’impatt qed tistenna li din l-inizjattiva se jkollha fuq l-industrija tal-ikel fl-UE?










2.


X’perċentwal ta’ prodotti tal-ikel attwalment fis-suq jikkonformaw mal-firxa ta’ sustanzi msemmija fil-lista?




Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Borg f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(21 ta' Diċembru 2012)






1.


Il-lista l-ġdida tal-Unjoni tas-sustanzi aromatizzanti u tal-materjali sors (400) ittejjeb l-funzjonament tas-suq intern, hekk kif il-leġiżlazzjoni nazzjonali se tiġi eliminata gradwalment. Din iżżid ukoll it-trasparenza u ċ-ċertezza legali dwar liema sustanzi jistgħu jintużaw legalment fis-suq tal-UE mil-lum “il quddiem. Barra minn hekk, hija tippromwovi l-innovazzjoni billi l-operaturi tan-negozji tal-ikel għandhom il-possibbiltà japplikaw għal awtorizzazzjoni ta” sustanza ġdida fil-livell tal-Unjoni.










2.


Mill-informazzjoni li għandha l-Kummissjoni, jidher li r-rata ta’ konformità diġà hija għolja. Dan minħabba l-fatt li l-proċess tat-twaqqif tal-lista tal-Unjoni kien wieħed twil u għaldaqstant l-industrija milquta kellha biżżejjed żmien biex tipprepara għall-bidliet. Barra minn hekk, tranżizzjoni bla xkiel hija żgurata permezz ta’ żmien tranżitorju għall-konformità mogħti mil-leġiżlazzjoni dwar is-sustanzi aromatizzanti.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010143/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Food flavouring
Flavouring substances are common in food. On 1 October 2012, the Commission adopted two new regulations on food flavouring, which include a list of flavouring substances allowed in the EU. This legislation stipulates that the food industry in the EU can only make use of substances that are on this list and that any non-listed substances will eventually be banned.






1.


What impact does the Commission expect this initiative to have on the food industry in the EU?










2.


What is the percentage of food products currently on the market that comply with the range of substances mentioned in this list?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)







1.


The new Union list of flavourings and source materials










1.


The new Union list of flavourings and source materials




 (401) improves the functioning of the internal market as the national legislation will be phased out. It also increases the transparency and legal certainty regarding which substances can be legally used on the EU market from now on. Furthermore, it promotes innovation as the food business operators have the possibility to apply for an authorisation of a new substance at the Union level.





2.


To Commission's understanding the compliance rate is already high. This is due to the fact that the process of establishing the Union list has been lengthy and therefore the concerned industry has had time to get ready for the changes. In addition a smooth transition is ensured through the transitional time for compliance provided by the legislation on flavourings.




(Verżjoni Maltija)
Mistoqsija għal tweġiba bil-miktub E-010144/12
lill-Kummissjoni
David Casa (PPE)
(8 ta' Novembru 2012)

Suġġett: Servizz Ewropew ta' Pedaġġ Elettroniku 
Fl-2004 l-Kummissjoni kienet ippjanat li tuża s-Servizz Ewropew ta’ Pedaġġ Elettroniku (EETS) fl-UE kollha. Madankollu, il-Komunikazzjoni reċenti tal-Kummissjoni dwar l-Implimentazzjoni tas-Servizz Ewropew ta’ Pedaġġ Elettroniku (COM(2012)0474) tindika li l-progress li sar fir-rigward tal-EETS iddewmet serjament. L-Istati Membri ġew meħtieġa jkollhom l-oqsma legali tagħhom fis-seħħ sat-8 ta' Ottubru 2012. Madankollu, dawn ħabbtu wiċċhom ma’ ostakli differenti li kkawżaw id-dewmien fl-użu ta’ dan is-servizz.
Il-Kummissjoni tista’ tirraporta dwar kull żvilupp li sar fir-rigward ta’ din il-kwistjoni, wara d-data fil-mira tat-8 ta’ Ottubru 2012? 
Tweġiba mogħtija mis-Sur Kallas f'isem il-Kummissjoni
(19 ta' Diċembru 2012)
Kif imsemmi mill-Onorevoli Membru, il-Komunikazzjoni dwar l-Implimentazzjoni tas-Servizz Elettroniku Ewropew tan-Nollijiet (European Electronic Toll Service — EETS) indikat dewmien serju fl-implimentazzjoni mill-Istati Membri tal-EETS. Il-Kummissjoni pproponiet pjan ta’ azzjoni li progressivament jikseb l-interoperabbiltà Ewropea sħiħa billi jibda bl-adozzjoni bikrija tal-EETS fil-livell reġjonali (jiġifieri bejn l-Istati Membri ġirien) u offriet l-appoġġ tekniku u finanzjarju tagħha. B’mod partikolari, il-Kummissjoni:






—


fis-7 ta’ Novembru 2012 bagħtet talba għal informazzjoni, bil-ħsieb li tibda proċeduri ta’ ksur formali skont l-Artikolu 258 tat-Trattat dwar il-Funzjonament tal-Unjoni Ewropea kontra l-Istati Membri li ma kinux issodisfaw l-obbligi ġuridiċi tagħhom.










—


Saru bosta kuntatti bilaterali mal-Istati Membri, mal-kolletturi tan-nollijiet u mal-fornituri tal-EETS potenzjali, inkluż permezz tal-Kumitat tan-Nollijiet Elettroniċi, biex tidentifika l-problemi, tipproponi soluzzjonijiet u tiffaċilita l-kooperazzjoni neċessarja bejn il-partijiet involuti għal adozzjoni bikrija fil-livell reġjonali tal-EETS.










—


Offriet appoġġ finanzjarju għall-EETS permezz tal-Programm ta’ Ħidma Multiannwali tal-2012 tan-Netwerk Trans-Ewropew tat-Trasport. Is-sejħa għall-proposti korrispondenti se tiġi ppubblikata sa tmiem is-sena sabiex tappoġġa finanzjarjament dawk il-proġetti reġjonali li jistgħu juru l-maturità tagħhom, l-appoġġ sħiħ tal-Istati Membri involuti u d-dimensjoni tagħhom sabiex ikunu jistgħu jiġu estiżi fi stadju aktar tard biex ikopru t-toroq kollha tal-UE li għandhom in-nollijiet.




Il-Kummissjoni se tkompli ssegwi s-sitwazzjoni mill-qrib. Kif indikat fil-Komunikazzjoni, il-Kummissjoni se tieħu azzjoni ulterjuri, inkluż billi tipproponi bidliet leġiżlattivi, jekk il-pakkett ta’ miżuri msemmija hawn fuq ma jkunx biżżejjed biex jiżgura l-ħolqien effettiv tal-EETS.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010144/12
to the Commission
David Casa (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: European Electronic Toll Service
The Commission had planned to deploy the European Electronic Toll Service (EETS) EU‐wide back in 2004. However, the recent Commission Communication on the Implementation of the European Electronic Toll Service (COM(2012)0474) points out that the progress made with regard to the EETS has been seriously delayed. Member States were required to have their legal frameworks in place by 8 October 2012. However, they have faced different obstacles that have caused the delay in the deployment of this service.
Can the Commission report on any developments that have taken place in relation to this matter, following the target date in October?
Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
As referred to by the Honourable Member, the communication on the Implementation of the European Electronic Toll Service (EETS) pointed out serious delays in implementation by the Member States of EETS. The Commission proposed an action plan to progressively achieve full European interoperability starting with an early deployment of EETS at regional level (ie between neighbouring Member States) and offered its technical and financial support. In particular, the Commission: 






—


Sent a request for information on 7 November 2012, with a view to initiating formal infringement proceedings under Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union against Member States which have not fullfilled their legal obligations.










—


Held numerous bilateral contacts with Member States, toll chargers and potential EETS providers, including through the Electronic Toll Committee, to identify problems, propose solutions and facilitate the necessary cooperation between stakeholders for an early deployment at regional level of EETS. 










—


Offered financial support for EETS via the 2012 Multi-annual Work Programme of the Trans-European Transport Network. The corresponding call for proposals will be published by the end of the year in order to financially support those regional projects which can demonstrate their maturity, the full support of the Member States involved and their scalability so that they can be extended at a later stage to cover all EU tolled roads. 




The Commission will continue to closely monitor the situation. As indicated in the communication the Com will take further action, including proposing legislative changes, if the abovementioned package of measures proves to be insufficient to ensure the effective creation of a EETS. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010146/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: La Commissione tuteli la produzione europea di tabacco
Le misure proposte dalla Commissione per dismettere in Europa la produzione di tabacco rappresentano un serio pericolo per la salute dei cittadini europei e per i produttori agricoli. Infatti, qualora l'UE bandisse la produzione interna di tabacco, si assisterebbe a una totale importazione del prodotto da paesi terzi senza le garanzie di qualità e di trattamento che la normativa europea impone, ad esempio nel campo dei trattamenti con i fitofarmaci.
Inoltre, un intero settore agricolo e la conseguente filiera industriale sarebbero distrutti. La soppressione della produzione non implicherà la diretta conseguenza della fine del consumo del tabacco, ma una perdita produttiva per l'UE.






1.


Non ritiene la Commissione opportuno valutare le conseguenze di una decisione che non influirebbe direttamente sulla salute dei cittadini UE ma che invece graverebbe sulla loro situazione economica?










2.


Intende la Commissione modificare la sua decisione relativa alla futura Politica agricola comune al fine di garantire la giusta tutela della produzione ed evitare il ricorso massiccio alle importazioni da paesi terzi?




Risposta di Dacian Cioloș a nome della Commissione
(11 dicembre 2012)
In seguito alla riforma della politica agricola comune intervenuta nel 2003, lo speciale regime di sostegno al settore del tabacco greggio è stato eliminato progressivamente. La tabacchicoltura rientra ora nell'ambito del regime di pagamento unico (RPU o RPUS), che riguarda la maggior parte delle produzioni agricole.
Per quanto attiene alle conseguenze socioeconomiche di cambiamenti strutturali nella produzione del tabacco, la Commissione ritiene che la politica di sviluppo rurale dell'UE offra numerose possibilità per far fronte a tali situazioni.
Le attuali proposte della Commissione per la politica agricola comune dopo il 2013 non contengono alcun riferimento a una limitazione o all'abbandono della tabacchicoltura.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010146/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The Commission should protect European tobacco-growing
The measures proposed by the Commission to abandon tobacco-growing in Europe present a serious risk to the health of the European public and to tobacco growers. If the EU bans domestic tobacco growing, all our tobacco would then be imported from third countries without the quality and treatment safeguards provided by European legislation, for example as regards treatment with crop protection products.
In addition, a whole agricultural sector and the related industrial sector would be destroyed. Stopping production will not have the direct consequence of stopping tobacco consumption, but lead to a loss of production for the EU.






1.


Does the Commission not think it would be wise to assess the consequences of a decision that would not directly affect EU citizens' health but rather exacerbate their economic situation?










2.


Does the Commission intend to amend its decision on the future common agricultural policy in order to ensure proper protection of production and prevent wholesale recourse to imports from third countries?




.
Answer given by Mr Cioloș on behalf of the Commission
(11 December 2012)
Following the reform of the common agricultural policy of 2003, the special support scheme for the raw tobacco sector was phased out. Tobacco growing is covered now by the single payment scheme (SPS or SAPS) which covers the majority of agricultural productions. 
As to the economic and social implications of any structural changes in tobacco production the Commission is of the opinion that the EU rural development policy offers numerous possibilities to deal with such situations.
The current Commission proposals for the common agricultural policy post-2013 do not mention any limitation or abandonment of tobacco-growing.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010147/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: La Commissione tuteli la comunità cattolica di Bosnia
La fine della guerra civile e gli accordi di pace imposti dall'UE a Dayton hanno, di fatto, minato la sopravvivenza della comunità dei croati residente in Bosnia Erzegovina: nella sola città di Banja Luka, dei 40 000 croati residenti prima della guerra ne sono rimasti 3 000, e nell'intera Republika Srpska si è passati da 152 000 croati agli attuali 11 900. La comunità croata rappresenta l'unica comunità cattolica presente in Bosnia: nonostante non sia in atto una discussione sulla convivenza religiosa, la discriminazione in atto nei confronti dei croati in realtà è una discriminazione religiosa. Le cause giudiziarie intentate dagli ex abitanti croati della Bosnia per riottenere i beni sequestrati durante il conflitto sono in gran parte annullate e i serbi stanno tentando in tutti i modi di boicottare la ricostituzione della comunità cattolica croata.
Può la Commissione indicare:







sta monitorando la difficile situazione dei croati residenti in Bosnia?











quali azioni intende intraprendere affinché siano riconosciuti i diritti dei cittadini croati e il ripristino delle loro proprietà ante-guerra?











è a conoscenza del mancato riconoscimento di diritti civili da parte dei bosniaci sulla minoranza cattolica croata?




Risposta di Štefan Füle  a nome della Commissione
(21 dicembre 2012)
La Commissione invita l’onorevole parlamentare a consultare le risposte alle precedenti interrogazioni scritte E-010581/2011 ed E-001425/2012 (402).
Inoltre, la Commissione ricorda che i croati sono uno dei tre «popoli costituenti» della Bosnia-Erzegovina, con le garanzie, i diritti e i benefici che ne conseguono conformemente alla Costituzione. La Commissione segue la situazione politica, sociale, giuridica ed economica nel paese sotto ogni aspetto.
La Commissione ha sempre evidenziato l'importanza della libertà di religione nel corso degli incontri con le autorità della Bosnia-Erzegovina, nel quadro del processo di stabilizzazione e di associazione e in altre occasioni, in particolare durante le riunioni con i leader dei partiti politici. L'importanza di tale diritto fondamentale è sottolineata anche nella relazione 2012 relativa ai progressi compiuti dalla Bosnia-Erzegovina. 
La Commissione sostiene inoltre il rientro dei rifugiati e i relativi diritti, in linea con tutti gli accordi internazionali riguardanti la regione, ad esempio contribuendo al processo di Sarajevo. Lo strumento di assistenza preadesione (IPA) sosterrà la messa in atto, a livello nazionale, della strategia riveduta per l’attuazione di tale processo e dell'allegato VII dell'accordo di Dayton sui rifugiati e gli sfollati. In tale contesto l'IPA collaborerà con le autorità per elaborare misure socioeconomiche volte ad assicurare la sostenibilità dei rientri.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010147/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The Commission should protect the Catholic community in Bosnia
The end of the civil war and the peace agreements imposed by the EU in Dayton have actually threatened the survival of the communities of Croatians living in Bosnia-Herzegovina: in the town of Banja Luka alone, of the 40 000 Croatians who lived there before the war only 3 000 remain, and in the Republic of Serbia as a whole the number of Croatians has fallen from 152 000 to the current level of 11 900. The Croatian community is the only Catholic community in Bosnia: although peaceful religious coexistence is not in question, the current discrimination against Croatians is in reality religious discrimination. Many of the court cases brought by former Croatian residents in Bosnia to regain property that was seized during the conflict are cancelled and the Serbs are using all possible means to hinder the reestablishment of the Croatian Catholic community.
Can the Commission state:







Whether it is monitoring the difficult situation of Croatians living in Bosnia?











What measures it intends to take to ensure that Croatian citizens' rights are recognised and their pre-war property returned to them?











Whether it is aware of the Bosnians' failure to recognise the civil rights of the Croatian Catholic minority?




Answer given by Mr Füle  on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The Commission would like to refer the Honourable Member to the answers given to his previous questions E-010581/2011 and E-001425/2012 (403).
Furthermore, the Commission recalls that Croats are one of the three constituent peoples of Bosnia and Herzegovina with guarantees, rights and privileges as defined in the constitution. The Commission monitors the political, social, legal and economic situation in the country in all its aspects.
The Commission has been underlining on a regular basis the importance of freedom of religion during meetings with the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in the framework of the Stabilisation and Association Process as well as on other occasions, including during meetings with political party leaders. The importance of this fundamental right is also stressed in the Bosnia and Herzegovina 2012 Progress Report. 
The Commission also supports refugee return and the associated rights in line with all international agreements in the region amongst others as contributor to the Sarajevo process. The Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) will support the implementation, at the national level, of the revised strategy implementing this process and Annex VII of the Dayton Agreement on Refugees and Displaced Persons. In this context, IPA will work with the authorities on socioeconomic measures to ensure sustainability of returns.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010148/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: L'UE tuteli gli interessi delle PMI nei Balcani
L'eventuale uscita della Grecia dall'area dell'euro potrebbe diventare il terreno fertile per la conquista economica dei Balcani da parte di Cina, Turchia e Russia. Oggi la Grecia, geograficamente situata nei Balcani, ha una radicata presenza economica in paesi come Albania, Bulgaria, Serbia e Romania, e in alcuni di questi occupa il secondo posto in attività commerciali, bancarie e imprenditoriali. L'eventuale fallimento incontrollato della Grecia avrebbe ripercussioni negative sulle economie di tutti questi paesi, i quali diventerebbero essi stessi eventuali prede da conquistare da parte dei mercati limitrofi.
Nel caso di sue dismissioni per ragioni politiche ed economiche da queste aree, sia la Turchia, che ha inaugurato negli ultimi anni una politica estera che mira a renderla una potenza regionale del Mar Mediterraneo orientale con aspirazione ad estendersi fino ai Balcani e ai paesi mediorientali, sia la Russia, che ha già una notevole presenza economica nei Balcani, specialmente nel settore energetico con investimenti che riguardano gli oleodotti e i gasdotti, sia la Cina, dato che Pechino ha già effettuato notevoli investimenti, specialmente nelle infrastrutture portuali del Pireo, potrebbero inserirsi nelle aree balcaniche con investimenti economici a discapito della presenza delle aziende dell'UE.
Quale strategia intende attuare la Commissione per garantire nelle aree balcaniche gli interessi economici dell'UE e delle sue PMI?
Risposta di Antonio Tajani a nome della Commissione
(4 febbraio 2013)
Le relazioni dell'UE con i BO (404) sono disciplinate dal processo di stabilizzazione e associazione. In tale processo rientrano impegni specifici, tra cui lo stabilimento e le attività degli investitori e degli investimenti europei e quindi anche la protezione degli investimenti. Le PMI sono parte integrante di questo processo e dovrebbero beneficiare dell'intensificarsi delle relazioni tra l'UE e i paesi BO. La migliore garanzia dell'UE di radicare la regione BO nell'UE è data dal processo di allargamento e dalla prospettiva di un futuro status di membri dell'UE offerta a tali paesi. Il processo porta a risultati chiari. Diversi paesi negli ultimi anni hanno fatto progressi sulla via del processo di adesione. Si prevede che fra breve inizieranno negoziati d'adesione con il Montenegro (405). 
Nel contesto della sua strategia di allargamento la Commissione effettua regolarmente una valutazione del clima imprenditoriale nella regione BO. Il più recente rapporto comparativo è stato appena completato e comprende anche per la prima volta la Turchia. Questo esercizio, basato su un insieme di diversi indicatori, offre un quadro per valutare la convergenza delle politiche nazionali in tema di PMI nei singoli paesi rispetto ai 10 principi dello SBA (406), identifica i punti di forza e i punti deboli e delinea una serie di priorità per la riforma strategica per le PMI. Il previsto miglioramento delle condizioni quadro per le PMI nella regione va anche a vantaggio delle PMI unionali che hanno l'ambizione di impegnarsi in questi paesi attraverso le esportazioni e gli investimenti esteri diretti.
Per quanto concerne la Grecia, l'UE segue una chiara politica volta a mantenere la Grecia nell'Eurozona attraverso tutta una serie di misure di riforma finanziaria combinate con il sostegno finanziario dell'UE.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010148/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The EU should protect SMEs' interests in the Balkans
If Greece were to leave the euro area, the way could be left open for the economic conquest of the Balkans by China, Turkey and Russia. At present, Greece, which is geographically part of the Balkans, has a well-established economic presence in countries such as Albania, Bulgaria, Serbia and Romania, and in some of these countries it is the second largest player in the commercial, banking and enterprise sectors. Uncontrolled bankruptcy on the part of Greece would have negative repercussions on the economies of all these countries, which could themselves fall prey to neighbouring markets.
If Greece abandons these areas for political and economic reasons, both Turkey, which in recent years has launched a foreign policy aimed at making it a regional power in the eastern Mediterranean with the hope of expanding to the Balkans and Middle Eastern countries, and Russia, which already has a substantial economic presence in the Balkans, especially in the energy sector with investments relating to oil and gas pipelines, and China, given that Beijing has already made considerable investments, especially in the port infrastructure of Piraeus, could penetrate the Balkans with economic investments, pushing out EU businesses.
What strategy does the Commission intend to adopt in order to safeguard the economic interests of the EU and its SMEs in the Balkans?
Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(4 February 2013)
The EU's relations with the WB (407) are governed by the Stabilisation and Association process. Specific commitments are part of this process, including the establishment and operations of the European investors and investments and therefore investment protection. SMEs are fully included in this process and should benefit from the enhanced relations between the EU and WB countries. The EU's best guarantee to anchor the region of the WB in the EU is the enlargement process and the prospective of future EU Member status for these countries. The process leads to clear results. Various countries have moved up the ladder of the process in recent years. Accession negotiations with Montenegro are expected to start soon (408). 
Within the scope of its Enlargement Strategy, the Commission regularly conducts an assessment of the business climate in the WB region. The most recent benchmarking report has just been finalised and also includes Turkey for the first time. Built on a set of various indicators, this activity provides a framework to assess convergence of national SME policies in the respective countries with the 10 principles of the SBA (409), identifies strengths and weaknesses and provides a set of priorities for SME policy reforms. The envisaged improvement of framework conditions for SMEs in the region also benefits EU SMEs which have the ambition to engage in these countries through exports and foreign direct investment. 
Where Greece is concerned, the EU is following a clear policy of keeping Greece in the Eurozone through a variety of financial reform measures, combined with financial support from the EU. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010149/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Prípad Malala Yousafzai
Celým svetom v súčasnej dobe otriasa prípad Malaly Yousafzai, iba štrnásťročnej obete radikálnej nábožensko-politickej skupiny Taliban. V roku 2009 totiž vtedy jedenásťročné dievča hnutie otvorene kritizovalo. Počas posledných troch rokov sa jej islamisti viackrát vyhrážali a nedávno Malalu napadli v škole, ktorú navštevuje. Streľbou jej spôsobili vážne poranenia hlavy a krku a zranili aj ďalšie dve dievčatá. Taliban sa svojím útokom vôbec netají. Dôvod, pre ktorý chceli radikalisti zastreliť štrnásťročné dieťa, je podľa hovorcu hnutia to, že bola prozápadná, Taliban otvorene kritizovala a za svoj idol označovala prezidenta USA.
Plánuje Komisia v tejto súvislosti apelovať na Pakistanskú islamskú republiku, a to najmä aby bola Malale zabezpečená náležitá ochrana a aby bol prípad riadne vyšetrený a páchatelia spravodlivo odsúdení a potrestaní?
Odpoveď podpredsedníčky Komisie/vysokej predstaviteľky Ashtonovej v mene Komisie
(21. decembra 2012)
Vysoká predstaviteľka Ashtonová vo svojom vyhlásení krátko po správach o útoku na Malalu Yousafzaiovú vyzvala pakistanskú vládu, aby vynaložila maximálne úsilie o bezpečnosť Malaly Yousafzaiovej a jej rodiny. Pri pravidelných dialógoch s Pakistanom vyzvala EÚ jeho orgány, aby prijali opatrenia na zaistenie fyzickej bezpečnosti a ochranu práv všetkých občanov Pakistanu. 
K zodpovednosti za útok na Malalu Yousafzaiovú sa prihlásil pakistanský Taliban, ktorý ho odôvodnil tým, že nechceli, aby sa jej laické politické názory šírili v údolí Svát. Hoci sú zaistení asi štyria ľudia, podozriví páchatelia sú pravdepodobne stále na slobode. Pakistanské orgány ponúkli odmenu 10 miliónov rupií za informácie, ktoré umožnia zatknutie útočníkov. 
EÚ postupne zintenzívňuje dialóg s Pakistanom o problematike právneho štátu a ľudských práv. Od roku 2010 EÚ v Pakistane financuje projekty, a to aj v provincii Chajber Pachtunchwa, v ktorej sa nachádza údolie Svát. Tieto projekty majú zlepšiť presadzovanie práva, rozšíriť prístup k spravodlivosti a prispieť k mierovým iniciatívam prostredníctvom mediácie. V súvislosti s prijatím protiteroristickej bezpečnostnej stratégie EÚ pre Pakistan na zasadnutí Rady pre zahraničné veci 25. júna 2012 sa očakáva, že sa zároveň posilní podpora EÚ pre boj proti terorizmu v Pakistane. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010149/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The Case of Malala Yousafzai
The world has been shaken by the case of Malala Yousafzai who, only 14 years old, became a victim of the radical religious and political Taliban group. In 2009, when she was 11, she openly criticised the group. In the last three years, Malala received repeated threats from the Islamists and, most recently, was attacked in her school. Gunshots caused her serious head and neck injuries, while two other girls were also hurt. The Taliban does not deny its responsibility for the attack. Spokesmen of the radical group justify their intention to shoot and kill a 14-year-old child by her pro-Western tendencies, open criticism of the Taliban and idolisation of the US president. 
Is the Commission planning to call on the Islamic Republic of Pakistan to ensure sufficient protection for Malala in particular, proper investigation into the case, and unbiased prosecution and sentencing of the culprits? 
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission 
(21 December 2012)
In a statement issued shortly after the news of the attack on Malala Yousafzai, High Representative Ashton called on the Pakistani government to make every effort to ensure the safety of Malala Yousafzai and her family. In regular dialogues with Pakistan the EU has called on the Pakistani authorities to adopt measures to the ensure the physical security and protect the rights of all Pakistani citizens. 
Responsibility for the attack on Malala Yousafzai was claimed by the Pakistani Taliban who stated that they did not want her secular political views spreading in the Swat valley. It appears that up to four people are being held, but that the suspected perpetrators are still at large. The Pakistani authorities have offered a reward of 10 M rupees for information leading to the arrest of the attackers. 
The EU is in the process of enhancing dialogue with Pakistan on the rule of law and human rights matters. Since 2010 the EU has been funding projects in Pakistan, including in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, the province where the Swat valley is situated, intended to improve the quality of law enforcement, access to justice and contribute to peace-building initiatives through mediation. Following the adoption of the EU Counter Terrorism/Security Strategy for Pakistan at the 25 June 2012 Foreign Affairs Council, it is expected that EU support for counter-terrorism in Pakistan will also be reinforced. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010150/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Vigilanza da parte della Commissione sulle speculazioni rese possibili dalla garanzia accordata alle banche d'investimento
Monique Goyens, esponente del Bureau Européen des unions des consommateurs (BEUC), che ha contribuito alla redazione del rapporto Liikanen, ha espresso preoccupazione riguardo al fatto che la decisione di accordare una garanzia implicita da parte degli Stati membri alle banche di investimento le spinga a prendere rischi finanziari e speculativi eccessivi. La cura prevista potrebbe quindi, in un certo senso, favorire la malattia del sistema bancario che, consapevole del fatto di non poter fallire, potrebbe essere stimolato ad accollarsi rischi maggiori.






1.


La Commissione come intende vigilare affinché le banche di investimento non sfruttino tale garanzia per effettuare speculazioni azzardate?










2.


Ha previsto parametri per monitorare il comportamento delle banche di investimento?










3.


Nel caso sia necessario utilizzare le garanzie previste per il salvataggio di un istituto finanziario, ha previsto sanzioni in caso di speculazioni azzardate?




Risposta di Michel Barnier a nome della Commissione
(7 gennaio 2013)






1.


Una delle raccomandazioni contenute nella relazione del gruppo di esperti ad alto livello sulla riforma della struttura del settore bancario dell'UE riguarda la separazione obbligatoria della negoziazione per conto proprio e di altre attività di negoziazione ad elevato rischio dalle attività bancarie al dettaglio tradizionali e il divieto di finanziare le attività dell’impresa attiva nella negoziazione con i depositi garantiti. 




Dopo aver ricevuto la relazione, la Commissione ha tenuto una consultazione pubblica che si è conclusa il 13 novembre. Sulla base della consultazione e di ulteriori adeguamenti, la Commissione deciderà come procedere ulteriormente. 
La proposta della Commissione relativa al risanamento e alla risoluzione delle crisi bancarie del giugno 2012 mira a garantire la sicurezza delle funzioni essenziali delle banche, assicurando al contempo che i costi di ristrutturazione e di risoluzione delle crisi ricadano sui proprietari e creditori delle banche e non sui contribuenti.






2.


Le norme prudenziali a livello UE relative agli enti creditizi includono requisiti per misurare i rischi delle banche, comprese quelle di investimento, e fissano in particolare l’entità del capitale che le banche devono detenere per coprirsi di fronte a tali rischi. Attualmente spetta alle autorità nazionali di vigilanza accertarsi che le banche rispettino tali requisiti. 










3.


Il controllo degli aiuti di Stato promuove la disciplina nel settore finanziario, in quanto impone ai beneficiari una ristrutturazione generale per assicurarne la sostenibilità nel lungo termine senza aiuti di Stato, garantisce una ripartizione degli oneri per ridurre in futuro l’azzardo morale e assicura che i beneficiari siano soggetti a misure che limitano la distorsione della concorrenza, comprese misure di riduzione delle attività rischiose e speculative, diluzione del capitale, limitazione dei dividendi, dei pagamenti di cedole, dei bonus e delle 




stock options
, cessioni finalizzate ad aumentare la concorrenza, misure di apertura del mercato e limitazione di attività di espansione aggressive finanziate dallo Stato.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010150/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Vigilance by the Commission concerning speculation made possible by the guarantee granted to investment banks
Monique Goyens, speaking on behalf of the European Consumers' Organisation (BEUC), which helped draw up the Liikanen report, has voiced concern at the fact that the Member States' decision to grant an implicit guarantee to investment banks is prompting them to take excessive financial and speculative risks. Indeed, the remedy prescribed might feed the illness affecting the banking system — which, aware that it cannot fail, could be encouraged to take on greater risks.






1.


How does the Commission intend to ensure that the investment banks do not take advantage of this guarantee to indulge in risky speculation?










2.


Has it established parameters for monitoring the behaviour of the investment banks?










3.


In the event that the planned guarantees are required to save a financial institution, has it laid down penalties for cases of risky speculation?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)






1.


One of the recommendations in the report of the High-Level Expert Group on reforming the structure of the EU banking sector, is the mandatory separation of proprietary trading and other high-risk trading activities from traditional retail banking activities. The activities of the trading entity could not be funded by insured deposits. 




Upon receiving the report, the Commission held a public consultation until 13 November. Following the consultation and further calibration work, the Commission will decide on the next steps. 
The Commission proposal on bank recovery and resolution from June 2012 aims to ensure that banks' critical functions are safeguarded while the restructuring and resolving costs fall upon the bank's owners and creditors, and not on taxpayers.






2.


The EU-wide prudential rules on credit institutions include requirements to measure banks' risks, including those of investment banks, and specifically mandating how much capital banks have to hold against those risks. It is currently for national supervisory authorities to monitor that banks fulfil these requirements. 










3.


State aid control fosters discipline in the financial sector by requiring comprehensive restructuring from the beneficiaries to ensure their long-term viability without state aid, by ensuring burden-sharing to curtail future moral hazard and by ensuring that beneficiaries are subject to measures limiting competition distortion including the reduction of risky and speculative activities; capital dilution; limitations of dividends, coupon payments, bonuses and stock options; divestments to enhance competition; market-opening measures; and limitations on State-financed aggressive expansion.




(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010151/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Utečenecký tábor Dadaab
Dadaab je najväčší utečenecký tábor na svete s viac než 450 000 utečencami. Vznikol pred 20 rokmi ako tábor vytvorený pre 40 000 utečencov, postupne prerástol až do veľkosti mesta. Minuloročný enormný príval utečencov zo Somálska, ktorých z krajiny vyhnal hladomor a dlhotrvajúce nepokoje, spôsobil jednu z najväčších humanitárnych kríz na svete. Situácia v Dadaabe však nie je priaznivá ani po vyše roku od vypuknutia hladomoru. Podmienky sú otrasné, nedostatok pitnej vody, zvyšujúce sa riziko rozšírenia cholery, kvôli nedostatku učiteľov vyše 70 percent detí nenavštevuje školu. Mnohé rodiny v tábore takisto čelia násiliu, sexuálnemu obťažovaniu a diskriminácii.






1.


Prispieva Komisia k zlepšenu situácie v utečeneckom tábore Dadaab?










2.


Ak áno, akým konkrétnym spôsobom?




Odpoveď pani Georgievovej v mene Komisie
(21. decembra 2012)
EÚ patrí k najvýznamnejším humanitárnym aktérom v utečeneckých táboroch Dadaab, do ktorých v roku 2012 smerovalo viac ako 16 miliónov EUR na podporu humanitárnych opatrení. Ich cieľom je pokryť základné potreby tých najzraniteľnejších skupín so zameraním na zdravie, výživu (pre deti mladšie ako 5 rokov a tehotné a dojčiace ženy), vodu, hygienu a činnosti súvisiace s civilnou ochranou.
EÚ okrem toho prispela sumou 5 miliónov EUR úradu UNHCR (410), aby podporila plnenie jeho centrálneho koordinačného a ochranného mandátu v súlade so ženevským dohovorom. 
Osobitný regionálny program ochrany (4 milióny EUR) sa zameriava na zlepšenie príležitostí utečencov a hostiteľských spoločenstiev na zabezpečenie živobytia, ako aj na vytváranie prístupu k spravodlivosti v Dadaabe. V roku 2012 EÚ takisto podporila UNHCR v plnení plánu OCP (Operations Continuity Plan), ktorého cieľom je zlepšiť sebestačnosť utečencov a zmierniť negatívny dosah desaťročí poskytovania humanitárnej pomoci. Okrem toho EÚ financuje integrovaný vzdelávací program (3,5 milióna EUR) určený somálskym utečencom a miestnej hostiteľskej komunite v Dadaabe, v rámci ktorého získavajú vzdelanie a schopnosti potrebné pre život, ktoré im umožnia návrat do Somálska.
EÚ zároveň v roku 2012 pridelila vyše 6 miliónov EUR na posilnenie ochrany utečencov v Dadaabe. Hoci je bezpečnostná situácia naďalej nestabilná, cielenými akciami sa podarilo posilniť ochranné opatrenia, a to najmä prostredníctvom IRC (411) a DRC (412), ktoré sa sústreďujú na prechádzanie sexuálnemu alebo rodovo podmienenému násiliu a ochranu maloletých bez sprievodu. 
V roku 2013 bude pokračovať spolupráca s partnermi EÚ na činnostiach zameraných na záchranu životov. EÚ v spolupráci s ďalšími humanitárnymi a rozvojovými partnermi prispeje k vytváraniu priaznivého prostredia pre programy sebestačnosti. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010151/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Refugee camp Dadaab
Dadaab is the largest refugee camp in the world with over 450 000 refugees. It was formed 20 years ago as a camp originally for 40 000 refugees, gradually growing to the size of a large town. Last years’ massive influx of Somali refugees, fleeing their country due to famine and long term unrest, caused one of the largest humanitarian crises in the world. The situation in Dadaab is not however any better now, more than a year after the famine. Conditions are terrible: drinkable water supplies are inadequate; there is an increased risk of spread of cholera; more than 70% of children do not attend school due to a lack of teachers. Many families in the camp also deal with violence, sexual harassment and discrimination.






1.


Does the Commission contribute to improving conditions in the Dadaab refugee camp?










2.


If yes, how specifically?




Answer given by Ms Georgieva on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The EU is one of the major humanitarian actors in the Dadaab refugee camps allocating more than EUR 16 million in 2012 to support humanitarian actions aimed at covering the basic needs of the most vulnerable, with a focus on health, nutrition (for children under five and pregnant and lactating women), water and sanitation and protection-related activities.
The EU has also contributed EUR 5 million UNHCR (413) in fulfilling its core coordination and protection mandate, in line with the Geneva Convention. 
A separate Regional Protection Programme (EUR 4 million) is targeted at increasing livelihood opportunities for refugees and host communities as well as providing access to justice in Dadaab. In 2012, the EU also supported the UNHCR in the implementation of the Operations Continuity Plan (OCP), aimed at increasing refugee self-reliance and mitigating the negative impact of decades of humanitarian assistance. Moreover, an EU-funded integrated education programme (EUR 3.5 million) targeting Somali refugees and local host population in Dadaab is providing Somali refugees with education and life skills to enable them to return to Somalia.
The EU has also allocated more than EUR 6 million in 2012 to reinforce refugee protection in Dadaab. Although the security context remains fragile, protection measures have been reinforced through targeted actions notably with IRC (414) and DRC (415) focusing on preventing sexual/gender-based violence and protecting unaccompanied minors. 
In 2013, cooperation with EU partners shall continue with a focus on life saving activities. The EU will contribute to building a conducive environment for self-reliance programmes in collaboration with other humanitarian/ development partners. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010152/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Znižovanie emisií oxidu uhličitého
Európska komisia predložila návrhy na implementáciu nových cieľových hodnôt na ďalšie zníženie emisií oxidu uhličitého (CO2) z nových osobných automobilov a ľahkých úžitkových vozidiel do roku 2020. Predmetnými návrhmi by sa mali priemerné emisie z nových osobných automobilov v roku 2020 znížiť zo 135,7 gramov CO2 na km (g CO2/na km) (z roku 2011) na 95 g, a v roku 2015 by mali dosiahnuť podľa povinného cieľa hodnotu 130 g. Emisie z ľahkých úžitkových vozidiel by sa znížili zo 181,4 g (z roku 2010) na 147 g CO2/km v roku 2020, s dosiahnutím povinného cieľa 175 g v roku 2017. Ekologické organizácie však považujú návrhy Komisie za príliš slabé a upozorňujú, že navrhnuté normy efektívnosti sú poznačené silnoýmm nátlakom automobilovej lobby.
Aká je reakcia Komisie na upozornenia ekologických organizácií o tom, že návrhy súvisiace so znižovaním emisií oxidu uhličitého z nových osobných automobilov a ľahkých úžitkových vozidiel do roku 2020 sú nedostatočné a vytvorené pod nátlakom automobilovej lobby?
Odpoveď pani Hedegaardovej v mene Komisie
(7. januára 2013)
Návrhy Komisie boli vypracované po rozsiahlom procese analýzy, konzultácie a hodnotenia. Počas tohto procesu mali všetky zainteresované strany vrátane automobilového priemyslu a ekologických organizácií možnosť vyjadriť svoje stanovisko.
Cieľové hodnoty 95 g/km pre osobné automobily a 147 g/km pre ľahké úžitkové vozidlá určil zákonodarca v rámci spolurozhodovacieho procesu, ktorý viedol k existujúcim právnym predpisom. Súčasné návrhy Komisie potvrdzujú tieto ciele a stanovujú spôsoby, ako ich náležitým spôsobom uviesť do účinnosti.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010152/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Reducing carbon dioxide emissions
The European Commission presented proposals for the implementation of new target values for a further reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by new cars and vans by the year 2020. The proposals would reduce average emissions from new cars by 2020 from 135.7 grams CO2/km (g CO2/km) (in 2011) to 95 g, and by 2015 should achieve the mandated goal of 130 g. Emissions from vans would be reduced from 181.4 g (in 2010) to 147 g CO2/km by 2020, with the mandated goal of 175 g achieved by 2017. However, environmental organisations consider the Commission’s proposals to be too weak and warn that the suggested effectiveness norms are marked by strong pressure from the automobile lobby.
What is the Commission’s reaction to the environmental agencies’ warnings that the recommendations concerned with lowering carbon dioxide emissions caused by new cars and vans by 2020 are inadequate and created under pressure from the automobile lobby?
Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The Commission's proposals have been prepared following an extensive process of analysis, consultation and evaluation. During this process all stakeholders, including the automotive industry and environmental organisations, have had the opportunity to make their views known.
The target values of 95g/km for cars and 147g/km for light commercial vehicles were already established by the legislator in the co-decision processes leading to the existing Regulations. The Commission's current proposals confirm these targets and establish the modalities for putting them into force as requested.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010153/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Spravodlivé riešenie sporov v EÚ
Britská organizácia Fair Trails International a medzinárodná právnická firma Clifford Chance vypracovali analýzu, ktorá sa zaoberá spravodlivým riešením sporov v krajinách EÚ. Z prieskumu prípadov, ktoré rieši Európsky súd pre ľudské práva, vyplýva, že najhoršie sú na tom krajiny na juhovýchode Európy, a tiež Poľsko. Dochádza tu najmä k porušovaniu práv jednotlivca na slobodu a spravodlivý proces. Európsky súd pre ľudské práva najčastejšie kritizuje prieťahy v súdnych sporoch. Zadržanie pred začatím procesu v niektorých krajinách EÚ môže trvať aj 4 roky, v iných krajinách dokonca nie je ani limit stanovený. Autori prieskumu poukázali na zhoršujúci sa trend v porušovaní práva na spravodlivý proces v krajinách EÚ. V porovnaní s rokom 2007, keď sa zaznamenalo 37 prípadov, toto číslo vzrástlo v roku 2011 až na 75.
Čím je podľa názoru Komisie spôsobený takýto zhoršujúci sa trend v porušovaní práva na spravodlivý súdny proces v členských krajinách EÚ a akým spôsobom by mohla Komisia prispieť k zlepšeniu súčasnej situácie?
Odpoveď pani Redingovej v mene Komisie
(18. decembra 2012)
Komisia si dovoľuje odkázať váženú poslankyňu na odpoveď na písomnú otázku E‐009260/2012, ktorú predložila pani Bizottová. Komisii je známa štúdia organizácie Fair Trials International.
S cieľom rozšíriť vzájomné uznávanie súdnych rozhodnutí v rámci celej EÚ Komisia stanovuje minimálne normy ochrany podozrivých a obvinených osôb v rámci trestného konania. Na úrovni EÚ sa už dosiahol významný pokrok. Bola prijatá smernica o práve na tlmočenie a preklad (416) a smernica o práve na informácie v trestnom konaní (417). Komisia takisto navrhla smernicu o práve na prístup k advokátovi a o práve na komunikáciu po zatknutí (418), ktorá je predmetom rozpravy v Rade a Európskom parlamente. Komisia uskutočňuje aj štúdie týkajúce sa iniciatív v oblasti právnej pomoci a osobitných záruk pre zraniteľné osoby.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010153/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The fair resolution of disputes in the EU
The British organisation Fair Trails International and the international law firm Clifford Chance developed an analysis, focusing on the fair resolution of disputes within the EU. From the review of cases dealt with by the European Court of Human Rights, it concludes that the worst-off are countries in South-East Europe and also Poland. In particular there are violations of individual rights to freedom and a fair trial. The European Court of Human Rights most commonly criticises delays in litigation. Delays before the start of the process in some EU countries can be up to four years, and in other countries in fact no limit is even stated. The authors of the study highlighted the worsening trend of infringement upon the rights for fair process within the EU countries. In comparison with 2007, when 37 cases were recorded, this number rose to 75 in 2011.
What, in the Commission’s opinion, are the reasons for this worsening trend of violations of the right to a fair trial within Member States of the EU and how can the Commission contribute in improving the current situation?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to the answer to the Written Question E-009260/2012 by Ms Bizotto. The Commission is aware of the Study of Fair Trials International. 
In order to enhance mutual recognition of judicial decisions throughout the EU, the Commission is laying down minimum standards for the protection of suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings. Good progress has already been made at EU level. Directives on the right to interpretation and translation (419) and on the right to information in criminal proceedings (420) have been adopted. The Commission proposed a directive on the right of access to a lawyer and on the right to communicate upon arrest (421), which is under discussion in the Council and European Parliament. The Commission is conducting studies on initiatives on legal aid and special safeguards for vulnerable persons. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010154/12
aan de Commissie
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 november 2012)

Betreft: Integratie moslims
Is de Commissie bekend met het artikel in de NRC (422) van 6 november jl. waarin wordt beschreven dat het aantal en het percentage in Nederland geboren moslims dat naar de moskee gaat, de afgelopen jaren is gestegen? Volgens het artikel bidt 76 % van de Marokkaanse moslims vijf keer per dag. Van de Turkse moslims is dat percentage 27. Vrouwen gaan minder vaak naar de moskee, maar bidden vaker vijf keer per dag. Het artikel is gebaseerd op het SCP-rapport „Moslims in Nederland 2012”.
In het SCP-rapport wordt gesteld dat degene die meer belang hecht aan zijn geloof zich sterker verbonden voelt met zijn (oorspronkelijke) land van herkomst en minder met Nederland. Ook blijken moslims uit die groep zich bovendien vaker binnen de eigen etnische (Marokkaanse of Turkse) groep te bewegen.






1.


Is de Commissie het eens met de conclusie van het SCP dat deze absolute en relatieve stijgingen van het aantal Marokkanen en Turken dat naar een moskee gaat een indicatie zijn van afnemende integratie van moslims in Nederland?










2.


Zo nee, waarom niet?










3.


Wat vindt de Commissie van het feit dat de Marokkaanse en Turkse moslims zich steeds meer verbonden voelen met de cultuur van hun (oorspronkelijke) vaderland?










4.


Wat vindt de Commissie ervan dat moslims zich vaker bewegen binnen de eigen groep en zich daardoor minder oriënteren op de Nederlandse samenleving als geheel?










5.


Het beleid van de Commissie is erop gericht dat de onderlinge communicatie tussen de verschillende gemeenschappen wordt aangemoedigd. Is de Commissie van mening dat deze isolatie van de moslimgemeenschappen in Nederland het integratiebeleid (communicatiestimulering) van de EU bemoeilijkt?










6.


Ziet de Commissie deze isolatie daarom als een ongewenste ontwikkeling?










7.


Zo ja, betekent dit dan dat de Commissie een afname van het moskeebezoek van Marokkaanse en Turkse moslims voorstaat?










8.


Zo neen, hoe valt het stimuleren van de communicatie tussen bevolkingsgroepen te rijmen met de toenemende oriëntatie op de eigen etnische groep van Marokkaanse en Turkse moslims in Nederland?




Antwoord van mevrouw Malmström namens de Commissie
(17 januari 2013)
De Commissie is op de hoogte van de studie die wordt vermeld in het artikel waar het geachte Parlementslid naar verwijst.
In de voorbije decennia werden de Europese samenlevingen geconfronteerd met de vraag hoe zij gepast kunnen reageren op de groeiende maatschappelijke, culturele, etnische en religieuze diversiteit in een democratische context. (423) Integratie werkt gewoonlijk het best als minderheids‐ en meerderheidsgroepen in het dagelijkse leven met elkaar omgaan. Om de dialoog in de genoemde context te stimuleren, moet het beleid zowel op moslims als op de meerderheid van de bevolking gericht zijn (424).
In dit kader heeft de Commissie de uitwisseling van goede praktijken gesteund om lidstaten te helpen bij het waarborgen van een zinvolle interactie tussen mensen met een verschillende culturele of religieuze achtergrond (425).
Integratie is een progressief tweezijdig proces: migranten en minderheden moeten het rechtssysteem van het land waarin ze leven aanvaarden, inclusief de grondrechten, en zich inspannen om te integreren. Tegelijk moet de samenleving in het algemeen manieren vinden om de integratie van minderheden en migranten te bevorderen (426).
Een andere manier om religieus geloof uit te drukken kan niet zomaar worden toegeschreven aan onwil om te integreren en kan niet worden beschouwd als een oorzaak van minder effectieve integratie (427). Veel migranten in Europa zien hun geloof als een belangrijke reden voor discriminatie en dat kan een rol spelen in de mate waarin ze zich  terugtrekken in hun eigen religieuze groep.
Vrijheid van godsdienst is samen met de vrijheid van gedachte en geweten een van de essentiële grondslagen van onze democratische samenlevingen die zijn vastgelegd in het Handvest van de grondrechten en in het Europees Verdrag tot bescherming van de rechten van mens. Dat geldt voor iedereen in gelijke mate.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010154/12
to the Commission
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Integration of Muslims
Is the Commission aware of the NRC article (428) of 6 November 2012, indicating that mosque attendance in terms of number and percentage by Muslims born in the Netherlands has increased in recent years? According to the article, 76% of Moroccan Muslims and 27% of Turkish Muslims pray five times a day. While mosque attendance by women is less frequent, the number of women praying five times a day is greater. The article is based on the findings of the Social and Cultural Planning Office (SCP) regarding ‘Muslims in the Netherlands 2012’.
The SCP report concludes that those attaching greater importance to their religious beliefs typically feel closer ties with their country of (ethnic) origin than with the Netherlands, Muslims in this category tending to remain within their own ethnic groups and associate more frequently with fellow Moroccans or Turks.






1.


Does the Commission agree with the findings of the SCP that this increase in mosque attendance by Moroccans and Turks in absolute and relative terms reflects a lesser degree of integration of Muslims in the Netherlands?










2.


If not, why not?










3.


What view does the Commission take of the fact that Moroccan and Turkish Muslims are identifying to an increasing extent with the culture of their country of (ethnic) origin?










4.


What view does the Commission take of the fact that Muslims are tending to remain within their own ethnic group, thereby weakening their ties with Dutch society as a whole?










5.


Does the Commission, which is seeking to encourage integration and communication between different communities, take the view that the growing isolation of the Muslim community in the Netherlands is undermining EU policy in this respect?










6.


Does the Commission accordingly consider such isolation to be an undesirable development?










7.


If so, does this mean that the Commission would be in favour of lower attendance at mosques by Moroccan and Turkish Muslims?










8.


If not, how can efforts to encourage communication between different communities be reconciled with the growing tendency of Moroccan and Turkish Muslims in the Netherlands to remain within their own ethnic groups? 




Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
The Commission is aware of the study mentioned in the article to which the Honourable Member refers. 
Over recent decades European societies have faced the question of how to respond appropriately to increasing social, cultural, ethnic and religious diversity in a democratic context. (429) Usually, integration works best when minority and majority societies interact in everyday life. Therefore to stimulate dialogue in the mentioned context, policies should target both Muslims and the majority population (430). 
In this respect, the Commission has supported the exchange of best practices to help Member States to ensure meaningful interaction between people with different backgrounds, be they cultural or religious (431).
Integration is a progressive two way process: migrants and minorities must accept the legal system of the country in which they live, including fundamental rights, and make integration efforts. At the same time, society at large will have to find ways to facilitate integration of minorities and migrants (432). 
Different ways to express religious beliefs cannot automatically be ascribed to a lesser will to integrate nor be viewed as a cause for a less effective integration (433). Many migrants living in Europe view their religion as a major reason for discrimination and this can play a role in the degree to which they withdraw into their own religious group.
Freedom of religion, along with freedom of thought and conscience, constitutes one of the essential foundations of our democratic societies, enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and in the European Convention on Human Rights. It applies equally to all individuals. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010155/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Rozvojové vzdelávanie a aktívne globálne občianstvo
V Európskom parlamente bolo prijaté Písomné vyhlásenie o rozvojovom vzdelávaní a aktívnom globálnom občianstve. Vyhlásenie bolo oficiálne schválené 5. júla 2012. Toto písomné vyhlásenie je zamerané na posilňovanie politík rozvojového vzdelávania na národnej, ako aj na európskej úrovni, a zároveň stanovuje rámec debát o úlohe európskych občanov v oblasti rozvoja. Európska únia je jedným z najvýznamnejších donorov v oblasti rozvojového vzdelávania a zvyšovania povedomia v Európe, podrobná stratégia zameraná na rozvojové vzdelávanie však ešte stále chýba. Aj keď Európania plne podporujú globálny rozvoj, aktívne osobné angažovanie sa pre globálnu spravodlivosť je stále nízke: 89 % Európanov pripisuje veľkú hodnotu rozvojovej spolupráci, ale len 4 % sa na nej aktívne podieľajú.






1.


Plánuje Komisia vypracovať podrobnú stratégiu zameranú na rozvojové vzdelávanie?










2.


Plánuje Komisia kampaň, ktorá by motivovala Európanov viac sa aktívne osobne angažovať pre globálnu spravodlivosť?




Odpoveď pána Piebalgsa v mene Komisie
(8. januára 2013)






1.


V návrhu viacročného finančného rámca (VFR) na roky 2014 – 2020, ktorý vypracovala Komisia, sa odporúča zachovať zložku Rozvojové vzdelávanie a zvyšovanie informovanosti (Development Education and Awareness Raising – DEAR) ako súčasť tematického programu pre občiansku spoločnosť a miestne orgány.




Komisia vypracuje svoju stratégiu rozvojového vzdelávania a zvyšovania informovanosti v rámci viacročného indikatívneho programu (Multi-Annual Indicative Programme – MIP) na roky 2014 – 2020.
S cieľom rozšíriť priestor pre výmenu názorov a prispieť k stanoveniu viacročnej stratégie týkajúcej sa DEAR sa pripravuje pracovný dokument útvarov Komisie o DEAR, v ktorom sú zohľadnené závery štruktúrovaného dialógu a štúdia o DEAR, ako aj vyhlásenie Európskeho parlamentu z 5. júla 2012.






2.


Cieľom DEAR je podporovať správne chápanie a podnietiť názory a účasť občanov, pokiaľ ide o celosvetový rozvoj a boj proti chudobe. Komisia v súčasnosti realizuje opatrenia DEAR v rámci tematického programu Neštátni účastníci a miestne orgány.




Realizácia súčasného programu, ktorého cieľom je „spolufinancovanie iniciatív navrhnutých a/alebo uskutočnených organizáciami občianskej spoločnosti a miestnymi orgánmi“, vychádza predovšetkým z iniciatív príslušných účastníkov. V súlade s nariadením o rozpočtových pravidlách Komisia realizuje program DEAR predovšetkým prostredníctvom výziev na predloženie návrhov a podporuje široký okruh projektov DEAR.
Aby sa zvýšilo pokrytie kampaní a aktivít na ochranu záujmov, ktorých cieľom je podpora angažovanosti Európanov v celosvetových otázkach, Komisia mieni klásť zvýšený dôraz na podporu iniciatív zameraných na zvyšovanie informovanosti, ktoré prebiehajú na celoeurópskej úrovni.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010155/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Development education and active global citizenship
The European Parliament has adopted a written declaration on development education and active global citizenship. The declaration was officially signed on 5 June 2012. This written declaration aims to strengthen the policies of development education on national and European levels and at the same time determine the framework of debates on the role of EU citizens in the area of development. The EU is one of the most significant donors to development education and awareness-raising in Europe; however, a detailed strategy for development education is still missing. Although Europeans fully support global development, personal engagement in global justice is still low: 89% of Europeans ascribe great value to development cooperation, while only 4% are actively involved. 






1.


Is the Commission planning to advance a detailed strategy for development education?










2.


Is the Commission planning a campaign motivating Europeans to be more personally involved in the pursuit of global justice? 




Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
1.The Commission's proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for the period 2014-2020 proposes to maintain the Development Education and Awareness Raising (DEAR) component as part of the thematic programme for Civil Society and Local Authorities. 
The Commission will develop its Strategy for Development Education and Awareness Raising in the Multi-Annual Indicative Programme (MIP) for 2014-2017. 
In order to broaden the reflections and to contribute to the definition of the Multiannual Strategy regarding DEAR, a Staff Working Document concerning DEAR is under preparation, taking into account the conclusions of the Structured Dialogue and the DEAR Study, as well as the declaration of the European Parliament of July 5th 2012. 






2.


The aim of DEAR is to promote citizens' understanding of, reflection on, and participation in global development and the fight against poverty. The Commission currently implements DEAR activities under the Non-State Actors and Local Authorities thematic programme. 




The implementation of the current programme, which is meant to ‘co-finance initiatives proposed and/or carried out by civil society organisations and local authorities’, is primarily based on the initiatives of the relevant actors. In line with the Financial Regulation, the Commission implements the DEAR programme principally through Calls for Proposals, and supports a wide range of DEAR projects.
In order to increase the coverage of campaigns and advocacy activities aiming at the promotion of Europeans' engagement in global issues, the Commission intends to put further emphasis on supporting development awareness raising initiatives which operate on a European scale.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010156/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Pomoc detským utečencom zo Sýrie
Konflikt v Sýrii má na svedomí viac ako 120 000 utečencov, ktorí hľadajú pomoc a bezpečie v Jordánsku, Libanone, Iraku a Turecku. Asi polovica z nich sú deti – viac ako 50-tisíc detských utečencov zo Sýrie hľadá bezpečie a pomoc v okolitých krajinách. Zažiť ozbrojený konflikt na vlastnej koži predstavuje pre deti obrovskú traumu – mnohé z nich sa stali obeťami, zasiahli ich výstrely, úlomky výbušnín, vypálili ich domovy alebo ich prevrátili naruby. Mnohé deti prišli o rodičov, súrodencov, kamarátov a pocit bezpečia. Pomoc detským utečencom aj deťom, ktoré ostali na území Sýrie, je nevyhnutná.
Aké konkrétne opatrenia zamerané na pomoc detským utečencom zo Sýrie prijala, alebo sa chystá prijať Komisia?
Odpoveď pani Georgievovej v mene Komisie
(23. januára 2013)
Celkový počet sýrskych utečencov, ktorí utiekli do susedných krajín, predstavuje cez 609 000 osôb, pričom 70 % z toho sú ženy a deti (podľa údajov UNHCR, 11. januára 2013). 
Európska únia je v popredí celosvetového humanitárneho úsilia a v tejto chvíli je hlavným humanitárnym donorom v súvislosti s touto krízou: k 11. januáru dosiahol celkový spoločný humanitárny príspevok EÚ sumu 362,8 milióna EUR [213,5 milióna EUR od členských štátov + 149,3 milióna EUR z rozpočtu EÚ]. Okrem uvedenej sumy sa z rozpočtového riadku pre humanitárnu pomoc Európskej únie pridelilo 52,8 milióna EUR na poskytovanie pomoci utečencom v krajinách susediacich so Sýriou.
Túto podporu sprostredkúvajú rozličné humanitárne agentúry OSN a medzinárodné mimovládne organizácie vrátane UNHCR a organizácií, ktorých pôsobnosť sa zameriava na pomoc deťom a ich ochranu, ako napríklad UNICEF a Save the Children.
UNICEF-u bola napríklad do 1. januára 2013 poskytnutá suma vo výške 13 miliónov EUR na psychologické a sociálne činnosti, vzdelávanie a vodu, sanitárne a hygienické opatrenia (WASH) v Jordánsku. K rovnakému dátumu organizácia Save the Children dostala finančné prostriedky vo výške 1 milión EUR na psychologické a sociálne činnosti v Jordánsku a UNHCR v Libanone sa poskytlo 5 miliónov EUR na podporu vnútroštátnych štruktúr, aby boli schopné poradiť si s prílivom utečencov, najmä pokiaľ ide o vzdelávací systém. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010156/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Aid for child refugees from Syria
The conflict in Syria has been responsible for over 120 000 refugees, who are seeking help and safety in Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey. Roughly half of these are children — more than 50 000 children refugees from Syria seeking safety and help in neighbouring countries. For children to experience an armed conflict first hand is a massive trauma — many of them have been victims, wounded by bullets, shrapnel, had homes burnt out or been looted. Many children have lost parents, siblings, friends and any sense of security. Aid for child refugees and for children who remain in Syria is a necessity.
What specific steps has the Commission adopted, or what steps is it preparing to adopt to aid child refugees from Syria?
Answer given by Ms Georgieva on behalf of the Commission
(23 January 2013)
The total number of Syrian refugees who fled to neighbouring countries stands at over 609 000 000, 70% being women and children (UNHCR, 11 January 2013). 
The European Union has been at the forefront of the global humanitarian efforts and is at the moment the main humanitarian donor for this crisis: as of 11 January, the EU total collective humanitarian contribution reaches EUR 362.8 M [EUR 213.5 M from Member States + EUR 149.3 M from the EU budget]. Out of this amount, EUR 52.8 M have been allocated from the European Union humanitarian budget line to provide assistance to refugees in Syria neighbouring countries.
This support is channelled through various UN humanitarian agencies and INGOs, including UNHCR and those whose mandate focuses on the protection and assistance of children, such as, for example, Unicef and Save the Children.
As of 11 January 2013, for instance, Unicef has received a total amount of EUR 13 million for psychosocial, education and water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) activities in Jordan. As of the same date, Save the Children has been funded with EUR 1 M for psychosocial activities in Jordan and EUR 5 million has been provided to UNHCR in Lebanon to support the capacity of national structures to deal with the refugee influx, notably in the education system. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010157/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Rozvoj občianskej spoločnosti v Tunisku
Podpora občianskej spoločnosti v Tunisku je po transformácii krajiny po Jazmínovej revolúcii v roku 2011 mimoriadne dôležitá. Je dôležité, aby sa občianska spoločnosť v Tunisku viac angažovala a vytvárala tlak na vládu, ale takisto aby jej pomáhala, nakoľko organizácie občianskej spoločnosti majú lepší prístup do terénu, k informáciám a majú veľký ľudský potenciál. Tuniská vláda však nie je otvorená pre podnety a odporúčania občianskej spoločnosti, a to aj napriek tomu, že tá má často lepšie zdroje a informácie o situácii a potrebách v krajine. Medzi najdôležitejšie potreby tuniskej občianskej spoločnosti patrí predovšetkým finančná podpora, nakoľko väčšina asociácii nemá ani len miestnosť, kde by mohli pracovať.
Akým spôsobom sa Komisia v poslednej dobe zaslúžila o podporu rozvoja občianskej spoločnosti v Tunisku?
Odpoveď pána Füleho v mene Komisie
(4. januára 2013)
Podpora EÚ pre tuniskú občiansku spoločnosť po revolúcii bola poskytnutá rýchlo a mala politický aj finančný charakter. 
Pokiaľ ide o politickú podporu, EÚ verejne vyjadrila silnú podporu občianskej spoločnosti a viedla intenzívne a pravidelné konzultácie s partnermi z občianskej spoločnosti prostredníctvom zastúpenia EÚ a počas návštev vysokých úradníkov v Tunisku. 
Pokiaľ ide o finančnú podporu, tuniské mimovládne organizácie (MVO) rýchlo využili podporu EÚ v rámci tematických programov, akými sú napríklad nástroj stability, európsky nástroj pre demokraciu a ľudské práva a tematická položka pre neštátne subjekty. Všetky tieto opatrenia boli zamerané na zlepšenie fungovania mimovládnych organizácií alebo na financovanie projektov. Okrem toho v rámci zvýšenia finančnej pomoci pridelenej Tunisku podľa programu SPRING Komisia financovala program spolupráce osobitne zameraný na posilnenie občianskej spoločnosti. Dohoda o financovaní v celkovej výške 7 miliónov EUR bola podpísaná v júli 2012. Táto dohoda umožňuje EÚ, aby poskytla priamu finančnú podporu tuniským mimovládnym organizáciám s cieľom zlepšiť právny a inštitucionálny rámec pre organizácie občianskej spoločnosti v Tunisku.
EÚ a tuniské orgány konzultovali s tuniskou občianskou spoločnosťou aj o novom akčnom pláne privilegovaného partnerstva, ktorý obsahuje ambiciózne záväzky týkajúce sa správy vecí verejných, ľudských práv a politických reforiem. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010157/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Development of civil society in Tunisia
Supporting civil society in Tunisia after the landscape shift following the Jasmine Revolution of 2011 is particularly important. It is important that civil society in Tunisia becomes more involved and puts pressure on government, but also that it helps government, as civil organisations have better grassroots awareness, access to information and have great human potential. The Tunisian government is not however open to the suggestions and recommendations of civil society, in spite of the fact that often they have better sources and information concerning the situation and needs of the country. Among the most pressing needs of civil society in Tunisia is primarily financial support, with the majority of associations lacking even a room in which they can work.
How has the Commission recently been engaged in supporting the development of civil society in Tunisia?
Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
EU support for Tunisian civil society after the revolution has been provided rapidly and has had both a political and financial character. 
As regards political support, the EU has publicly expressed strong support for civil society and has held intense and regular consultations with civil society partners via the EU Delegation and on the occasion of high level officials’ visits to the country. 
As for financial support, Tunisian non-governmental organisations (NGOs) have rapidly benefited from EU support under thematic programmes such as the Instrument for Stability, the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights and the Non State Actors thematic line. All these actions were either directed to reinforce the functioning of the NGOs or to fund projects. Moreover, in the framework of the increase in financial support allocated to Tunisia under the SPRING programme, the Commission has funded a cooperation programme specifically aimed at reinforcing civil society. A financing agreement amounting to EUR 7 million was signed in July 2012. This agreement allows the EU to provide direct financial support to Tunisian NGOs with the aim of improving the legal and institutional framework for civil society organisations in Tunisia.
Tunisian civil society has also been consulted by the EU and Tunisian Authorities on the New Action Plan on Priviliged Partnership, which includes ambitious commitments on governance, human rights and political reforms. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010158/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Rozvojová pomoc EÚ
V roku 2005 sa EÚ a jej členské štáty zaviazali spoločne poskytnúť na rozvojovú pomoc 0,7 % hrubého národného dôchodku do roku 2015, s cieľom podporiť dosiahnutie Miléniových rozvojových cieľov. Európska konfederácia mimovládnych rozvojových a humanitárnych organizácií – CONCORD vydala správu, ktorá hodnotí pokrok vlád EÚ v ich záväzkoch týkajúcich sa oficiálnej rozvojovej pomoci za predchádzajúci rok. Zo správy je zrejmé, že škrty v rozpočtoch na rozvojovú pomoc boli zaznamenané v 11 krajinách, čo spôsobilo, že celková pomoc poklesla takmer o 500 miliónov EUR, z 53,5 mld. EUR v roku 2010 na 53 mld. EUR v roku 2011. 7 členských štátov poskytlo menej ako 50 % svojich medzinárodných záväzkov a 9 štátov plánuje znížiť pomoc v roku 2012. No z prieskumu Eurobarometra vyplýva, že v roku 2011 až 84 % európskych občanov podporovalo poskytovanie rozvojovej pomoci ako prostriedku, ktorý pomáha ľuďom na celom svete vymaniť sa z chudoby. V súčasnej dobe ekonomických ťažkostí totiž potrebujú chudobní ľudia našu solidaritu viac ako kedykoľvek predtým.






1.


Bude sa Komisia touto správou Európskej konfederácie mimovládnych rozvojových a humanitárnych organizácií – CONCORD a jej varovnými výsledkami zaoberať?










2.


Ak áno, bude z výsledkov správy vyvodzovať určité konzekvencie?




Odpoveď pána Piebalgsa v mene Komisie
(14. decembra 2012)
Komisia si dovoľuje pripomenúť váženej poslankyni svoje odpovede na predchádzajúce písomné otázky E-009007/2012, E-009443/2012 a E-009908/2012 (434), ktoré sa týkajú rovnakých záležitostí. Komisia vzala na vedomie správu konfederácie CONCORD a navrhla opatrenia v oznámení „Zlepšenie podpory EÚ rozvojovým krajinám mobilizáciou financovania rozvoja“ (435) z roku 2012, na ktoré sa odkazovalo v uvedených odpovediach na predchádzajúce písomné otázky.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010158/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Development aid in the EU
In 2005 the EU and its Member States committed themselves to collectively providing development aid totalling 0.7% of gross national income by 2015 to support the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. The European NGO Confederation for Relief and Development — CONCORD released a report, assessing the progress of EU governments in their commitments to official development aid in the previous year. From this report it is apparent that, hidden in the budgets for development aid for 11 countries, the total aid fell by almost EUR 500 million, from EUR 53.5 billion in 2010 to EUR 53 billion in 2011. Seven Member States provided less than 50% of their international commitment and nine Member States intend to reduce aid in 2012. From the Eurobarometer research, it becomes apparent that in the year 2011 up to 84% of European citizens supported the provision of development aid as a tool to help all people globally break out of poverty. In the current climate of economic difficulties, disadvantaged people require our solidarity more than before. 






1.


Will the Commission address the report of the European NGO Confederation for Relief and Development — CONCORD and its concerning results?










2.


If yes, will the conclusions of this report result in concrete actions?




Answer given by Mr Piebalgs on behalf of the Commission
(14 December 2012)
The Commission kindly refers the Honourable Member to its answer to previous written questions E-009007/2012, E-009443/2012 and E-009908/2012 (436), which adresses the same issues. The Commission has taken note of the CONCORD report and has proposed actions in the 2012 Communication on Improving EU support to developing countries in mobilising Financing for Development (437), referred to in the abovementioned reply to previous written questions. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010159/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Podpora učiteľov v EÚ
V EÚ pracuje približne šesť miliónov učiteľov. Majú dôležité poslanie napomáhať osobnému rozvoju našich detí, takže majú dôležitú úlohu v rozvoji spoločnosti. Kvalitné vzdelanie hrá navyše nezastupiteľnú rolu v snahách Európskej únie pri prekonávaní problémov, ako sú chudoba, nezamestnanosť či xenofóbia. Podpora učiteľov a financovanie vzdelávania by teda mali byť prioritou Únie. Odborové organizácie bulharských učiteľov vyjadrili v tejto súvislosti názor, že Európska únia by mohla dopomôcť k zlepšeniu situácie učiteľov napríklad tým, že určí minimálne požiadavky v oblasti vzdelávania. Napríklad tým, že určí spodnú hranicu rozpočtových výdavkov na vzdelávanie, ako aj výšku minimálnej mzdy pre učiteľov.
Aké konkrétne opatrenia zamerané na podporu učiteľov v EÚ plánuje Komisia prijať v najbližšej dobe?
Odpoveď pani Vassiliouovej v mene Komisie
(7. januára 2013)
V súlade s článkom 165 Zmluvy o fungovaní Európskej únie za obsah a organizáciu systémov vzdelávania a odbornej prípravy nesú výlučnú zodpovednosť členské štáty. Komisia z tohto dôvodu nemôže vymedziť „minimálne požiadavky“ v oblasti vyučovania, ako sú napríklad rozpočtové alebo mzdové úrovne. Úlohou EÚ je podporovať a dopĺňať opatrenia členských štátov, a to najmä prostredníctvom podporovania vzájomnej spolupráce pri spoločných výzvach.
V tejto súvislosti v roku 2007 prijala Komisia oznámenie s názvom „Zlepšovanie kvality vzdelávania učiteľov“ (438), na základe ktorého sa ministri školstva dohodli na súbore prioritných opatrení v záujme reformy vzdelávania učiteľov. Komisia pomáha členským štátom s vykonávaním týchto opatrení tak, že umožňuje partnerské učenie v rámci politiky Vzdelávanie a odborná príprava 2020. 
Dňa 20. novembra 2012 Komisia prijala oznámenie „Prehodnotenie vzdelávania: investície do zručností na dosiahnutie lepších sociálno-ekonomických výsledkov“ (439). Pokiaľ ide o učiteľov, v oznámení sa členské štáty vyzývajú, aby prehodnotili a posilnili odborný profil učiteľského povolania. Komisia navrhuje zavedenie koherentných a adekvátne zabezpečených systémov zamestnávania, výberu pracovníkov, zaškolenia a profesionálneho rozvoja. Tieto systémy by mali byť založené na jasne vymedzených kompetenciách, ktoré sú potrebné na každom stupni pedagogickej kariéry. 
Komisia takisto podporuje zlepšenie kvality odbornej prípravy učiteľov prostredníctvom programu Comenius (440), ktorý je súčasťou programu celoživotného vzdelávania. Tento program ponúka kurzy odbornej prípravy popri zamestnaní a asistentúry na školách v zahraničí s cieľom pomôcť jednotlivým učiteľom pri rozvíjaní ich odborných zručností.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010159/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Support for teachers in the EU
Within the EU roughly 6 million teachers are employed. They have an important mission in helping the personal development of our children, and, as such, have an important part to play in the development of society. Quality education plays a key and irreplaceable role in the efforts of the European Union in overcoming problems, such as poverty, unemployment or xenophobia. Support for teachers and financial assistance for education should be a priority of the European Union. Teacher Unions in Bulgaria have expressed the opinion that the European Union could help improve conditions for teachers by stating, for instance, the minimum requirements in teaching. For example, setting the minimum budget expenditures levels for teaching, and the minimum wage levels for teachers.
What specific measures aimed at supporting teachers within the EU does the Commission plan to adopt in the near future?
Answer given by Ms Vassiliou on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
In accordance with Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the responsibility for the content and organisation of education and training systems rests entirely with Member States. The Commission therefore cannot define ‘minimum requirements’ in teaching, such as budget or salary levels. The EU's role is to support and supplement the actions of Member States, particularly by encouraging cooperation among them on common challenges.
In this spirit, in 2007 the Commission adopted the communication ‘Improving the Quality of Teacher Education’ (441), in response to which Education Ministers agreed on a series of priority actions to reform teacher education. The Commission helps Member States to implement these actions by facilitating peer learning within the framework of the Education and Training 2020 policy. 
On 20 November 2012 the Commission adopted the communication ‘Rethinking Education: Investing in skills for better economic and social outcomes’ (442). With regard to teachers, the communication encourages Member States to revise and strengthen the professional profile of the teaching profession. The Commission suggests introducing coherent and adequately resourced systems for their recruitment, selection, induction and professional development. Such systems should be based on clear definitions of the competences needed at each stage of the teaching career. 
The Commission also supports improvements in the quality of teacher training through the Comenius (443) programme, which is part of the Lifelong Learning Programme. It offers in-service training courses and assistantships at schools abroad to help individual teachers to develop their professional skills.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010160/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Zastavenie potravinovej pomoci pre Slovensko
Európska komisia vyradila Slovensko z programu potravinovej pomoci pre rok 2013. Dôvodom rozhodnutia Komisie je skutočnosť, že Slovensko nevytvorilo vhodné podmienky na to, aby zabezpečilo bezpečnú, správnu a včasnú implementáciu tohto programu. Slovenská republika bude navyše musieť vrátiť 1,1 mil. EUR, ktoré na tento účel dostala ako zábezpeku. V čase krízy, keď je akákoľvek pomoc potrebnejšia viac ako kedykoľvek predtým, sa tak najchudobnejším obyvateľom Slovenska odoprie prístup k potravinovej pomoci, a to nie ich vinou.






1.


Nemá Komisia pocit, že pravidlá programu poskytnutia potravinovej pomoci sú príliš prísne?










2.


Nebolo by podľa názoru Komisie vhodné tieto pravidlá prehodnotiť, a to najmä s ohľadom na veľký nárast sociálne odkázaných Európanov, ktorí tvrdo platia za chyby vlád členských krajín?




Odpoveď pána Cioloşa v mene Komisie
(19. decembra 2012)
Komisia neprijala žiadosť Slovenska o účasť na programe potravinovej pomoci pre najodkázanejšie osoby na rok 2013, pretože usúdila, že Slovensko nedisponuje primeranými vykonávacími opatreniami na to, aby zabezpečilo správnu a včasnú implementáciu tohto programu. Rozhodnutie bolo prijaté v nadväznosti na oznámenie Slovenskej republiky o odstúpení od vykonávania ročného plánu na rok 2012 zdôvodnenom nedostatkom organizácií, ktoré by mohli dané potraviny distribuovať najodkázanejším osobám. Slovensko v dôsledku toho prišlo o celý príspevok v rámci ročného plánu na rok 2012 vo výške viac než 5 miliónov EUR.
Komisia sa preto domnieva, že dôvodom neúčasti Slovenska na ročnom pláne distribúcie na rok 2013 sú organizačné problémy Slovenska, a nie príliš prísne alebo zložité predpisy Komisie.
V tejto súvislosti si Komisia dovolí váženému členovi Parlamentu pripomenúť, že ostatných 19 zúčastnených členských štátov bolo v roku 2012 schopných využiť viac než 98 % pridelených zdrojov.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010160/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Ending food aid for Slovakia 
The European commission eliminated Slovakia from the food aid program for the year 2013. The reason for the Commission’s decision is the fact that Slovakia has not created favourable conditions to ensure the safe, correct and timely implementation of this program. Furthermore the Slovak Republic will have to return EUR 1.1 million, which was given as security to this effect. In times of crisis, when any help is more necessary than before, the poorest inhabitants of Slovakia are being denied access to food aid, through no fault of their own.






1.


Does the Commission not feel that the regulations for the food aid program are too strict?










2.


Would it not be appropriate in the Commission’s opinion that these regulations are reviewed, especially given the large increase in socially disadvantaged Europeans who are paying a steep price for the mistakes of member governments?




Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
The Commission did not accept Slovakia's request for participation in the 2013 annual plan for distribution of food to the Most Deprived People (MDP) because it considered that Slovakia did not dispose of adequate implementing arrangements for securing a correct and timely implementation of the programme. This decision was taken following the communication from the Slovak Republic of its decision to withdraw from the implementation of the 2012 annual plan due to the absence of organisations that could distribute the food to the most deprived. As a consequence, Slovakia lost its entire allocation for the 2012 annual plan, of over EUR 5 million.
Therefore, the Commission considers that the non-participation of Slovakia in the 2013 annual distribution plan is due to Slovakia's organisational problems rather than to the Commission regulations being too strict or complex. 
In this context, the Commission would like to remind the Honourable Member that in 2012 the other 19 participating Member States were able to use more than 98% of the allocated resources.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010161/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Lepšie presadzovanie práv žien vo svete
Počas 67. zasadnutia Valného zhromaždenia OSN v New Yorku Európska únia spoluorganizovala stretnutie venované presadzovaniu rovnosti žien a mužov v rozvojových krajinách. Podpredsedníčka Európskej komisie Catherine Ashton poukázala na nevyhnutnosť posilniť postavenie žien v ekonomickej i politickej oblasti. Európska únia má v tejto oblasti záväzky, ktoré sa týkajú kampaní zameraných na zlepšenie politického i ekonomického postavenia žien v krajinách prechádzajúcich zmenami, riešenie problému násilia voči ženám a dievčatám, ktoré je bariérou ich väčšej spoločenskej participácie, presadzovanie reprezentácie žien v mierových rokovaniach, procese mediácie a post-konfliktnej obnove krajín.
Aké konkrétne opatrenia chce Komisia v rámci svojho medzinárodnoprávneho záväzku prijať v samotnej Únii?
Odpoveď pani Redingovej v mene Komisie
(7. januára 2013)
Komisia sa usiluje odstrániť nerovnosti a podporovať rodovú rovnosť vo všetkých svojich činnostiach prostredníctvom Zmluvy o fungovaní Európskej únie. 
Na dosiahnutie cieľa 75 % zamestnanosti do roku 2020 bude potrebné väčšie zapojenie žien a preto boli členským štátom zaslané odporúčania, v ktorých sa zdôraznila potreba služieb starostlivosti o deti (a celodenných škôl), aby sa znížili finančné prekážky brániace práci (ktoré postihujú ženy častejšie), riešili rozdiely v odmeňovaní mužov a žien a aby sa zosúladili dôchodkové práva a dôchodkový vek. V svojom treťom ročnom prieskume rastu (444) Komisia potvrdzuje politický dôraz na poskytovanie kvalitných a cenovo dostupných služieb v oblasti starostlivosti o deti a primerané daňové a sociálne stimuly.
Na podporu politík členských štátov Komisia stanovila kľúčové priority v rámci boja proti všetkým formám násilia páchaného na ženách, ako je zlepšenie poznatkov a pochopenia problému, boj proti diskriminácii a posilnenie postavenia žien a dievčat, výmena osvedčených postupov, zvyšovanie informovanosti, podpora občianskej spoločnosti prostredníctvom programu Daphne III a iniciovanie legislatívnych opatrení. Medzi trestnoprávne opatrenia patria právne predpisy týkajúce sa obchodovania s ľuďmi, sexuálneho zneužívania a sexuálneho vykorisťovania detí, ako aj práva obetí trestnej činnosti.
Komisia opätovne potvrdila svoju podporu rodovej rovnosti v rozhodovacom procese, a to v Charte žien (445) a v Stratégii rovnosti žien a mužov 2010 – 2015 (446). Dňa 15. novembra 2012 prijala návrh smernice Európskeho parlamentu a Rady o zlepšení rodovej vyváženosti medzi nevýkonnými riadiacimi pracovníkmi spoločností kótovaných na burze a súvisiacich opatreniach (447) doplnený oznámením (448), v ktorom sa navrhuje súbor sprievodných opatrení s cieľom podporiť členské štáty, aby túto situáciu zlepšili. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010161/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Greater promotion of women's rights worldwide
During the 67th session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, the EU co-sponsored a meeting to promote equality between women and men in developing countries. The Vice-President of the European Commission Catherine Ashton stressed the imperative to strengthen the position of women in both the economic and political spheres. The EU has committed to campaigns to improve the political and economic situation of women in countries undergoing changes; deal with violence against women and young girls which prevents them from greater social involvement; and promote women’s participation at peace talks, mediation processes and post-conflict reconstruction of countries.
What concrete measures does the Commission intend to adopt for the EU, within the framework of its international commitment? 
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The Commission is committed to eliminate inequalities and to promote gender equality in all its activities through the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 
A greater involvement of women will be necessary to achieve the 75% employment target by 2020 and recommendations were addressed to Member States stressing the need for childcare services (and full-day schools), to reduce financial disincentives to work (which affect women more often), to tackle the gender pay gap and to harmonise pensionable ages and rights. In its third Annual Growth Survey (449), the Commission confirms the policy emphasis on the provision of quality affordable childcare and adequate tax-benefit incentives.
In support of Member states' policies, the Commission identified key priorities to combat all forms of violence against women, such as improve knowledge and understanding of the problem, combat discrimination and empower women and girls, exchange good practices, raise awareness, support the civil society through the Daphne III programme and initiate legislative action. Criminal justice measures include legislation on human trafficking, sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children and the rights of victims of crime.
The Commission reaffirmed its support for gender equality in decision-making, both in its Women's Charter (450) and its Strategy for Equality between Women and Men 2010-2015 (451). It adopted on 15.11.2012 a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on improving the gender balance among non-executive directors of companies listed on stock exchanges and related measures (452), accompanied by a communication (453) proposing a set of accompanying measures in order to support Member States to improve the situation. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010162/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Vznikajúca banková únia
Európska komisia nedávno predložila návrh na vytvorenie jednotného mechanizmu bankového dohľadu v Európe. Jedná sa o prvý krok smerom k vytvoreniu tzv. bankovej únie. Tá by mala byť tvorená jednotným mechanizmom bankového dohľadu, spoločným systémom krízového riadenia v rámci bankového sektoru a spoločným systémom ochrany vkladov. Cieľom bankovej únie je obmedziť prepojenie bánk a vnútroštátnych rozpočtov tak, aby podliehali jednotnému dohľadu. Na podporu problémových bánk by následne boli vyčleňované prostriedky na úrovni Únie, v snahe eliminovať tlak trhov na jednotlivé členské štáty.
Kedy konkrétne sa má podľa predpokladov Európskej komisie Európska centrálna banka ujať svojich úloh v oblasti dohľadu?
Odpoveď pána Barniera v mene Komisie
(7. januára 2013)
V návrhu nariadenia Rady, ktorým sa od 12. septembra 2012 Európskej centrálnej banke ukladajú špecifické úlohy týkajúce sa politík prudenciálneho dohľadu nad úverovými inštitúciami, sa plánuje, že uvedené nariadenie nadobudne účinnosť 1. januára 2013. S cieľom zaistiť hladký štart jednotného mechanizmu bankového dohľadu (SSM) sa v návrhu stanovuje prístup založený na postupnom zavádzaní, podľa ktorého ECB v plnom rozsahu prevezme svoje úlohy dohľadu najneskôr od 1. januára 2014. Európska rada tento prístup potvrdila 18. – 19. októbra a vyzvala na dosiahnutie dohody o legislatívnom rámci SSM do konca roku, pričom zdôraznila, že práce na operačnom zavádzaní SSM by sa mali vykonať v priebehu roka 2013.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010162/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Emergent banking union
The European Commission has recently submitted a proposal for unified bank supervision in Europe. This is the first step towards the ‘banking union’. The banking union should comprise unified bank supervision, a common crisis management system within the banking sector framework and a common bank deposit protection system. The banking union aims to restrict the interconnectedness of banks with national budgets so that banks are subject to a single supervision authority. Problem banks would then receive financial aid apportioned to them by the European Union in order to limit the market pressure on individual Member States. 
When does the European Commission expect that the European Central Bank will begin fulfilling this supervisory role? 
Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The proposal for a Council Regulation conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions from 12 September 2012 envisages the entry into force of the regulation on 1 January 2013. In order to ensure a smooth start of the single supervisory mechanism (SSM) the proposal provides for a phasing-in approach, according to which the ECB would assume its supervisory tasks in full as from 1 January 2014 at the latest. The European Council on 18/19 October has confirmed this approach and called for reaching an agreement on the legislative framework for the SSM by the end of the year while emphasising that work on the operational implementation of the SSM should take place in the course of 2013.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010163/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Problematika biopalív
Snaha Európskej únie sústrediť svoju pozornosť na ekologickejšiu dopravu má za následok zvýšenú produkciu biopalív. Únia naďalej plánuje zabezpečiť, aby 10 % pohonných látok využívaných v doprave pochádzalo do roku 2020 práve z obnoviteľných zdrojov energie. Narastá ale tlak na obmedzenie používania biopalív tzv. prvej generácie, ktoré sa vyrábajú z potravín a krmív, ako napríklad olejnín, kukurice, obilia či cukrovej repy. Európska komisia oznámila, že v najbližších mesiacoch navrhne obmedzenie používania biopalív vyrábaných z týchto plodín na 5 %. To znamená, že zvyšných 5 % bude musieť pochádzať z nepotravinárskych zdrojov, t. j. z biomasy. Na výrobu týchto biopalív tzv. druhej a tretej generácie sa najčastejšie využíva slama, drevo a odpad. Výrobcovia biopalív sa však obávajú, že navrhnuté zmeny bolestivo zasiahnu vytvorené odvetvie a budú stáť tisíce pracovných miest.
Akým spôsobom chce Komisia zabrániť negatívnemu dopadu obmedzenia používania biopalív prvej generácie na vytvorené odvetvie, a to najmä v súvislosti so stratou pracovných miest?
Odpoveď pána Oettingera v mene Komisie
(9. januára 2013)
Návrh Komisie je zameraný na zníženie emisií pri nepriamej zmene využívania pôdy a zároveň na ochranu existujúcich investícií. Ako je opísané v posúdení vplyvu (454), 5 % limit zodpovedá súčasným úrovniam spotreby, a preto sa neočakáva, že významne ovplyvní už vykonané investície. Zároveň s nárastom podielu biopalív na trhu by sa posilnila istota investícií a zamestnanosti v oblasti pokročilých biopalív.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010163/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Biofuel
The EU focus on more ecological transportation has caused an increase in the production of biofuel. The EU is further planning to ensure that 10% of fuel used for transportation comes from renewable energy sources by 2020. However, pressure is growing to restrict the use of biofuel of the ‘first generation’, which is made from foodstuffs and animal feed, such as oil-producing plants, corn, wheat and sugar beets. The European Commission has announced its intention to propose in the next few months that biofuel made from these agricultural plants be limited to 5%. This means that the remaining 5% has to come from other sources, i.e. biomass. Straw, wood and refuse are most frequently used to produce biofuel of the ‘second’ and ‘third generation’. But biofuel producers fear that the proposed changes will negatively impact the newly created industry, costing thousands of jobs. 
How does the Commission intend to prevent the negative impact of the first generation biofuel restrictions on the new industry, particularly in view of the anticipated job losses? 
Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(9 January 2013)
The Commission's proposal aims at minimising indirect land-use change emissions, while protecting existing investments. As described in the impact assessment (455), the 5% limit corresponds to current consumption levels and is therefore not expected to significantly impact investments already made. In addition, certainty for investments and employment in advanced biofuels is strengthened, as biofuels' share in the market would be increased.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010164/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Problematika viacročného rozpočtu
V júni minulého roku Európska komisia predstavila návrh rozpočtového rámca Európskej únie na obdobie rokov 2014 – 2020 vo výške 1,025 bilióna EUR, pričom na súčasné rozpočtové obdobie do roku 2013 bolo dohodnutých 976 miliárd EUR. Pri rokovaniach o jeho finálnej podobe sa však členské štáty rozdelili na tie, ktoré sa zasadzujú za lepšie využívanie finančných prostriedkov a rozpočet navrhujú znížiť, a tie, ktoré kladú dôraz na to, aby výška výdavkov na kohéznu politiku ostala totožná s návrhom Komisie. Oklieštenie rozpočtu by však mohlo vážne ohroziť ciele, ktoré si Európska únia v zastúpení všetkých členských štátov predsavzala do roku 2020 naplniť, a je neopodstatnené, keďže návrh Komisie zohľadňuje súčasnú ekonomickú situáciu aj napäté rozpočty členských krajín.
Akým spôsobom chce Komisia presvedčiť členské štáty, ktoré chcú navrhovaný rozpočet znížiť, o opodstatnenosti svojho návrhu?
Odpoveď pána Lewandowského v mene Komisie
(11. januára 2013)
Na zasadnutí Európskej rady 22. a 23. novembra 2012 sa nepodarilo dosiahnuť dohodu o nasledujúcom viacročnom finančnom rámci. Európska rada však poverila svojho predsedu, aby v nadchádzajúcich týždňoch spolu s predsedom Európskej komisie pokračoval v práci a konzultáciách s cieľom dospieť ku konsenzu medzi 27 členskými štátmi v súvislosti s viacročným finančným rámcom Únie. V mandáte sa výslovne odkazuje aj na skutočnosť, že potenciál pre zblíženie názorov je dostatočný na to, aby bolo možné začiatkom budúceho roka dospieť k dohode.
Komisia s uspokojením konštatuje, že všetky zainteresované strany vyjadrili svoje pevné odhodlanie dosiahnuť dohodu. Komisia je preto presvedčená, že dohodu hláv štátov a vlád možno dosiahnuť už pri najbližšej príležitosti pod vedením predsedu Van Rompuya. Rotujúce predsedníctvo by následne mohlo vychádzať z tejto dohody a zabezpečiť tak súhlas Európskeho parlamentu. Komisia je odhodlaná urobiť všetko preto, aby uľahčila dosiahnutie tejto dohody. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010164/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Multiannual Financial Framework
Last year in June, the European Commission presented its proposal for the 2014‐2020 Multiannual Financial Framework in the amount of EUR 1 025 million, while EUR 976 million was allocated for the current budgetary period ending in 2013. But during debates concerning its final form, the Member States divided into those who promoted better uses of financial resources and proposed to lower the budget, and those who stressed that the cohesion policy budget should remain identical with the Commission’s proposal. However, any budget size reductions may seriously threaten the objectives that the EU, represented by all of its Member States, has outlined to fulfil by 2020. The budget reduction is further unsubstantiated because the proposal of the Commission takes into account both the current economic situation and the stretched budgets of the Member States. 
How does the Committee intend to justify its proposal and thus change the opinions of the Member States that insist on budget reduction? 
Answer given by Mr Lewandowski on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)
The European Council of 22-23 November 2012 failed to reach an agreement on the next multiannual financial framework. However, the European Council has mandated its President together with the President of the European Commission to continue the work and pursue consultations in the coming weeks to find a consensus among the 27 Member States over the Union's multiannual financial framework. The mandate also refers explicitly to a sufficient degree of potential convergence to make an agreement possible in the beginning of next year.
The Commission notes with satisfaction that all parties continue to voice their strong commitment to reaching a deal. The Commission is therefore fully confident that an agreement between Heads of States and Government can be brokered at the earliest opportunity under the chairmanship of President Van Rompuy. The rotating Presidency would then build on this agreement to secure the consent of the European Parliament. The Commission is committed to doing everything in its power to facilitate this agreement. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010165/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Nárast nezamestnanosti mladých ľudí
Ako varovala Európska komisia koncom uplynulého leta, nárast nezamestnanosti v prípade mladých ľudí môže predstavovať „vážnu hrozbu pre sociálnu súdržnosť“. Podľa údajov Eurostatu nezamestnanosť mladých ľudí v desiatich členských štátoch síce klesla, no na druhej strane bol zaznamenaný jej výrazný vzostup predovšetkým v Grécku, Španielsku a na Cypre. Práve v prípade Grécka a Španielska počet mladých nezamestnaných presahuje hranicu 50 % v tom ktorom členskom štáte. Medzičasom celková nezamestnanosť v eurozóne prekročila v júli toho roku 11 %, čo oproti údajom spred roka predstavuje nárast približne o 2 milióny ľudí bez práce.
Aké konkrétne opatrenia na boj proti nezamestnanosti mladých prijala Komisia v poslednej dobe?
Odpoveď pána Andora v mene Komisie
(8. januára 2013)
Komisia v rámci balíka opatrení pre zamestnanosť mládeže (456) z 5. decembra 2012 navrhuje Rade, aby prijala odporúčanie o vytvorení systému záruk pre mladých ľudí. Komisia odporúča, aby členské štáty zabezpečili, že všetci mladí ľudia vo veku do 25 rokov dostanú kvalitnú ponuku práce, ďalšieho vzdelávania, učňovskej prípravy alebo stáží do štyroch mesiacov od ukončenia formálneho vzdelávania alebo straty zamestnania.
Ako sa uvádza v navrhovanom odporúčaní Rady, záruky pre mladých ľudí by sa mali realizovať ako systém pozostávajúci z podporných opatrení, ktoré zohľadňujú národné, regionálne a miestne okolnosti. Tieto opatrenia sú zamerané na šesť oblastí: rozvíjanie prístupov na báze partnerstva, zabezpečenie včasnej intervencie a aktivácie, prijatie podporných opatrení, ktoré umožnia integráciu do pracovného trhu, využívanie štrukturálnych fondov EÚ, hodnotenie a sústavné zlepšovanie tohto systému a jeho urýchlené realizovanie. V priloženom pracovnom dokumente útvarov Komisie (457) sa nachádzajú podrobnosti o tom, čo tvorí systém záruk pre mladých ľudí, akým spôsobom môže tento systém získať úspech a aké špecifické príklady činností môžu byť podporované Európskym sociálnym fondom.
Systém záruk pre mladých ľudí takisto zahŕňa aj druhú konzultáciu s európskymi sociálnymi partnermi o rámci kvality pre stáže, Európskom združení učňovskej prípravy a o zvýšenej pracovnej mobilite mladých ľudí. V tejto súvislosti nedávne rozhodnutie o sieti EURES (458), ktorým sa transformuje európska pracovná sieť na nástroj orientovaný na výsledky v oblasti sprostredkovania zamestnania, má pre mladých ľudí veľký význam, pretože sa bude podstatne rozširovať tak, aby zahŕňala aj učňovské prípravy a stáže súvisiace s prácou. Komisia okrem toho plánuje aj naďalej rozvíjať svoju iniciatívu „Tvoje prvé pracovné miesto EURES“, ktorej cieľom je pomôcť občanom EÚ vo veku od 18 do 30 rokov nájsť si prácu v inom členskom štáte.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010165/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Growth in unemployment of young people
As the European Commission warned at the end of last summer, the growth in unemployment levels among young people can pose a ‘significant threat to social stability’. According to information from European countries unemployment in ten Member States fell. Conversely however, a marked rise in unemployment was noted particularly in Greece, Spain and Cyprus. In the particular cases of Greece and Spain the number of unemployed young people exceeds 50%. In the meantime unemployment levels in the euro area as a whole exceeded the 11% mark in July of this year, representing a year on year rise of roughly 2 million people without work.
What specific measures to combat unemployment among young people has the Commission adopted?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
In its Youth Employment Package (459) (YEP) of 5 December 2012, the Commission proposes a Council recommendation on establishing a Youth Guarantee. The Commission recommends that Member States ensure that all young people under 25 receive a good quality offer of employment, continued education, an apprenticeship or a traineeship within four months of leaving formal education or becoming unemployed.
As outlined in the proposed Council recommendation, the Youth Guarantee should be implemented by a scheme consisting of supportive measures according to national, regional and local circumstances. These measures are based on six axes: building up partnership-based approaches, early intervention and activation, supportive measures enabling labour market integration, use of EU Structural Funds, assessment and continuous improvement of the scheme and its swift implementation. The accompanying Staff Working Document (460) gives details on what constitutes a Youth Guarantee, how it can be made a success and which specific activity examples can be supported by the European Social Fund.
The YEP also includes a second stage consultation of the European social partners on a Quality Framework for Traineeships, a European Alliance for Apprenticeships and enhanced labour mobility for young people. In this respect, the recent EURES decision (461) transforming the European jobs network into a result-oriented matching and placement instrument has direct relevance for young people, since it will notably be expanded to also cover work-reltated apprenticeships and traineeships. Moreover, the Commission intends to develop further its ‘Your first EURES job’ initiative to help EU nationals aged 18-30 to find work in another Member State.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010166/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Nedokonalosti jednotného trhu Európskej únie
Jednotný trh EÚ sa od svojho vzniku rozrástol o vyše 500 miliónov spotrebiteľov. Pretrvávajú však medzery medzi ich očakávaniami a realitou. Ako problematické sa napríklad javí uznávanie odborných kvalifikácií, diskriminácia pri uchádzaní sa o zamestnanie, riadenie systému sociálneho zabezpečenia či rôzne iné bariéry, ktoré odrádzajú od samotného podnikania v inom členskom štáte. Jedným z dôvodov je nedostatok informácií, keď občania často nevedia, kam sa majú so žiadosťou o pomoc obrátiť. Problémy tiež spôsobuje nedostatočné uplatňovanie už existujúcich pravidiel, ako aj existencia akéhosi legislatívneho vákua, keď v nejednej oblasti pravidlá Európskej únie nezodpovedajú očakávaniam občianskej a podnikateľskej verejnosti.
Plánuje Komisia v najbližšej dobe návrh legislatívnych opatrení, ktoré by určitým spôsobom zlepšili fungovanie jednotného trhu v Európskej únii?
Odpoveď pána Barniera v mene Komisie
(8. januára 2013)
Komisia súhlasí s tým, že napriek jej obrovským úspechom pretrvávajú na jednotnom trhu nedostatky. Preto Komisia v apríli 2011 predložila Akt o jednotnom trhu I a v októbri 2012 Akt o jednotnom trhu II. V týchto dvoch oznámeniach sa stanovuje stratégia a 12 kľúčových priorít týkajúcich sa budúceho rozvoja jednotného trhu. Komisia v roku 2011 a počas prvých mesiacov roku 2012 predložila legislatívne návrhy všetkých kľúčových opatrení zahrnutých v Akte o jednotnom trhu I a vyzvala Európsky parlament a Radu EÚ na ich urýchlené schválenie. Komisia sa okrem toho zaviazala, že do jari 2013 predloží všetky legislatívne návrhy kľúčových opatrení zahrnutých v Akte o jednotnom trhu II a vyzýva spoluzákonodarcu na ich prijatie do konca súčasného volebného obdobia Parlamentu.
Komisia súhlasí s tým, že zabezpečenie správneho uplatňovania predpisov EÚ orgánmi členských štátov predstavuje hlavnú prioritu. Podporuje členské štáty v tom, aby správne uplatňovali predpisy a v súlade so zmluvami prijme opatrenia (vrátane právnych), ak sa predpisy v členských štátoch buď správne netransponovali alebo správne neuplatňujú. V júni 2012 Komisia uverejnila oznámenie, v ktorom sa stanovujú konkrétne dodatočné opatrenia na zlepšenie riadenia jednotného trhu.
S cieľom lepšie informovať občanov o ich právach na jednotnom trhu Komisia naďalej zlepšuje svoje informačné služby, najmä prostredníctvom portálu Your Europe.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010166/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: EU single market flaws
The EU single market has grown by more than 500 million consumers since its inception. However, gaps remain between expectations and reality. For example, there are problems related to professional certification recognition, discrimination on the job market, social security system management, and other obstacles that ultimately discourage people from carrying out business in another Member State. Another reason is that due to lack of information, citizens are often confused as to where they may go to ask for help. Problems are also caused by insufficient application of pre-existing regulations and the existence of a legislative vacuum concerning many areas where the EU’s rules and regulations fail the expectations of the general public and business community. 
Is the Commission planning to propose legislative measures that would somehow improve the functioning of the EU single market in the near future? 
Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
The Commission agrees that despite its tremendous achievements gaps remain in the single market. This is why the Commission presented its Single Market Act I and II in April 2011 and October 2012 respectively. These two Communications set out a strategy and 12 key priorities each for the further development of the single market. The Commission tabled legislative proposals for all key actions contained in the single market Act I in 2011 and during the first months of 2012 and calls for their speedy agreement by the European Parliament and the EU Council. The Commission moreover commits itself to deliver all legislative proposals for key actions contained in the single market Act II by spring 2013 and calls for their adoption by the co-legislator before the end of the current parliamentary term.
The Commission agrees that the ensuring of the correct application of EU rules by authorities in Member States constitutes an overriding priority. It supports Member States in their correct application of the rules and in line with the Treaties takes action, including legal action, where rules are either not correctly transposed or not correctly applied in Member States. In June 2012, the Commission published a communication setting out concrete additional actions to improve the governance of the single market.
In order to inform citizens better of their single market rights, the Commission is continuously improving its information services, notably through the Your Europe portal.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010168/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Nedostatok údajov o obchode s ľuďmi v EÚ
Podľa slov Európskej komisie jednotlivé členské štáty nedisponujú spoľahlivými údajmi, na základe ktorých by bolo možné plne posúdiť rozsah problematiky obchodovania s ľuďmi v EÚ. Podľa odhadov Únie je približne 2,4 milióna ľudí v súčasnosti obeťami tohto závažného zločinu. Väčšina obetí pochádza z Bulharska a Rumunska, prevažne sa obchoduje so ženami a deťmi nelegálnych prisťahovalcov, alebo sú obeťami rómske deti. Rozdielne právne normy v členských štátoch, problémy spojené s identifikáciou osôb, ktoré sú obeťami obchodovania s ľuďmi, prípadne neochota svedkov vypovedať – toto všetko sú problémy a prekážky, ktorým čelia príslušné orgány pri zbere dát. Neraz sa i z tohto dôvodu nedostane obetiam včas adekvátnej pomoci.
Akým spôsobom bude Komisia riešiť problém nedostatku spoľahlivých údajov o obchodovaní s ľuďmi v EÚ?
Odpoveď pani Malmströmovej v mene Komisie
(19. decembra 2012)
Komisia uznáva, že je ťažké odhadnúť celý rozsah obchodovania s ľuďmi.
Preto stratégia EÚ na roky 2012 – 2016 zameraná na odstránenie obchodovania s ľuďmi (462) zahŕňa aj vypracovanie systému pre celú EÚ určeného na zber a zverejňovanie údajov členených podľa veku a pohlavia v spolupráci s členskými štátmi. Predbežná analýza údajov zhromaždených v rámci akcie, ktorú Komisia podnikla v septembri 2011, ukazuje, že v rokoch 2008 – 2010 tvorili obete ženského pohlavia 79 % (z toho 12 % dievčatá) a mužské obete 21 % (z toho 3 % boli chlapci). Väčšina členských štátov uviedla, že väčšina obetí pochádza z EÚ, najmä z Rumunska a Bulharska. Podrobnejšie výsledky akcie možno očakávať okolo konca roku 2012. Okrem toho Komisia na základe mandátu daného smernicou 2011/36/EÚ (463) bude pokračovať v práci na metodike a metódach zberu údajov s cieľom vytvoriť porovnateľné štatistiky, a to v úzkej spolupráci s národnými spravodajcami alebo rovnocennými mechanizmami.
Komisia okrem toho odkazuje na svoje odpovede na písomné otázky E‐006480/12, E‐006490/12, E-006553/12, E-006561/12, E-006593/12, E-006675/12, E‐006590/12 a E‐007118/12 (464).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010168/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Lack of Data on Human Trafficking in the EU
According to the European Commission, individual Member States do not have sufficiently reliable data at their disposal to fully assess the extent of human trafficking within the EU. The EU estimates that at present, 2.4 million people are victims of this heinous crime. The majority of the victims come from Bulgaria and Romania; women, the children of illegal immigrants and Roma children are the most frequently trafficked victims. Authorities face obstacles when collecting data like legislative norms that differ from one Member State to another, problems related to identity verification of trafficking victims, and, as the case may be, witnesses’ reluctance to speak. For these reasons the victims often fail to receive adequate and timely help.
In what way will the Commission address the lack of reliable data on human trafficking in the EU? 
Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
The Commission has acknowledged the difficulty of gauging the extent of trafficking in human beings.
For this reason, the EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012-2016 (465) includes the development of an EU-wide system for the collection and publication of data broken down according to age and gender in collaboration with Member States. Preliminary analysis of the data collection exercise undertaken by the Commission in September 2011 shows that in 2008-2010 female victims accounted for 79% (of whom 12% girls) and male victims for 21% (of whom 3% were boys). Most Member States reported that most victims come from within the EU, mainly from Romania and Bulgaria. More detailed results of the exercise are expected around the end of 2012. In addition, the Commission as mandated by the directive 2011/36/EU (466), will continue to develop its work on methodologies and data collection methods to produce comparable statistics, in close cooperation with the National Rapporteurs or equivalent mechanisms. 
The Commission further refers to its answers to Written Questions E-006480/12, E-006490/12, E-006553/12, E-006561/12, E-006593/12, E-006675/12, E-006590/12 and E-007118/12 (467).
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010169/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Výzva Európskej únii na podniknutie krokov voči diskriminácii Rómov
Európska sieť proti rasizmu (ENAR) uvítala návrh francúzskej vlády zrušiť pracovné obmedzenia pre rumunských a bulharských občanov žijúcich vo Francúzsku. V liste adresovanom podpredsedníčke Komisie Viviane Reding, však ENAR poukázala na skutočnosť, že všetky tieto snahy sa môžu minúť účinku, ak nebudú podniknuté ďalšie kroky. Tie by mali byť zamerané na zabránenie diskriminácie Rómov na trhu práce, v prístupe k vzdelaniu, bývaniu či v prístupe k službám. Európska sieť proti rasizmu rovnako odsúdila nútené vysťahovanie rómskych komunít a poukázala na systematickú diskrimináciu v Rumunsku, Bulharsku a ďalších východoeurópskych krajinách. Apeluje na Európsku komisiu a popredných predstaviteľov členských štátov, aby vynakladali patričné úsilie na sociálne začlenenie rómskych komunít v Európe.
Aká bude reakcia Komisie na tieto výzvy Európskej siete proti rasizmu?
Odpoveď pani Redingovej v mene Komisie
(7. januára 2013)
Ako Komisia uvádza vo svojej poslednej správe (468), uvedomuje si skutočnosť, že zatiaľ sa vykonal len prvý krok pri implementovaní rámca EÚ pre vnútroštátne stratégie integrácie Rómov a že je potrebné urobiť na národnej úrovni omnoho viac, aby sa podporilo sociálne začlenenie a dodržiavanie základných práv Rómov. 
V súlade s týmto prístupom sa v posledných mesiacoch viedol intenzívny a konštruktívny dialóg s francúzskymi orgánmi v súvislosti s francúzskou stratégiou integrácie Rómov. Komisia zdôraznila prvky, na základe ktorých sa očakáva ďalšie zlepšenie v oblasti zamestnanosti, vzdelávania, zdravia a podmienok bývania migrujúcich Rómov a kočovníkov vo Francúzsku. Francúzske orgány kladne reagovali a 22. augusta 2012 prijali súbor záväzkov vrátane revízie vnútroštátnej stratégie integrácie Rómov a prijatia ucelenejšieho metodického rámca objasňujúceho úlohu štátnych orgánov a miestnej koordinácie pre anticipáciu a vysťahovanie z nelegálnych osád (469).
Komisia pozorne sleduje situáciu Rómov vo všetkých členských štátoch EÚ. Na zabezpečenie primeraného úsilia sa v októbri uskutočnili dvojstranné diskusie s niekoľkými členskými štátmi vrátane Bulharska a Rumunska o stave implementovania rámca EÚ pre vnútroštátne stratégie integrácie Rómov. Okrem toho bola uvedená do prevádzky sieť vnútroštátnych kontaktných miest pre Rómov s cieľom uľahčiť dialóg medzi Komisiou a vnútroštátnymi orgánmi a podporiť vzájomnú výmenu medzi členskými štátmi. Komisia predloží správu o pokroku na jar 2013.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010169/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: An invitation to the European Union to take action against the discrimination of the Roma
The European Network Against Racism (ENAR) welcomed the suggestion of the French Government to end the work limitations for Romanian and Bulgarian citizens living in France. However, in a letter addressed to the Vice-President of the European Commission Viviane Reding, ENAR pointed out the fact that all these efforts can fail, if further steps are not implemented. These should focus on preventing discrimination against Roma in the job market, in access to education, accommodation and access to services. The European Network Against Racism condemned the forced removal of Roma communities and pointed out the systematic discrimination in Romania, Bulgaria and other Eastern-European countries. It appeals to the European commission and leading representatives of member states, to ensure that appropriate efforts are made to ensure the social integration of Roma communities in Europe. 
What will be the Commission’s reaction to this challenge from the European Network Against Racism?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
As acknowledged in its last report (470), the Commission is aware of the fact that only a first step in the implementation of the EU Framework for national Roma integration strategies has been done and that much more needs to be done at national level to bolster both the social inclusion and the respect of fundamental rights of the Roma. 
In line with this approach, a dense and constructive dialogue has been taking place with the French authorities in the past months regarding France's Roma integration strategy. The Commission has highlighted the elements on which further improvements are expected on the employment, education, health and housing conditions of migrant Roma and travellers in France. The French authorities have been responsive and made, on last 22nd August, a number of commitments, including the revision of the national Roma integration strategy and the adoption of a more robust methodological framework clarifying the role of the State authorities and the local coordination for the anticipation and eviction of illegal settlements (471).
The Commission follows closely the situation of Roma people in all EU Member States. To ensure that appropriate efforts are made, bilateral discussions took place in October with a few Member States, including Bulgaria and Romania, on the state of the implementation of the EU Framework for national Roma integration strategies. In addition, the network of national Roma contact points has been launched to facilitate dialogue between the Commission and national authorities and support mutual exchanges among Member States. The Commission will report on progress in spring 2013.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010170/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Vlastný rozpočet eurozóny
Viaceré členské štáty sa vyslovili za špeciálny rozpočet pre eurozónu, ktorý by disponoval účinnými mechanizmami na riešenie a nápravu neudržateľného fiškálneho vývoja v členských štátoch. Takto plánovaný rozpočet by slúžil predovšetkým na makroekonomické intervencie voči asymetrickým šokom a tiež by vhodne kompenzoval nerovnováhu v období recesie. Podporu tomuto návrhu prejavili i silné štáty, akými sú Francúzsko a Nemecko. Myšlienku akéhosi spoločného rozpočtu eurozóny po prvý raz predostrel tiež predseda Európskej rady Herman Van Rompuy.
Aký je postoj Komisie k otázke vlastného rozpočtu eurozóny?
Odpoveď pána Rehna v mene Komisie
(11. februára 2013)
Komisia predstavila svoju víziu budúcnosti eurozóny v koncepcii pre rozsiahlu a skutočnú hospodársku a menovú úniu uverejnenej 28. novembra 2012. Cieľom tejto koncepcie je otvoriť európsku diskusiu o politických opatreniach, ktoré by sa mali prijať na prehĺbenie HMÚ. Predstavuje príspevok Komisie k záverečnej správe predsedov Komisie, Európskej rady, Európskej centrálnej banky a Euroskupiny o vytvorení skutočnej HMÚ. Bude základom pre diskusiu na decembrovom zasadnutí Európskej rady.
Predstava o spoločnej fiškálnej kapacite eurozóny sa nesie celou koncepciou ako cieľ, ktorý možno dosiahnuť v strednodobom až dlhodobom horizonte. Takáto kapacita by sa musela rozvíjať postupne a mohla by naozaj pomáhať pri zavádzaní štrukturálnych reforiem hospodárstiev, ktoré sa ocitajú v ťažkostiach, a v konečnom dôsledku zmierniť dosah nerovnomerných náhlych zmien. Z dlhodobejšieho hľadiska možno koncepciu ďalej rozvíjať v závislosti od želanej hĺbky integrácie a ochote zaviesť sprievodné politické zmeny. Komisia chápe rozvoj fiškálnej kapacity ako dôležitý krok vo vývoji skutočnej hospodárskej a menovej únie, ktorá je zabezpečená politickou úniou. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010170/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: A seperate Eurozone budget
A larger number of Member States have called for a special budget for the Eurozone, which would possess effective mechanisms to address and correct unsustainable fiscal developments in Member States. A budget planned thus would primarily facilitate macroeconomic interventions in case of asymmetric shocks and also would suitably compensate for imbalance in a period of recession. Support for this suggestion was given also by strong states, such as France and Germany. The idea for some sort of common Eurozone budget was also outlined for the first time by the European Council President Herman Van Rompuy.
What is the Commission’s stance on the idea of a common Eurozone budget?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(11 February 2013)
The Commission presented its vision for the future of the Eurozone in a blueprint for a deep and genuine economic and monetary union published on the 28 November 2012. This blueprint aims to launch a European debate on the policy measures that should be taken to further deepen EMU and is the Commission's contribution to the final report by the Presidents of the Commission, the European Council, the European Central Bank and the Eurogroup on moving towards a genuine EMU. This will form the basis of the debate in the December European Council.
The idea of common Eurozone fiscal capacity runs through the blueprint as an aim that can be achieved over the medium to long term. Such a capacity would need to be developed step by step and could indeed serve to provide assistance for the introduction of structural reforms for economies in distress and eventually alleviate the impact of asymmetric shocks. Over the longer term, it can be further developed, depending on the depth of integration desired and on the willingness to enact accompanying political changes. The Commission sees the development of a fiscal capacity as an important step in developing a genuine economic and monetary union, backed up with a political union. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010171/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Program inteligentnej regulácie
Komisia má podľa plánu koncom roka 2012 uverejniť správu o pokroku v rámci programu inteligentnej regulácie. Program inteligentnej regulácie predstavuje snahu o zjednotenie úsilia v oblasti lepšej tvorby a zjednodušenia právnych predpisov EÚ, rovnako ako zníženia administratívneho a regulačného zaťaženia. Oznámenie Komisie o inteligentnej regulácii vychádza zo záverov predsedníctva jarného zasadnutia Európskej rady v roku 2007 o obnovenej lisabonskej stratégii pre rast a zamestnanosť a z dokumentu Politické usmernenia pre budúceho predsedu Komisie, ktorý obsahoval návrh zmeniť lisabonskú stratégiu na stratégiu EÚ 2020, v ktorej sa mala zdôrazniť konkurencieschopnosť a nižšia administratívna záťaž prostredníctvom inteligentnej regulácie s cieľom zabezpečiť, aby trhy slúžili ľuďom. Európske inštitúcie a členské štáty, by mali zabezpečili, aby sa zachovala doterajšia dynamika a aby vo všetkých príslušných oblastiach došlo k zintenzívneniu činností.
Stihne Komisia zverejniť správu o pokroku v rámci programu inteligentnej regulácie do konca roka 2012 tak, ako pôvodne plánovala?
Odpoveď pána Barrosa v mene Komisie
(10. decembra 2012)
Komisia potvrdzuje, že oznámenie o inteligentnej regulácii plánuje prijať v decembri 2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010171/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Smart regulation programme
The Commission plans to publish a progress report on the smart regulation programme in late 2012. This programme is an attempt to consolidate efforts to improve and simplify the EU legislative process and to reduce regulatory and administrative burdens. The Commission Communication on smart regulation is based on the conclusions of the Presidency of the Spring European Council meeting of 2007 on the renewed Lisbon strategy for Growth and Jobs, and on the document Political Guidelines for the Next Commission, which proposes replacing the Lisbon strategy with the EU 2020 strategy — a strategy in which emphasis is placed on competitiveness and reducing the administrative burden through smart regulation in order to ensure that the markets serve the people. The European institutions and Member States should ensure that today’s dynamism is maintained and that actions are stepped up in all appropriate areas.
Will the Commission manage to publish the progress report on the smart regulation by the end of 2012, as originally planned?
Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)
The Commission confirms that it plans to adopt a communication on Smart Regulation in December 2012. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010172/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Spoločná organizácia trhov s výrobkami rybolovu a akvakultúry
Spoločná organizácia trhu je prvou zložkou spoločnej politiky v oblasti rybného hospodárstva a je zavedená od roku 1970. Súčasný regulačný rámec má podobu vychádzajúcu z nariadenia (ES) 104/2000, ktoré má byť nahradené legislatívnym návrhom prijatým Komisiou v júli 2011. Budúca spoločná organizácia trhu by mala priaznivo prispievať k dynamickému rozvoju odvetvia v EÚ s cieľom lepšie uspokojiť rastúci európsky dopyt po rybách v kontexte klesajúcich populácií voľne žijúcich rýb. Kľúčovou otázkou je v tejto súvislosti označovanie. Spotrebitelia majú právo na lepšie a zrozumiteľné informácie o produkte rybolovu, ktorý kupujú, aby mohli uskutočniť informovaný výber. Rovnako dôležité je, aby bola udržateľným rybolovným postupom udelená environmentálna značka EÚ.
Mieni Komisia v blízkej budúcnosti stanoviť minimálne pravidlá pre používanie environmentálnej značky a prípadne zaviesť i svoju vlastnú environmentálnu značku, aby zabezpečila jej väčšiu rozpoznateľnosť a prijateľnosť pre odvetvie i verejnosť?
Odpoveď pani Damanakiovej v mene Komisie
(21. decembra 2012)
Návrhom nariadenia o spoločnej organizácii trhu sa zdôrazňuje význam lepších, presných a overiteľných informácií pre spotrebiteľov.
V prípade potreby to poskytuje možnosť regulácie dobrovoľných informácií stanovením príslušných pravidiel a podmienok. Požiadavky na enviromentálnu udržateľnosť – alebo ekologické značky – patria medzi najcitlivejšie otázky v tomto kontexte. Komisia je preto pripravená stanoviť minimálne kritériá, ktoré by sa mali uplatňovať na všetky schémy verejných alebo súkromných environmentálnych značiek, ktoré pôsobia v rámci EÚ. 
Komisia zatiaľ neplánuje vyvinúť svoju vlastnú environmentálnu značku vzhľadom na to, že už existuje viacero iniciatív uznaných tak spotrebiteľmi, ako aj priemyslom. Stanovením minimálnych kritérií by sa zabezpečila stabilita požiadaviek na udržateľnosť. Tým by sa podporil rozvoj spoľahlivých systémov a metodík v EÚ a trhy EÚ by sa posunuli k udržateľnejšej spotrebe.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010172/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Common organisation of the markets in fishery and aquaculture products
The Common Organisation of the Market (CMO) is the first component of the common fisheries policy (CFP) and has been in place since 1970. Today's regulatory framework is shaped by Regulation (EC) 104/2000, to be replaced by the legislative proposal adopted by the Commission in July 2011. The future CMO should also contribute positively to the dynamic development of the sector in the EU in order to better meet growing European demand for fish against a backdrop of declining wild fish stocks. Labelling is a key issue in this respect. Consumers have a right to have comprehensible and better information on the fishery products they buy in order to be able to make an informed choice. It is equally important for sustainable fishing practices to be rewarded with an EU eco‐label.
Does the Commission intend to establish minimum standards for the use of the eco‐label and, if necessary, to introduce its own eco‐label in order to ensure that both the public and the sector recognise and accept it?
Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The proposal for a regulation of the common market Organisation emphasises the importance for consumers to have improved, accurate and controllable information.
It opens the possibility to regulate voluntary information when needed by setting respective rules and conditions. Environmental claims on sustainability — or ecolabels‐ are among the most sensitive issues in that context. The Commission therefore is ready to set minimum criteria that would apply to any ecolabel scheme operating in the EU, be it public or private. 
The Commission has not yet planned to develop its own ecolabel considering that several initiatives already exist and are acknowledged by consumers and the industry. Setting minimum criteria would ensure that sustainability claims are robust. It would support the development of credible schemes and methodologies in the EU and push EU markets to more sustainable consumption.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010173/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Nezákonné zadržiavanie väzňov v európskych krajinách prostredníctvom CIA
Program CIA pod vedením USA zahŕňa opakované porušovanie ľudských práv, vrátane nezákonného a svojvoľného zadržiavania, mučenia, násilného zmiznutia a porušovania zásady zákazu vrátenia alebo vyhostenia. Na preskúmanie tejto otázky zriadil Európsky parlament špeciálny výbor. Ten zdokumentoval využívanie európskeho vzdušného priestoru a územia agentúrou CIA. Parlament od tohto zistenia opakovane žiada o plné vyšetrenie spolupráce národných vlád a agentúr s programom CIA. Členské štáty si však svoju povinnosť vyšetriť závažné prípady súvisiace s programom CIA náležite nesplnili. Ide o povinnosť vyšetriť prípady porušovania ľudských práv, najmä to, či sú na ich území tajné väznice alebo dochádza k operáciám, v rámci ktorých sú ľudia zadržiavaní v rámci programu CIA v zariadeniach na ich území.
Bude Komisia apelovať na členské štáty, aby si čo najskôr splnili svoju povinnosť vyšetriť spoluprácu národných vlád a agentúr s programom CIA, a to prostredníctvom nezávislého a účinného vyšetrovania s ohľadom na všetky nové dôkazy?
Odpoveď pani Redingovej v mene Komisie 
(21. decembra 2012)
Komisia vždy považovala postupy známe ako vydávanie podozrivých a tajné zadržiavanie za porušenie základných práv. Komisia vždy zdôrazňovala, že hĺbkové, nezávislé a nestranné vyšetrovanie zamerané na hľadanie pravdy musia začať alebo v ňom pokračovať dotknuté členské štáty. Ide o pozitívnu povinnosť, ktorá vyplýva z Európskeho dohovoru o ľudských právach, ktorej cieľom je stanoviť zodpovednosť a umožniť obetiam získať odškodnenie.
Ako už bolo vysvetlené 10. septembra 2012 na plenárnom zasadnutí Európskeho parlamentu, Komisia je v kontakte s členskými štátmi, na území ktorých sa údajne nachádzali tajné miesta na zadržiavanie. Poľským, rumunským a litovským orgánom boli odoslané viaceré listy, v ktorých sa od nich žiadali informácie o stave vyšetrovania v ich krajinách.
Komisia pripomenie členským štátom, že pri spolupráci v boji proti terorizmu musia využívať všetky relevantné nástroje EÚ v oblasti policajnej a justičnej spolupráce v trestných veciach a že tieto nástroje sa musia používať pod justičnou kontrolou a spôsobom, ktorý je v plnej miere súladný s Chartou základných práv EÚ.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010173/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Illegal detention of prisoners in European countries by the CIA
The US‐led CIA rendition programme has been involved in multiple human rights violations, including unlawful and arbitrary detention, torture and other ill-treatment, violations of the non‐refoulement principle, and enforced disappearance. Parliament created a special committee to look into this issue. This committee documented the use of European airspace and territory by the CIA. Since then, Parliament has repeated its demands for full investigations into the collaboration of national governments and agencies with the CIA programme. Member States have, however, failed to fulfil their obligation to investigate serious human rights violations connected with the CIA programme. At question is their failure to look into whether there are secret prisons on their territory or whether operations have taken place in which people have been held under the CIA programme in facilities on their territory.
Will the Commission call on the Member States to fulfil their obligation to investigate — by means of an effective and independent inquiry — cooperation between national governments and agencies with the CIA rendition programme as soon as possible?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The Commission has constantly held that practices referred to as ‘rendition’ and secret detentions are a violation of fundamental rights. The Commission has always stressed that it is for the Member States concerned to commence or continue in-depth, independent and impartial investigations to establish the truth. This is a positive obligation deriving from the European Convention on Human Rights in order to establish responsibilities and to enable the victims to obtain compensation for damages.
As explained on 10 September 2012 during the plenary session of the European Parliament, the Commission has been in contact with those Member States that were said to have hosted secret detention sites. Several letters have been sent to the authorities of Poland, Romania and Lithuania asking for a state-of-play on the investigations carried out in their countries.
The Commission will recall to the Member States that, while cooperating to fight terrorism, they must use all relevant EU instruments in the field of police cooperation and judicial cooperation in criminal matters and that these instruments must be applied under judicial control and in a manner fully compatible with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010174/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Spoločný európsky azylový systém SEAS
Európska únia sa zaviazala k tomu, že v roku 2012 dokončí zriaďovanie spoločného európskeho azylového systému (SEAS), čím vytvorí spoločný priestor ochrany a solidarity na základe spoločných azylových postupov a jednotného právneho postavenia osôb, ktorým bola poskytnutá medzinárodná ochrana. Systém SEAS je postavený na troch pilieroch: harmonizácia noriem ochrany, a to ďalším zosúladením právnych predpisov členských štátov v oblasti azylu; účinná a náležite podporovaná praktická spolupráca; ako aj zvýšená solidarita a väčší zmysel pre zodpovednosť nielen medzi členskými štátmi EÚ, ale aj medzi EÚ a krajinami, ktoré nie sú jej členmi. Zaistenie dobrého fungovania systému SEAS je v dnešných časoch mimoriadne dôležité. Členský štáty totiž v súčasnosti nedokážu primerane riešiť žiadosti o azyl podané na ich území. Cieľom EÚ je zriadenie skutočného priestoru ochrany, v ktorom sa práva žiadateľov o azyl a osôb pod medzinárodnou ochranou riadne rešpektujú a presadzujú. Pri presadzovaní tohto cieľa by sa však azylové systémy členských štátov mali pravidelne a často hodnotiť.
Má Komisia v pláne vypracovať v rámci účinného systému SEAS návrh určitého systému zameraného na pravidelné hodnotenie azylových systémov jednotlivých členských štátov s cieľom určiť najlepšie postupy, ako aj nedostatky a uľahčiť vypracovanie cielených riešení pre konkrétne situácie?
Odpoveď pani Malmströmovej v mene Komisie
(10. januára 2013)
Európska komisia prijala v súlade so Štokholmským programom všetky relevantné nástroje, ktoré prispejú k zabezpečeniu účinného fungovania spoločného európskeho azylového systému. Nepočíta sa so žiadnym návrhom na zriadenie dodatočného systému, ktorý by bol osobitne určený na hodnotenie azylových systémov členských štátov.
Európska komisia má však v úmysle sledovať uplatňovanie nového spoločného európskeho azylového systému v členských štátoch, a to aj prostredníctvom účinného monitorovania právnych predpisov a bežnej praxe. Čiastočne k tomu prispeje uplatňovanie článku 31 nového dublinského nariadenia (472), ktorý vytvára nástroj zameraný na odstraňovanie problémov predtým, ako sa vyvinú do krízy, ako aj všeobecnejšie právomoci Európskej komisie stanovené v zmluvách.
V tejto súvislosti bude Európsky podporný úrad pre azyl poskytovať Komisii relevantné štatistické údaje a analýzy a zároveň bude pomáhať zabezpečovať pripravenosť EÚ a jej členských štátov na rýchlu a účinnú reakciu v prípade, že azylový systém bude vystavený mimoriadnej záťaži.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010174/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Common European Asylum System (CEAS)
2012 is the year during which the European Union has committed itself to completing the establishment of a Common European Asylum System (CEAS), setting up a common area of protection and solidarity based on a common asylum procedure and uniform legal status for people who have been granted international protection. The CEAS is underpinned by three pillars: harmonisation of standards of protection, by further aligning the Member States’ asylum legislation; effective and well-supported practical cooperation; and increased solidarity and a sense of responsibility, not only among EU Member States, but also between the EU and non-EU countries. Ensuring that the CEAS functions well is particularly important today, since Member States are unable to cope adequately with the asylum applications lodged on their territory. The EU’s aim is to establish a genuine area of protection in which the rights of asylum-seekers and beneficiaries of international protection are duly respected and promoted. In order to achieve this aim, Member States’ asylum systems need to be evaluated regularly and frequently.
Does the Commission plan on drafting a proposal, in the context of an efficient CEAS, to establish a system for the regular evaluation of Member States’ asylum systems in order to ascertain best practices and the shortcomings of those systems, and to facilitate the development of solutions targeted at specific problems?
Answer given by Ms Malmström on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
In line with the Stockholm programme, the European Commission has adopted all the relevant instruments that will contribute to ensure an efficiently functioning CEAS. No new proposal is planned for the establishment of an additional system specifically to evaluate Member States' asylum systems.
It is however the intention of the European Commission to follow up the implementation of the new Common European Asylum System by Member States, including through effective monitoring of legislation and practice. This will be done in part via the implementation of Article 31 of the new Dublin Regulation (473), which creates an instrument aimed at redressing problems before they develop into crises, as well as through the more general powers of the European Commission set out in the Treaties.
To this end the European Asylum Support Office will prove relevant statistical data and analysis to the Commission, and will help to ensure the preparedness of the EU and its Member States to respond quickly and effectively when particular pressures are placed on the asylum system.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010175/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Darcovstvo tkanív a buniek
Polovica členských štátov vyhlasuje, že čelí pravidelnému nedostatku ľudských tkanív a buniek, najmä kostnej drene, pohlavných buniek a takých tkanív, ako sú rohovka a koža. Z etického hľadiska je mimoriadne dôležité zabezpečiť primeranú dodávku tkanív a buniek potrebných na lekárske účely. Odoberanie tkanív a buniek v prospech príjemcov sa môže vykonať, len ak sú splnené dve podmienky: musí sa sledovať zdravotný alebo vedecký a terapeutický účel a všetky odobraté prvky musia byť darované nezištne. Podľa správ mediálnych zdrojov však dochádza k opakovanému porušovaniu zásady bezplatného darcovstva. Charta základných práv Európskej únie, ktorá je právne záväzná, zakazuje využívanie ľudského tela a jeho častí na dosiahnutie zisku. Bezplatné darcovstvo je nielen etickou zásadou, ale je tiež nevyhnutné na ochranu zdravia darcu a príjemcu vzhľadom na to, že ak sú súčasťou procesu darcovstva veľké sumy peňazí, môžu darcu podnietiť k riskovaniu a môžu zabrániť odhaleniu rizík v jeho zdravotnej anamnéze.
Bolo by podľa názoru Komisie vhodné, aby sa členské štáty pri presadzovaní zásady bezplatnosti darcovstva riadili záväznými pravidlami, a to aj prostredníctvom trestného práva?
Odpoveď pána Borga v mene Komisie
(14. januára 2013)
Komisia súhlasí s názorom váženej pani poslankyne a pripomína, že Charta základných práv Európskej únie, ako aj Dohovor o ľudských právach a biomedicíne (474) zakazujú využívanie ľudského tela a jeho častí ako zdroj finančného zisku. Darcovstvo tkanív a buniek by malo byť dobrovoľné a nezištné. To však nezahŕňa kompenzáciu za náklady vzniknuté darcovi, ako je uvedené v právnych prepisoch EÚ v oblasti tkanív a buniek (475).
Komisia finalizuje kontrolu transpozície týchto právnych predpisov a pripravuje dva prieskumy: jeden o vykonávaní smerníc a jeden o podpore dobrovoľného a nezištného darcovstva tkanív a buniek. Na základe obáv, ktoré vyjadrili niektoré členské štáty a ktoré sú podobné obavám zdôrazneným v uznesení Európskeho parlamentu a Rady o dobrovoľnom a nezištnom darcovstve tkanív a buniek (476), sa druhý z prieskumov bude týkať otázky kompenzácie a porovnajú sa v ňom prístupy členských štátov.
Výsledky týchto prieskumov sa zverejnia v roku 2013. Tieto prieskumy, spolu s výsledkami projektov financovaných EÚ a spätnou väzbou od zúčastnených strán, poskytnú jasnejší obraz o uplatňovaní princípu dobrovoľného a nezištného darcovstva v celej EÚ. V článku 27 smernice 2004/23 je ustanovená povinnosť členských štátov stanoviť pravidlá týkajúce sa účinných, odradzujúcich a primeraných pokút uplatniteľných na prípady porušenia vnútroštátnych ustanovení prijatých na základe smernice.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010175/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Donation of tissues and cells
Half the Member States state that they regularly face a shortage of human tissues and cells, particularly bone marrow, gametes and tissues such as corneas and skin.From the ethical point of view, it is exceptionally important to ensure adequate supplies of tissues and cells needed for medical purposes.The removal of tissues and cells for the benefit of recipients may only be carried out under two conditions:it must be done with a medical or scientific and therapeutic aim, and all the elements removed must be donated without any payment being made.According to media reports, however, the principle of unpaid donation is repeatedly being violated.The European Union's Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is legally binding, prohibits making the human body and its parts a source of financial gain. Unpaid donation is not only an ethical principle but also necessary to protect the health of the donor and the recipient, as the involvement of large sums of money in the donation process may encourage the donor to take risks and may hinder the disclosure of risks in his/her medical history.
Does the Commission consider that it would be appropriate for the Member States, in enforcing the principle of unpaid donation, to apply binding rules, and even to make it subject to criminal law?
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)
The ‘Commission’ shares the Honourable Member's concerns and recalls that the Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (477) prohibit making the human body and its parts a source of financial gain. Donation of tissues and cells should be voluntary and unpaid. However, as reflected in the EU Tissues and Cells legislation (478), this does not exclude compensation for expenses occurred by the donor.
The Commission is finalising the transposition check of this legislation and is preparing two surveys: one on the implementation of the directives and one on the promotion of voluntary and unpaid donation of tissues and cells. Following concerns expressed by some Member States, similar to those highlighted in the European Parliament's Resolution on voluntary and unpaid donation of tissues and cells (479), the latter survey will address the issue of compensation and will compare Member States' approaches. 
The results of these surveys will be made available in 2013. Together with output of relevant EU-funded projects and feedback from stakeholders, these surveys will provide a clearer picture of the application of the principle of voluntary and unpaid donation across the EU. Article 27 of Directive 2004/23 obliges Member States to lay down rules on effective, dissuasive and proportionate penalties applicable to infringements of the national provisions adopted pursuant to the directive.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010176/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Práva obetí trestných činov
Európska komisia navrhuje vypracovať smernicu o právach, podpore a ochrane obetí trestných činov ako súčasť legislatívneho balíka, ktorý má za cieľ posilniť práva obetí v EÚ a ktorý tiež zahŕňa návrh nariadenia o vzájomnom uznávaní ochranných opatrení v občianskych veciach a oznámenie o posilnení práv obetí v EÚ. Táto smernica nebude len obhajovať práva obetí, poskytovať im podporu a ochranu, ale tiež bude pomáhať občanom Európy získať dôveru v ich národné systémy súdnictva a systémy svojich susedov v rámci EÚ, a to prostredníctvom harmonizácie týchto minimálnych noriem. Prieskum a jeho výsledky totiž ukazujú, že obete príliš často neohlasujú trestné činy z dôvodu strachu, neistoty a nedostatku dôvery alebo informácií. Trpia pre svoju zraniteľnosť a to im sťažuje zvládať súdne konanie. Dôvera v súdnictvo je prioritou pre všetkých európskych občanov a hlavne pre obete, ktoré majú skúsenosť, že sa nemôžu domôcť svojich práv. Rovnako však nesmieme zabúdať na zabezpečenie ochrany a podpory ich rodinných príslušníkov.
Ako konkrétne zohľadňuje návrh Komisie o právach, podpore a ochrane obetí trestných činov potrebu chrániť a podporovať aj rodinných príslušníkov obetí?
Odpoveď pani Redingovej v mene Komisie
(4. januára 2013)
Smernica Európskeho parlamentu a Rady 2012/29/EÚ z 25. októbra 2012, ktorou sa stanovujú minimálne normy v oblasti práv, podpory a ochrany obetí trestných činov a ktorou sa nahrádza rámcové rozhodnutie Rady 2001/220/SVV (480), výrazne posilňuje práva nielen obetí trestných činov, ale aj ich rodinných príslušníkov, ktorí sa v dôsledku spáchania trestného činu neraz ocitnú medzi poškodenými. Najmä rodinní príslušníci osoby, ktorej smrť bola spôsobená v dôsledku spáchania trestného činu, sa považujú za „obete“ a vzťahujú sa na ne preto všetky práva stanovené v tejto smernici. Rodinní príslušníci obetí, ktoré prežili, majú veľmi rozsiahle práva na podporu a ochranu, a to v súlade s ich potrebami. 
Definícia „rodinných príslušníkov“, ktorá je použitá v smernici, je okrem toho pomerne široko koncipovaná a zahŕňa manžela/manželku, osobu žijúcu s obeťou trvalo a stabilne v pevnom intímnom zväzku v spoločnej domácnosti, pokrvných príbuzných, súrodencov a osoby závislé od obete.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010176/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The rights of victims of crime
The Commission has submitted a proposal for a directive on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, as part of a legislative package which aims at strengthening the rights of victims in the EU and which also includes a proposal for a regulation on mutual recognition of protection measures in civil matters and a communication on strengthening victims' rights in the EU. This directive will not just defend victims’ rights and give support and protection, but will also help European citizens gain trust in their national judicial system and that of their EU neighbours by harmonising these minimum standards. Research and data show that all too often victims do not report a crime, due to fear, uncertainty, a lack of trust or a lack of information. They suffer due to their vulnerability, which makes it hard for them to cope with legal proceedings. Confidence in justice is a priority for all European citizens, especially for victims whose experience is that they cannot assert their rights. We also cannot, however, forget the importance of guaranteeing protection and support for their family members.
How specifically does the Commission proposal on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime intend to address the need for protection and support of their family members?
Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
Directive 2012/29/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 establishing minimum standards on the rights, support and protection of victims of crime, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2001/220/JHA (481), considerably strengthens the rights not only of crime victims but also of their family members as they are often harmed as a result of the crime. In particular, family members of a person whose death has been directly caused by a criminal offence are defined as ‘victims’ and will therefore benefit from all of the rights set out in the directive. Family members of surviving victims have very important rights to support and protection, in accordance with their needs. 
In addition, the definition used in the directive of ‘family members’ is rather wide and includes the spouse, the person who is living with the victim in a committed intimate relationship, in a joint household and on a stable and continuous basis, the blood relatives, the siblings and the dependants of the victim.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010177/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Európske fondy sociálneho podnikania
Európska komisia navrhuje nariadenie, ktorým sa vytvára právny rámec, v rámci ktorého možno rôznym investičným fondom udeliť označenie „európsky fond sociálneho podnikania“ a príslušné „povolenie“. Cieľom je vytvoriť európske odvetvie investovania do právnických osôb vykonávajúcich neziskové činnosti zamerané na plnenie rozličných cieľov sociálnej povahy. V súčasnej dobe sa totiž investori čoraz viac snažia dosahovať sociálne ciele a neusilujú sa len o finančné výnosy. V Európskej únii sa teda vytvára trh so sociálnymi investíciami, ktorý sčasti tvoria práve investičné fondy zamerané na sociálne podniky. Takéto investičné fondy poskytujú financovanie sociálnym podnikom, ktoré pôsobia ako stimuly sociálnych zmien tým, že ponúkajú inovačné riešenia sociálnych problémov, pomáhajú riešiť sociálne následky finančnej krízy a cenným spôsobom prispievajú k plneniu cieľov stratégie Európa 2020. Treba však poznamenať, že už existujú dve smernice týkajúce sa investičných fondov: smernica Európskeho parlamentu a Rady 2011/61/ES a smernica Európskeho parlamentu a Rady 2009/65/ES. Tieto smernice obsahujú pravidlá upravujúce investičné fondy a ich správu a pravidlá uplatniteľné na investorov v týchto fondoch.
Do akej miery zabezpečila Komisia súlad návrhu Nariadenia o európskych fondoch sociálneho podnikania s už existujúcou platnou legislatívou týkajúcou sa investičných fondov?
Odpoveď pána Barniera v mene Komisie
(15. januára 2013)
Cieľom smernice PKIPCP (482) je vytvoriť harmonizovaný súbor pravidiel na investovanie do fondov, ktoré sú vhodné pre retailových investorov. Investície do sociálnych podnikov sa nepovažovali za vhodné pre retailových investorov z dôvodu nelikvidnej povahy investičných nástrojov, ktoré sociálne podniky vydávajú. Keďže sa smernicou PKIPCP vyžadujú finančné prostriedky, ktoré sa majú poskytnúť investorom s pravidelným vyplácaním, investície, ktoré nie sú uvedené na zozname, sú do značnej miery z PKIPCP vyňaté.
Smernicou AIFMD (483) sa odopierajú správcom, ktorých portfólio fondov nepresahuje 500 miliónov EUR, výhody európskeho povolenia na uvádzanie na trh, pokiaľ si nezvolili možnosť, aby sa na nich AIFMD vzťahovala. Správcovia, ktorí sa špecializujú na sociálne podniky, majú málokedy portfólio spravovaných fondov, ktoré prekračuje prah AIFMD.
Navrhované nariadenie (484) EuSEF (485) má za cieľ vytvoriť harmonizovaný súbor pravidiel EÚ pre sociálne investície, vrátane európskeho povolenia na uvádzanie na trh pre správcov fondov, ktorí investujú do sociálnych podnikov.
Navrhované nariadenie EuSEF je jedným z prvých výsledkov vyplývajúcich zo záväzkov prijatých v Akte o jednotnom trhu.
Keďže v súčasnosti neexistuje celoeurópske povolenie na uvádzanie na trh pre správcov fondov, ktorí investujú do sociálnych podnikov a ktorí si nezvolili možnosť, aby sa na nich AIFMD vzťahovala, nariadením sa vypĺňa veľká finančná medzera a predstavuje teda potrebný nástroj na to, aby sa sociálne podniky mohli v EÚ rozvíjať.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010177/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: European Social Entrepreneurship Funds
The Commission has submitted a proposal for a regulation establishing the legal framework under which different types of investment fund can be granted the status of ‘European Social Entrepreneurship Fund’ and the respective ‘passport’. The aim is to create a European sector for investment in legal persons carrying on not-for-profit activities aimed at fulfilling various objectives of a social nature. Currently, investors are increasingly pursuing social goals and are not only seeking financial returns. A social investment market has therefore been emerging in the Union, comprised in part of investment funds targeting social undertakings. Such investment funds provide funding to social undertakings which are acting as drivers of social change by offering innovative solutions to social problems, helping to tackle the social consequences of the financial crisis and making a valuable contribution to meeting the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. It should be noted, however, that two directives relating to investment funds already exist: Directive 2011/61/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Directive 2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. These contain the rules governing investment funds and their management and the rules applicable to investors in those funds.
To what extent has the Commission taken steps to ensure that the proposal for a directive on European Social Entrepreneurship Funds is consistent with existing legislation applying to investment funds?
Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission 
(15 January 2013)
The objective of the UCITS Directive (486) is to create a harmonised set of rules for investment funds that are suitable for retail investors. Investments in social businesses were not deemed suitable for retail investors because of the illiquid nature of the investment instruments issued by social enterprises. As the UCITS Directive requires funds to provide investors with regular redemptions, non-listed investments are largely excluded from UCITS. 
The AIFMD (487) denies managers whose portfolio of funds does not exceed EUR 500 million the benefits of an EU marketing passport unless they have chosen to opt-in under the AIFMD. Managers that specialise in social business rarely have a portfolio of funds under management that exceeds the AIFMD threshold.
The proposed EuSEF (488) Regulation (489) intends to create a harmonised EU rule book on social investments, including an EU marketing passport for managers of funds that invest in social businesses. 
The proposed EuSEF Regulation is an early deliverable stemming from the commitments made in the single market Act. 
As there is at present no EU-wide marketing passport for managers of funds that invest in social businesses and who have not chosen to opt-in under AIFMD, the proposed EuSEF Regulation fills an important financing gap and therefore constitutes a necessary tool for social businesses to flourish in the EU. 
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010178/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Problematika osirotených diel
Osirotené diela sú diela, v prípade ktorých nemožno identifikovať ani nájsť nositeľa autorských práv. Európska komisia vytvára prostredníctvom návrhu smernice Európskeho parlamentu a Rady o určitých povolených spôsoboch použitia osirotených diel základ pre zaobchádzanie s knihami, novinami, časopismi, filmami, hudobnými nahrávkami, televíznou produkciou atď., ktoré sú síce chránené autorským právom, ale v prípade ktorých nemožno určiť nositeľa práv. Európska únia má totiž mimoriadne bohaté kultúrne dedičstvo. Väčšina tohto dedičstva však leží nevyužitá v archívoch a knižniciach členských štátov a nie je európskym občanom prístupná. V záujme zachovania rozmanitosti európskej kultúry je preto potrebné sprístupniť tieto diela na cezhraničnej úrovni. Nový právny predpis v budúcnosti umožní celoeurópsky online prístup k takýmto osiroteným dielam.
Akým spôsobom však Komisia zabráni tomu, aby sa dielam neprisudzoval status osiroteného diela neoprávnene?
Odpoveď pána Barniera v mene Komisie
(15. januára 2013)
Smernica o určitých povolených spôsoboch použitia osirotených diel bola oficiálne prijatá 25. októbra 2012. Členské štáty ju musia implementovať do 29. októbra 2014. Komisia je presvedčená, že smernica je dôležitým krokom k šíreniu nášho kultúrneho dedičstva. Uľahčí digitalizáciu a zákonný cezhraničný online prístup k dielam ako sú knihy, noviny, zvukové záznamy, filmy, ktoré sú súčasťou zbierok kultúrnych organizácii (napr. knižníc, inštitúcií, ktoré sa zaoberajú filmovým alebo zvukovým dedičstvom atď.) a ktoré možno na základe pravidiel smernice považovať za osirotené diela. 
Smernica obsahuje ustanovenia, cieľom ktorých je zaistiť, aby sa dielo nesprávne nepovažovalo za osirotené dielo. Podľa článku 3 ods. 1 sa vyžaduje, aby sa za osirotené dielo považovalo dielo až potom, čo usilovné pátranie neprinieslo pozitívne výsledky, pokiaľ ide o identifikáciu alebo miesto nositeľa(-ov) práv. Článkom 5 sa zaisťuje, že držitelia práv, ktorí sa objavia v neskoršej fáze, budú mať možnosť ukončiť status osiroteného diela, pokiaľ sú dotknuté ich práva. Napokon, podľa článku 3 ods. 5 budú organizácie, ktoré sa dozvedia o zmene statusu osiroteného diela, vyzvané, aby informovali príslušné orgány členského štátu, aby sa táto zmena statusu zachytila v jednotnej databáze osirotených diel EÚ, ktorá sa zriadi podľa článku 3 ods. 5 a článku 3 ods. 6. 
Komisia bude úzko spolupracovať s členskými štátmi počas obdobia implementácie, aby sa uistila, že smernica bude načas a správne implementovaná v celej EÚ.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010178/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The problem of orphan works
Orphan works are works whose rightholder or rightholders cannot be identified or found. The European Commission's proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain permitted uses of orphan works provides a basis governing books, newspapers, journals, films, musical works, TV productions etc., which are in fact covered by copyright, but for which the rightholder cannot be identified. The European Union has an exceptionally rich cultural heritage. Much of this heritage, however, lies unused in the archives and libraries of the Member States and is inaccessible to the people of Europe. In order to maintain the diversity of European culture, it is essential to make these works available across borders. In future, new legislation will make it possible to have Europe-wide online access to such orphan works.
What steps does the Commission intend to take, however, to prevent works being improperly classified as orphan works?
Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(15 January 2013)
The directive on certain permitted uses of orphan works was formally adopted on 25 October 2012. Member States will have to implement it by 29 October 2014. The Commission believes the directive is an important step forward for the dissemination of our cultural heritage. It will facilitate the digitisation of and the lawful cross-border online access to works such as books, newspapers, phonograms, films, that are contained in the collections of cultural organisations (e.g. libraries, film or audio heritage institutions, etc.) and that are qualified as orphan works on the basis of the directive's rules. 
The directive contains provisions which aim at ensuring that a work is not wrongly considered as an orphan work. Article 3.1 requires that a work can only be qualified as orphan after that a diligent search has been carried out without yielding results as to the identification or location of the rightholder(s). Article 5 makes sure that rightholders reappearing at a later stage will have the possibility to put an end to the orphan status of the work as far as their rights are concerned. Finally, pursuant to Article 3.5, the organisations that become aware of changes in the orphan status of the work will be required to inform the relevant Member State authorities, so that this change of status is reflected in the single EU database of orphan works that will be established pursuant to Article 3.5 and 3.6. 
The Commission will work closely with Member States during the implementation period to make sure that the directive is timely and correctly implemented within the whole EU.
(Slovenské znenie)
Otázka na písomné zodpovedanie E-010179/12
Komisii
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8. novembra 2012)

Vec: Lepšia tvorba právnych predpisov
Aby bola legislatíva na úrovni EÚ účinná, právne predpisy musia byť v prvom rade jasné, jednoduché, ľahko zrozumiteľné a prístupné pre všetkých. Európske inštitúcie by mali zjednotiť snahu v oblasti lepšej tvorby a zjednodušenia právnych predpisov EÚ, rovnako ako snahu o zníženie administratívneho a regulačného zaťaženia. Je ich úlohou zabezpečiť aby bola európska legislatíva čo najbližšie občanom a v plnej miere zabezpečiť dobrú správu vecí verejných. V snahe o celkové skvalitnenie európskej legislatívy je dôležitý účinný hodnotiaci systém už prijatých právnych predpisov na úrovni EÚ.
Má Komisia v pláne vypracovať návrh primeraných opatrení na hodnotenie účinnosti už prijatých právnych predpisov s cieľom získať spätnú väzbu, ktorá sa použije v snahe o skvalitnenie európskej legislatívy?
Odpoveď pána Barrosa v mene Komisie
(10. decembra 2012)
Hodnotenie je neoddeliteľnou súčasťou úsilia Komisie o maximalizáciu prínosov a minimalizáciu nákladov politík EÚ. Oznámenie o inteligentnej regulácii z roku 2010 potvrdilo odhodlanie intenzívnejšie využívať hodnotenie v rámci tvorby vecne podložených politických nástrojov. Zdôrazňovala sa v ňom kľúčová úloha hodnotení pri zlepšovaní kvality existujúcich právnych predpisov a zaviedli sa ním takzvané „kontroly účelnosti“ ako spôsob systematického posudzovania regulačných opatrení vo všetkých politických oblastiach. Komisia sa pripravuje na prijatie svojho ďalšieho oznámenia o inteligentnej regulácii v decembri 2012 vrátane ďalších opatrení na zabezpečenie lepšieho hodnotenia účinnosti súčasne platných právnych predpisov. V tomto oznámení sa poukáže na potrebu systematického hodnotenia vo všetkých oblastiach regulácie na úrovni EÚ, čo si na druhej strane vyžaduje strategické plánovanie. Tento proces by sa mal opierať o konzultácie a transparentnosť.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010179/12
to the Commission
Monika Flašíková Beňová (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Better legislation
For lawmaking to be effective at EU level, legislation must above all be clear, simple, easy to understand and accessible to all. The European institutions should attempt to consolidate efforts in better lawmaking, simplification of EC law and the reduction of administrative and regulatory burdens. It is their duty to ensure that European legislation is as close as possible to the citizen and to ensure in full measure that public affairs are subject to good governance. An important element in efforts to enhance the overall quality of European legislation is the development of an effective evaluation system for existing EU legislation already in force.
Does the Commission plan to draw up a proposal for appropriate measures to evaluate the effectiveness of legislation already in force with a view to collecting feedback that will be useful in improving future European legislation?
Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)
Evaluation is an integral part of the Commission’s effort to maximise the benefits and minimise the costs of EU policies. The 2010 Smart Regulation Communication confirmed commitments to strengthen the use of evaluation in the context of evidence-based policy making. It highlighted the key role of evaluation in improving the quality of existing legislation and introduced the so-called ‘fitness checks’ as a way to systematically assess regulatory measures in entire policy areas. The Commission is preparing to adopt its next communication on Smart Regulation in December 2012, including additional measures to ensure better evaluation of the effectiveness of legislation already in force. The communication will point to the need for systematic evaluation across all areas of EU regulation which in turn requires strategic planning. This process should be backed by consultation and transparency
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-010180/12
alla Commissione
Antonio Cancian (PPE)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Chiarimenti in merito alla normativa sul traffico nel Land Tirolo
Come si evince dal regolamento n. 119 del 25 ottobre 2012 e dal Landesgesetzblatt für Tirol del 31 ottobre 2012, il Tirolo sta introducendo un ulteriore divieto al traffico notturno ai veicoli pesanti che transitano nella Valle dell'Inn (A12).
A partire dal 1° novembre 2012 il transito è interdetto ai veicoli Euro V. Grazie a una deroga, il traffico notturno sarà permesso agli EEV fino al 31 ottobre 2013 e agli EURO VI fino al 31 ottobre 2015.
Si interroga pertanto la Commissione per sapere se è al corrente di questa decisione assunta dal governo tirolese e se la ritiene conforme alla normativa europea. Nello specifico:






—


non ritiene la Commissione che l'obbligo di utilizzare veicoli di classe EURO VI (azione che diverrà obbligatoria per le immatricolazioni a partire dal 1° gennaio 2014) violi il principio della libera circolazione delle merci, impedendo la circolazione a veicoli comunque meno inquinanti e allo stato attuale in regolare produzione e commercializzazione secondo le normative europee?










—


cosa pensa la Commissione del fatto che questo obbligo implica di utilizzare veicoli non ancora in produzione regolare e secondo una legge non ancora prevista dalla normativa dell'Unione?




Risposta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione
(6 dicembre 2012)
La competenza relativa all'emissione di divieti di circolazione spetta agli Stati membri o, come nel caso dell'Austria, alle autorità regionali. Essi non devono comunicare alla Commissione i divieti di circolazione, anche se alcuni di questi possono rivestire un'importanza a livello internazionale in quanto riguardano utenti della strada di vari paesi. Tuttavia la Commissione, che segue da vicino le questioni relative al traffico transalpino, è a conoscenza della decisione presa dal governo del Tirolo.
Quando emettono divieti di circolazione, le autorità nazionali e regionali devono rispettare i principi fondamentali del trattato. Tali divieti, ad esempio, non devono ostacolare in modo sproporzionato la libera circolazione delle merci, cosa di cui il governo del Tirolo è certamente al corrente dato che un divieto di traffico settoriale da esso introdotto due volte nel corso degli ultimi dieci anni è stato in entrambi i casi giudicato incompatibile con tale principio (490).
In seguito allo scadere della deroga al divieto di circolazione notturna per i veicoli Euro V, il 31 ottobre 2012, più della metà dei veicoli pesanti che avevano fino a quel momento utilizzato l'A12 durante la notte ora non è più autorizzata a farlo (491). Tale misura dovrebbe contribuire a ridurre l'inquinamento atmosferico nella valle dell'Inn, dove i valori limite fissati dalla direttiva 2008/50/CE (492) vengono spesso superati.
L'estensione del divieto avrà probabilmente un impatto sui flussi di merci. Tuttavia, gli operatori del trasporto stradale dispongono di varie alternative per il trasporto delle merci nella valle dell'Inn: possono effettuare il trasporto durante il giorno, utilizzare servizi di trasporto combinato o ammodernare il proprio parco autocarri con la più recente tecnologia dei veicoli (Euro VI), che è già disponibile sul mercato.
Alla luce di quanto sopra, la Commissione ritiene che il divieto di circolazione notturna per tutti i veicoli, eccetto gli EEV (veicoli ecologici migliorati) e gli Euro VI, costituisce una misura legittima per purificare l'aria nella valle dell'Inn e non ostacola in modo sproporzionato la libera circolazione delle merci.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010180/12
to the Commission
Antonio Cancian (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Clarification on the traffic rules in the Land of Tyrol 
According to Regulation No 119 of 25 October 2012 and the Landesgesetzblatt für Tirol of 31 October 2012, the Tyrol is introducing an additional night traffic ban for heavy goods vehicles in the Inn Valley (A12).
As from 1 November 2012, Euro V vehicles will no longer be able to pass through the valley. By way of derogation, night transit will be permitted for EEV vehicles until 31 October 2013 and for EURO VI vehicles until 31 October 2015.
Is the Commission aware of this decision taken by the Tyrolean government and, in its view, does the decision comply with EU legislation? More specifically:






—


Does the Commission not agree that the requirement to use EURO VI vehicles (that will become mandatory for all vehicles registered as of 1 January 2014) is in breach of the principle of the free movement of goods, since it prevents the circulation of vehicles that are, in any case, less polluting and are currently being manufactured and marketed perfectly legally, in accordance with EU legislation?










—


What is the Commission's view of the fact that this requirement will involve the use of vehicles that are not yet being regularly manufactured, under a law for which no provision has yet been made in EU legislation?




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(6 December 2012)
The competence for issuing traffic bans lies with the Member States or, as in the case of Austria, with regional authorities. They do not have to report traffic bans to the Commission, although some bans can have an international dimension affecting road users from several countries. As it closely follows transalpine traffic issues, the Commission is however aware of the decision taken by the Tyrolean Government.
When issuing traffic bans, national and regional authorities must respect the basic Treaty principles. Traffic bans must for example not disproportionately impede the free movement of goods, of which the government of Tyrol is certainly aware, as a sectoral driving ban which it introduced twice over the last 10 years was both times found to be incompatible with that principle (493).
Following the ending of the derogation for EURO V vehicles from the night traffic ban on 31 October 2012, more than half of all lorries which were using the A12 at night until then are now banned from doing so (494).This measure should help reduce air pollution in the Inn valley where the limit values of Directive 2008/50/EC (495) are frequently exceeded.
The extension of the ban is likely to have some impact on goods flows. Road transport operators do however still have several options to carry goods through the Inn valley: they may carry them during the day, use combined transport services or upgrade their fleet with the latest vehicle technology (EURO VI) which is already available on the market.
In view of the above, the Commission believes that the night traffic ban for all vehicles but EEV (enhanced environmentally-friendly vehicles) and EURO VI vehicles is a legitimate measure to clean up the air in the Inn valley and does not disproportionately hinder the free movement of goods.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010181/12
a la Comisión
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: CMT (Comisión del Mercado de Telecomunicaciones)
El Gobierno español acaba de presentar al Congreso un proyecto de ley para fusionar en un solo organismo las autoridades reguladoras de industrias de red junto con la autoridad nacional de competencia. El proyecto propone la transferencia de una buena parte de las competencias actualmente ejercidas por la CMT (Comisión del Mercado de Telecomunicaciones) en materia de comunicaciones electrónicas al Ministerio de Industria, Energía y Turismo. Se trata de un proceso de recentralización inédito en Europa. Se utiliza el argumento de que las funciones realizadas por la CMT exceden las directrices marcadas por las Directivas europeas y no guardan relación con la misión y objetivos de aquélla, siendo meramente tareas administrativas. Sin embargo, las competencias necesarias para que un regulador independiente cumpla adecuadamente sus objetivos son bastante más extensas, como demuestra la realidad europea, caracterizada por reguladores independientes con amplios poderes. Por otra parte, la armonización de políticas regulatorias, básica dentro del mercado interior, requiere que los reguladores independientes de los Estados miembros cuenten con un número común de competencias que facilite la colaboración a través de BEREC. La separación de la facultad reguladora básica en dos entidades obstaculizará la participación en BEREC, producirá inseguridad jurídica al afectar a la predictibilidad de la intervención pública y una pérdida de eficiencia administrativa al ser las competencias traspasadas parte de la actividad reguladora básica de los mercados. 
Por lo tanto, teniendo en cuenta que la CMT es actualmente el regulador de la UE con menos competencias en el sector de las telecomunicaciones, que dichas competencias se han ido reduciendo desde su creación en 1998, y que este proyecto de ley viene a reducir todavía más dicha asignación: 






—


¿Qué actuaciones se plantea emprender la Comisión para defender adecuadamente los objetivos de las Directivas con respecto a la decisión del Gobierno español? 










—


¿Cómo garantizará que los reguladores independientes tienen un ámbito competencial suficiente para cumplir con dichos objetivos? 










—


¿Cómo asegurará que la nueva transferencia de competencias al ministerio no reduzca aún más la independencia y la eficacia regulatoria de la futura CNMC? 




Dado que el proyecto de ley prevé que Madrid será la sede de la nueva CNMC, ¿qué actuaciones se plantea emprender la Comisión para asegurar que no se repita el parón regulatorio producido en 2005-2006 por el traslado de la CMT a Barcelona, tal y como manifestó la propia Comisión en su 11° informe de implementación?
Respuesta de la Sra. Kroes  en nombre de la Comisión 
(19 de diciembre de 2012)
La Comisión está al corriente de las novedades legislativas españolas en relación a la adopción de la ley por la que se crea la Comisión Nacional de Mercados y Competencia (CNMC). 
La Comisión da gran importancia al principio de la independencia de las autoridades nacionales de reglamentación, lo que es crucial para el correcto funcionamiento del mercado único. Los Estados miembros gozan de un grado considerable de autonomía en la manera de establecer sus organismos de reglamentación. La normativa de la UE consta de requisitos específicos sobre la independencia de las autoridades de reglamentación, incluida la prohibición de recibir instrucciones de parte de otros organismos, el ejercicio eficaz de sus tareas y los recursos adecuados. La Comisión también concede gran importancia a los requisitos relativos al ajuste de las tareas realizadas por las autoridades de reglamentación a los objetivos políticos y los principios reglamentarios que figuran en el marco de la UE y a su cooperación con el ORECE. 
La normativa de la UE no establece requisitos específicos en lo que respecta a la ubicación geográfica de las autoridades nacionales de reglamentación. El actual proyecto de ley, aunque prevé que la sede del CNMC esté en Madrid, también parece contemplar la posibilidad de otras sedes. 
La Comisión se mantiene en contacto con las autoridades españolas para garantizar la independencia de la nueva autoridad y que dispone de los poderes suficientes para desempeñar sus funciones con arreglo al Derecho de la UE. La Comisión analizará la conformidad de la legislación final con el Derecho de la UE y podrá incoar procedimientos de infracción en caso necesario. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010181/12
to the Commission
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Telecommunications Market Commission
The Spanish Government has recently submitted to the Spanish Parliament a bill to merge the national competition authority and the regulatory authorities for network industries. Under the terms of the bill, many of the powers currently exercised by the Telecommunications Market Commission (Comisión del Mercado de Telecomunicaciones or CMT) in the field of electronic communications would be transferred to the Ministry of Industry, Energy and Tourism. If adopted, the bill would lead to a recentralisation of administrative power which is unprecedented in Europe. The government argues that the tasks carried out by the CMT go beyond those laid down in European directives and fall outside its actual remit, which is purely administrative. However, the powers required by independent regulators if they are to fulfil their purpose are considerably more extensive, as demonstrated by those enjoyed by the relevant bodies in other Member States. Furthermore, the harmonisation of regulatory policies, which is fundamental to the whole philosophy of the internal market, requires independent regulators in the Member States to have a common set of powers in order to facilitate cooperation in BEREC (the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications). Dividing basic regulatory powers between two bodies would complicate Spanish participation in BEREC, undermine legal certainty (by making public intervention more difficult to predict) and reduce administrative efficiency (as the powers transferred form part of basic market regulation). 
Given that the CMT is currently the regulator in the EU with the fewest powers in the telecommunications sector, that its powers have been gradually reduced since its establishment in 1998 and that the bill plans to limit its powers even further: 






—


What does the Commission intend to do, in the light of the Spanish Government's decision, to ensure that the relevant directives are properly implemented? 










—


What will it do to ensure that independent regulators have sufficient powers to meet the objectives set out in those directives? 










—


How will it ensure that this new transfer of powers to the ministry will not further limit the independence and regulatory efficiency of the future National Markets and Competition Commission (CNMC)? 




The bill stipulates that the new CNMC will be based in Madrid. What does the Commission intend to do to prevent a repeat of the regulatory standstill that occurred in 2005 and 2006 when the CMT moved to Barcelona (referred to by the Commission in its 11th implementing report)?
Answer given by Ms Kroes  on behalf of the Commission 
(19 December 2012)
The Commission is aware of the legislative developments in Spain regarding the adoption of the law creating the National Commission for Markets and Competition (CNMC). 
The Commission attaches great importance to the principle of the independence of the national regulatory authorities which is critical to the effective functioning of the single market. Member States have a considerable degree of autonomy in deciding how to set up their regulatory bodies. The EC law contains specific requirements about the independence of regulatory authorities, including the prohibition to receive instructions from other bodies, the effective exercise of their tasks and adequate resources. The Commission also attaches great importance to the requirements regarding the alignment of the tasks carried out by the regulators with the policy objectives and regulatory principles contained in the EU framework and their cooperation with BEREC. 
The EU regulatory framework does not contain specific requirement as regards the geographical location of the national regulatory authorities. The current draft law, whilst providing for the seat of the CNMC to be located in Madrid, also appears to foresee the possibility of other seats. 
The Commission is in contact with the Spanish authorities ensure the independence of the new authority and that it has sufficient powers to fulfil its functions under EC law. The Commission will analyse the compliance of the final law with EU legislation and may take infringement actions if necessary. 
(Tekstas lietuvių kalba)
Klausimas, į kurį atsakoma raštu, Nr. P-010182/12
Komisijai
Justas Vincas Paleckis (S&D)
(2012 m. lapkričio 8 d.)

Tema: Protų nutekėjimas
Laisvas asmenų judėjimas Europos Sąjungoje yra ES laimėjimas, tačiau šis reiškinys turi ir antrąją pusę. Lietuva, Latvija, Estija, Bulgarija, Rumunija, Lenkija ir kitos šalys prarado daug jaunų, kūrybingų žmonių, kurių išsilavinimas brangiai kainavo. Krizė dar labiau paspartino protų ir darbo jėgos nutekėjimą, kuris sekina neturtingas ES šalis. Pagrindinė masinės emigracijos priežastis – didžiulis užmokesčio skirtumas (iki 10‐15 kartų) už tą patį darbą įvairiose ES šalyse. 
Ne pirmą kartą kviečiu EK apsvarstyti klausimą dėl specialaus ES fondo (panašiai kaip globalizacijos fondas) steigimo minėtai problemai spręsti. Šalys, kurios gauna paruoštus specialistus iš naujųjų ES valstybių, privalėtų joms kompensuoti bent dalį specialistams paruošti išleistų lėšų. Jos galėtų būti panaudotos paklausiausių profesijų darbuotojų darbo užmokesčio skirtumams išlyginti, mokslinių tyrimų plėtrai ir darbo sąlygoms gerinti. Prieš imantis tokių ar panašių priemonių turėtų būti surinkti statistiniai duomenys apie išvažiuojančių ir atvažiuojančių asmenų profesiją ir išsilavinimą.
Praėjusių metų rugsėjo 21 d. Europos Parlamente vykusioje socialdemokratinio jaunimo konferencijoje Europos Komisijos narys Laslo Andor pritarė nuomonei, kad laisvas žmonių judėjimas gali turėti ir neigiamų pasekmių: kai kurios ES šalys, ypač naujosios, daug investavusios į žmonių profesinį rengimą, juos negrįžtamai praranda, tapdamos kitų ekonomiškai stipresnių valstybių darbo jėgos donorėmis. Pasak Komisijos nario, Komisija rengia priemones, kuriomis būtų ne tik skatinamas jaunimo judumas studijų metu, bet ir numatomi atvejai, kai nuo to turėtų būti susilaikoma asmenims jau pradėjus dirbti. Komisijos narys užsiminė, kad Briuselyje diskutuojama apie galimybę įvesti naują bendrą ES mokestį siekiant kovoti su protų nutekėjimu.
Kaip Europos Komisija galėtų prisidėti prie tų skausmingų pasekmių mažinimo, kurias sukelia protų ir darbo jėgos nutekėjimas, daugiausia iš naujų ES valstybių?
L. Andoro atsakymas Komisijos vardu
(2012 m. gruodžio 13 d.)






1.


Judumo Europos Sąjungoje tendencijos atitinka ekonomikos raidą ir kinta cikliškai. 2004‐2007 m. spartaus ekonomikos augimo laikotarpiu judumas iš senbuvių į naująsias valstybes nares buvo didžiausias, o 2008 m. padėtis visiškai pasikeitė.










2.


Dabartinis judumo lygis laikomas per žemu, kad nulemtų protų nutekėjimą, o judžių darbuotojų ir visos darbo jėgos įgūdžių skirtumai yra nedideli ir nedarantys poveikio bendram protų nutekėjimui. Be to, didėjant išsilavinimo lygiui ir tretinį išsilavinimą turinčių asmenų procentinei daliai panašėjant su likusios ES procentine dalimi, iš dalies mažinamas įgūdžių turinčių darbuotojų nutekėjimo poveikis.










3.



ES teisės aktuose nustatytas Komisijos ir valstybių narių dialogas dėl su darbo rinka susijusių problemų, kylančių dėl darbuotojų judumo. Šiam dialogui paremti Europos laisvų darbo vietų stebėjimo sistemoje sekami darbo rinkos poreikiai valstybėse narėse.










4.


2012 m. balandžio mėn. Komisija pristatė užimtumo srities dokumentų rinkinį, kuriame daugiausia dėmesio skiriama darbo paklausai ir nustatyti veiksmingiausi būdai kurti darbo vietas. Gruodžio mėn. Komisija pateikė jaunimo užimtumo srities dokumentų rinkinį, kuriame, be kitų pasiūlymų, pateiktas Tarybos rekomendacijos dėl garantijų jaunimui nustatymo pasiūlymas.




(English version)
Question for written answer P-010182/12
to the Commission
Justas Vincas Paleckis (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Brain drain
The free movement of people within the European Union is an achievement of the EU. However, there is another side to this phenomenon. Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Bulgaria, Romania, Poland and other countries have lost a number of young and creative people, whose education had been very expensive. The crisis has accelerated the brain and labour drain even more, which causes problems for the poorer Member States. The major cause of mass emigration is the huge difference in salaries (up to 10-15 times) for the same job in different Member States.
I have repeatedly called on the European Commission to consider establishing a special EU fund (similar to the Globalisation Fund) to address the problem. Countries that receive trained specialists from new Member States should reimburse at least part of the costs incurred for their training. These funds could be used for evening-out salary differences in the most sought-after professions, developing research and improving working conditions. Before taking these or similar measures, statistical data on the professions and education of incoming and outgoing persons should be collected.
On 21 September 2011, during the Conference of young Social Democrats held at the European Parliament, Commissioner Andor admitted that the free movement of people might equally have negative repercussions; some Member States, in particular the new ones, that have invested a lot in professional training were now facing an irreversible loss of their labour force, thereby becoming donor countries to stronger economies. According to the Commissioner, the Commission was planning measures to promote the learning mobility of young people as well as to discourage mobility among people already in work. The Commissioner also mentioned that discussions were taking place in Brussels with regard to introducing a common EU tax to fight the brain drain.
How can the European Commission contribute to mitigating the painful consequences of the brain and labour drain, mostly from the new EU Member States?
Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)







1.


Intra-EU mobility follows the economy, and tends to be cyclical










1.


Intra-EU mobility follows the economy, and tends to be cyclical




 (496). Highest inflows from ‘new’ to ‘old’ Member States took place during the period of strong economic growth in 2004-07, but this changed radically in 2008. 






2.


Current levels of mobility seem too low to trigger a brain drain










2.


Current levels of mobility seem too low to trigger a brain drain




 (497) and differences in the skill-mix of mobile workers and that of the total labour force is moderate, limiting any overall brain drain. Also, improvement of the education level, with tertiary attainment rates catching up with the rest of the EU (498) compensates partly the outflow of skilled labour.





3.



EC law (499) provides for a dialogue between the Commission and Member States on labour market-related problems that stem from workers' mobility. To support this dialogue, the European Vacancy Monitor follows labour market needs in the Member States. 











4.


In April 2012, the Commission presented an Employment Package which puts a renewed policy focus on labour demand and identifies the most effective ways of creating jobs. In December it presented the Youth Employment Package, which among others, presents a proposal for a Council Recommendation on Establishing a Youth Guarantee










4.


In April 2012, the Commission presented an Employment Package which puts a renewed policy focus on labour demand and identifies the most effective ways of creating jobs. In December it presented the Youth Employment Package, which among others, presents a proposal for a Council Recommendation on Establishing a Youth Guarantee




 (500). (Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010183/12
aan de Commissie
Marianne Thyssen (PPE) en Ivo Belet (PPE)
(8 november 2012)

Betreft: Verhoging accijnzen bier in Frankrijk
Op 1 oktober 2012 heeft Frankrijk aangekondigd dat het de accijnzen op bier met 160 % zal verhogen, waardoor de prijs hiervan gevoelig zal stijgen (tot 15 %). De accijnzen op wijn zullen door de Franse overheid echter niet worden verhoogd, hoewel beide dranken sterke gelijkaardige eigenschappen vertonen en daardoor in concurrentie staan met elkaar. Verder behoren de Franse accijnzen op wijn momenteel al tot de laagste in Europa De verhoging van de bierprijs zal de concurrentiepositie van bier dus ernstig verzwakken.
De productie van wijn ligt in Frankrijk vele malen hoger dan de productie van bier. Het grootste deel van het bier dat in Frankrijk wordt geconsumeerd, wordt dan ook geïmporteerd vanuit het buitenland.
Is deze maatregel niet in strijd met artikel 110 van het Verdrag betreffende de werking van de Europese Unie, waarin o.a. is bepaald dat lidstaten geen zodanige binnenlandse belastingen mogen heffen op producten van de overige lidstaten dat daardoor andere producten zijdelings worden beschermd?
Welke stappen zal de Commissie ondernemen om aan deze discriminerende ingreep een einde te maken?
Antwoord van de heer Šemeta namens de Commissie
(21 december 2012)
Krachtens artikel 110 VWEU is fiscale discriminatie van ingevoerde producten verboden. Krachtens de tweede alinea van dat artikel mogen de lidstaten producten die uit andere lidstaten worden ingevoerd, niet zodanig belasten dat daardoor andere producties zijdelings worden beschermd. Het bestaan van dergelijke discriminatie moet met specifieke gegevens worden aangetoond. De Commissie verwijst de geachte Parlementsleden in dit verband met name naar het arrest van het Europese Hof van Justitie in zaak C-167/05, Commissie tegen Zweden.
Wat het door de geachte Parlementsleden genoemde Franse wetsontwerp betreft, heeft de Commissie geen kennis van specifieke gegevens die het bestaan van fiscale discriminatie onderbouwen. In dit verband merkt zij ook op dat volgens de informatie op de website van de Franse vereniging van brouwers (http://www.brasseurs-de-france.com) het grootste deel van het bier dat in Frankrijk wordt geconsumeerd, in Frankrijk is geproduceerd.
De Commissie zal evenwel iedere klacht die haar over deze zaak wordt voorgelegd, mits deze met bewijsstukken wordt gestaafd, aan een grondig onderzoek onderworpen.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010183/12
to the Commission
Marianne Thyssen (PPE) and Ivo Belet (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Increase in beer duty in France
On 1 October 2012 France announced that the duty on beer is to increase by 160%, leading to a perceptible price rise of up to 15%. The French Government will not, however, be increasing the duty on wine, although there are significant similarities between the two drinks, which are thus in competition with each other. Furthermore, French wine duties are currently already among the lowest in Europe. Increasing the price of beer will therefore seriously harm its competitive position.
Wine production in France is many times higher than beer production. The majority of the beer consumed in France is therefore imported.
Does this measure not conflict with Article 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which states among other things that no Member State shall impose on the products of other Member States any internal taxation of such a nature as to afford indirect protection to other products?
What measures will the Commission take to put an end to this discriminatory intervention?
Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
Article 110 TFEU prohibits tax discrimination against imported products. Under its second paragraph, Member States may not tax products imported from other Member States at a level which affords indirect protection to other products. Any such discrimination needs to be demonstrated by specific data. The Commission refers the Honourable Members in particular to the judgment of the European Court of Justice in Case C-167/05, Commission v. Sweden. 
The Commission is not aware of specific data supporting the existence of tax discrimination as regards the French draft legislation mentioned by the Honourable Members. The Commission notes in this respect that according to the information published by the French brewers association (http://www.brasseurs-de-france.com), the majority of beer consumed in France is produced in France. 
The Commission will, however, carefully examine any documented complaint that may be filed on the subject. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010184/12
aan de Commissie
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 november 2012)

Betreft: Bevoordeling van Spaanse banken
De ECB is een onderzoek gestart omdat beweerd wordt dat zij op basis van overgewaardeerd schatkistpapier goedkope leningen aan Spaanse banken zou hebben verstrekt, waardoor deze 16,6 miljard euro goedkoper uit waren. Bij het Spaanse schatkistpapier heeft de ECB de leninggaranties ingeschaald als een lage A, hoewel dit overeenkomstig de beoordelingen van grote ratingbureaus als Moody's en Standard & Poor's een B had moeten zijn. De ECB heeft vertrouwd op een minder bekend ratingbureau, DBRS, dat aan het Spaanse schatkistpapier nog de A-status had toegekend. Daarentegen is Iers schatkistpapier correct ingeschaald als B, met als gevolg dat Ierse banken meer voor hun leningen van de ECB moesten betalen dan Spaanse. Kennelijk beschouwde de ECB de Ierse zekerheden als veel riskanter dan de Spaanse, hoewel beide landen een identieke beoordelingsstatus hebben. 






1.


Is de Commissie op de hoogte van deze ontwikkelingen?










2.


Is de Commissie het met mij eens dat de Europese Centrale Bank aan financiële instellingen in Spaanse handen kredietfaciliteiten tegen veel gunstiger voorwaarden heeft verstrekt dan zij aan particuliere kredietinstellingen zou hebben gedaan, hetgeen in strijd is met artikel 123, lid 2, van het VWEU?










3.


Is de Commissie het met mij eens dat aan de Spaanse banken in vergelijking met de Ierse banken een bevoorrechte toegang tot de financiële instellingen is verleend, hetgeen volgens artikel 124 VWEU streng verboden is?










4.


Wat is de Commissie als hoedster der Verdragen van plan  ter zake te doen?




Antwoord van de heer Rehn namens de Commissie
(18 december 2012)
Het monetaire beleid in de eurozone valt onder de uitsluitende bevoegdheid van de ECB, waarvan de onafhankelijkheid in het Verdrag is vastgelegd. De Commissie bemoeit zich dan ook niet met de wijze waarop de ECB het monetaire beleid vorm geeft en uitvoert. Tijdens de persconferentie die na de vergadering van de raad van bestuur van de ECB op 8 november 2012 heeft plaatsgevonden, heeft president Draghi erop gewezen dat de raad van bestuur het door president Liikanen voorgezeten auditcomité van het Eurosysteem heeft opgedragen de tenuitvoerlegging van het zekerheidsstellingskader in het Eurosysteem te evalueren. Hij heeft ook verklaard dat „niemand meer heeft ontvangen dan hij had moeten ontvangen als gevolg van deze fout” en dat deze totaal geen invloed heeft gehad op de kredietverlening van het Eurosysteem.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010184/12
to the Commission
Auke Zijlstra (NI)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Privileged Spanish banks
The ECB has launched an inquiry into claims that it granted cheap loans to Spanish banks based on overrated treasury bills, thus saving them up to EUR 16.6 billion. In the case of the Spanish treasury bills, the ECB rated the loan guarantees as low A, even though they should have been labelled B, in line with ratings given by major agencies such as Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s. The ECB put its trust in a lesser known rating agency, DBRS, which still rated the Spanish bill as A class. In contrast, Irish treasury bills were correctly classified as B-rated, meaning that Irish banks had to pay more for their ECB loans than Spanish banks did and that the ECB apparently considered them much riskier than the Spanish collateral in spite of an identical country rating. 






1.


Is the Commission aware of these developments?










2.


Does the Commission agree with me that the European Central Bank provided credit facilities to financial institutions owned by Spain under much more favourable conditions than it would have provided to private credit institutions, thereby violating Article 123(2) TFEU?










3.


Does the Commission agree with me that the Spanish banks were given a privileged access to financial institutions vis-à-vis the Irish banks, which is strictly forbidden by Article 124 TFEU?










4.


What does the European Commission, as the guardian of the Treaties, intend to do in this matter?




Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(18 December 2012)
Monetary policy in the euro area is the exclusive competence of the ECB, whose independence is enshrined in the Treaty. The Commission does not interfere in the ECB's design and implementation of monetary policy. During the press conference that followed the ECB's Governing Council meeting held on 8 November 2012, President Draghi pointed out that the Governing Council had mandated the Eurosystem Audit Committee, chaired by Governor Liikanen, to assess the implementation of the collateral framework in the Eurosystem. He also stated that ‘nobody received more than they should have received because of this mistake’ and that it had no impact at all in the Eurosystem's lending. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010185/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Kriton Arsenis (S&D)
(8 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Θαλασσινά προερχόμενα από επιχειρήσεις ή βιομηχανικούς ομίλους που εμπλέκονται στην εξόντωση φωκιών για εμπορικούς σκοπούς
Επί του παρόντος, το 60% περίπου των νωπών ψαριών που τυγχάνουν επεξεργασίας από μεταποιητικές επιχειρήσεις της ΕΕ εισάγεται από τρίτες χώρες. Το ποσοστό αυτό μπορεί να ανέλθει στο 100% για ορισμένα είδη που διατίθενται στην αγορά της ΕΕ. Ο Καναδάς σήμερα εξάγει στην αγορά της ΕΕ περίπου το 12% της παραγωγής του σε θαλασσινά. 
Μολονότι η ενημέρωση του καταναλωτή και η ιχνηλασιμότητα τροφίμων αποτελούν καίρια επιτεύγματα της νομοθεσίας της ΕΕ, εξακολουθούν να υπάρχουν κενά στο ισχύον καθεστώς. Οι καταναλωτές απαιτούν μεγαλύτερη διαφάνεια και ταυτόχρονα σαφείς και ακριβείς επισημάνσεις στα προϊόντα προκειμένου να μπορούν να επιλέγουν σωστά όταν αγοράζουν θαλασσινά. Πρόκειται για θέμα βιωσιμότητας αλλά και δεοντολογίας. 
Το 2009 η ΕΕ θέσπισε τον κανονισμό ΕΚ/1007/2009, με τον οποίο απαγορεύεται το εμπόριο προϊόντων προερχομένων από φώκιες, ως απάντηση στην ευρεία κατακραυγή εναντίον του επαγγελματικού κυνηγιού φώκιας. 
Τούτο σημαίνει ότι οι ευρωπαίοι καταναλωτές πρέπει να ενημερώνονται για το αν τα θαλασσινά καναδικής παραγωγής που αγοράζουν προέρχονται από βιομηχανικούς ομίλους ή επιχειρήσεις που σχετίζονται ενδεχομένως με το επαγγελματικό κυνήγι φώκιας. Δεν υπάρχει αμφιβολία ότι κάτι τέτοιο ισχύει για ορισμένα καναδικά θαλασσινά προϊόντα δεδομένου ότι ο καναδικός κλάδος εκμετάλλευσης της φώκιας αποτελεί στην πράξη τμήμα του καναδικού εμπορικού αλιευτικού κλάδου. 
Ανήκει άραγε στα σχέδια της Επιτροπής η θέσπιση συστήματος ανιχνευσιμότητας που θα δίνει στους καταναλωτές την δυνατότητα να γνωρίζουν ποια από τα θαλασσινά που κυκλοφορούν στην αγορά της ΕΕ προέρχονται από επιχειρήσεις ή βιομηχανικούς ομίλους που εμπλέκονται στην εξόντωση φωκιών για εμπορικούς σκοπούς;
Απάντηση της κ. Δαμανάκη εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(22 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Όπως ορθά αναφέρεται από το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου, η ΕΕ έχει θεσπίσει και εφαρμόσει νομοθεσία προκειμένου για να εξασφαλίσει ότι τα προϊόντα που προέρχονται από τη θήρα φώκιας για εμπορικούς σκοπούς δεν διακινούνται πλέον στην ευρωπαϊκή αγορά, επιτρέποντας παράλληλα το εμπόριο προϊόντων φώκιας που προέρχονται από τη θήρα που ασκούν παραδοσιακά οι κοινότητες Inuit και άλλες κοινότητες αυτοχθόνων πληθυσμών και η οποία συμβάλλει στην επιβίωσή τους.
Όσον αφορά το σύστημα ιχνηλασιμότητας για το οποίο γίνεται λόγος από το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου, η νομοθεσία της ΕΕ που αφορά διάφορους τομείς πολιτικής (την υγεία και προστασία των καταναλωτών καθώς και την αλιεία) περιλαμβάνει ρυθμίσεις που επιτρέπουν στους φορείς εκμετάλλευσης να εντοπίζουν τα θαλασσινά προϊόντα. Η Επιτροπή θεωρεί ότι η πληροφόρηση του καταναλωτή έχει καίρια σημασία και συμπεριέλαβε ως εκ τούτου στην πρότασή της για τη μεταρρύθμιση της κοινής οργάνωσης των αγορών στον τομέα των προϊόντων αλιείας και υδατοκαλλιέργειας διατάξεις για την υποχρεωτική και προαιρετική πληροφόρηση του καταναλωτή. Οι εν λόγω προτεινόμενες διατάξεις για την προαιρετική πληροφόρηση, οι οποίες θα μπορούσαν να αποτελούν πληροφορίες δεοντολογικού ή κοινωνικού χαρακτήρα, θα εφαρμόζονται με την επιφύλαξη των διατάξεων του κανονισμού (ΕΕ) αριθ. 1169/2011 σχετικά με την παροχή πληροφοριών για τα τρόφιμα στους καταναλωτές. Οι προαναφερόμενες πληροφορίες δεοντολογικού ή κοινωνικού χαρακτήρα θα μπορούσαν να χρησιμοποιούνται σε προαιρετική βάση για να βοηθήσουν τους καταναλωτές να εντοπίζουν τα προϊόντα στα οποία αναφέρεται το Αξιότιμο Μέλος του Κοινοβουλίου.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010185/12
to the Commission
Kriton Arsenis (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Seafood sourced by companies or industries involved in the commercial killing of seals
At present about 60% of the raw fish used by EU processing firms is imported from third countries. This figure can reach up to 100% for certain species available on the EU market. Canada currently exports about 12% of its seafood production to the EU market. 
Although consumer information and food traceability are a milestone in EU legislation, there are still some gaps in the current regime. Consumers demand greater transparency along with clear and accurate labelling in order to be able to make the right choice when purchasing seafood. This applies to sustainability as well as ethical choices. 
In 2009 the EU introduced Regulation EC/1007/2009 banning the trade in products derived from seals as a response to a widespread outcry against commercial seal hunts. 
European consumers should therefore be informed as to whether or not the seafood they purchase from Canada originates from industries or companies which might be associated with the commercial killing of seals. However, this is what happens with certain Canadian seafood on the EU market given that the Canadian sealing industry is in reality part of the commercial Canadian fisheries industry. 
Does the Commission plan to establish a traceability system which will enable consumers to identify seafood on the EU market sourced by companies or industries also involved in the commercial killing of seals?
Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission
(22 January 2013)
As rightly mentioned by the Honourable Member, the EU adopted and implemented legislation to ensure that products derived from seals hunted for commercial purposes are no longer found on the European market, while allowing trade in seal products obtained from hunts traditionally conducted by Inuit and other indigenous communities, and which contribute to their subsistence.
With regard to the traceability system mentioned by the Honourable Member, EU legislation relating to different policy domains (health and consumer protection, fisheries) include provisions enabling operators to trace seafood products. The Commission considers that information to the consumer is essential and has therefore included in its proposal for the reform of the Common Organisation of Markets in fishery and aquaculture products (501) provisions on mandatory and voluntary information to the consumer. These proposed provisions on voluntary information, which could consist in ethical and social information, would apply without prejudice to Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 on the provision of food information to consumers. This ethical and social information could be used, on a voluntary basis, to help consumers identify the products referred to by the Honourable Member.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010186/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Phil Bennion (ALDE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Assistance to Yemen in the fight against piracy
Can the Vice-President/High Representative provide an update on the EU capacity building of the Yemeni Coastguard, given the urgent issue of piracy in the Gulf of Aden and the strategic trade importance of this maritime route to the EU?
Has the EU NAVFOR taskforce carried out any further training packages this year for the Yemeni Coastguard, to enable it to tackle the menace of piracy? 
What support has the European Union provided to the Yemeni fishing industry, especially in the field of employment, to ensure that unemployed fishermen are not tempted to engage in piracy?
Given the recent change of leadership in Yemen, can the Vice-President/High Representative outline whether she or any of her staff have addressed the issue of piracy in their discussions, and whether the new Yemeni President and his government are serious about tackling this scourge. 
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission 
(20 December 2012)
1.The EU supports maritime security and safety through the EUR 6 million Instrument for Stability project ‘Enhancing maritime security and safety through information sharing and capacity building’ (MARSIC). It contributes to the implementation of the regional Djibouti Code of Conduct (IMO) through capacity building and training of maritime administration staff, officials and coast guards of the region, and reinforcing capacity of coast guards and administrations, starting with Yemen and Djibouti, to ensure the surveillance and security of territorial waters. MARSIC supports the operations of the regional Maritime Information Sharing Centre (ReMISC) in Sana'a, to enhance maritime security. The long term aim is setting up a regional cooperation mechanism linking the Sana'a and Djibouti Centres with the wider region, including the Kenyan and Tanzanian Information Sharing Centres. 
2.Currently no training activities for Yemeni coast guards are taking place, but Yemen can later benefit from the EUCAP NESTOR provisions.
3.Under the Development Cooperation Initiative, the EU is engaged in a fisheries support programme which includes both development of coastal communities and private sector development. The EU also has a support programme for job creation with a special focus on youth and women from which coastal communities in Yemen will benefit. 
4.President Hadi recently visited Brussels for discussions with the HR/VP, the Council and Commission. President Hadi highlighted his committment to address Security Sector Reform, including maritime security, as one of his priorities. The EU supports President Hadi in these efforts, politically as well as through operational cooperation.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010187/12
alla Commissione
Matteo Salvini (EFD)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Contraddizione del Dlgs 2011/7/UE
Le nuove disposizioni di legge che si applicheranno ai contratti conclusi a partire dal 1° gennaio 2013, con l'approvazione del Dlgs di recepimento della direttiva europea 2011/7/UE del 16 febbraio 2011, impongono il termine tassativo di pagamento da parte della pubblica amministrazione alle imprese in 30 giorni, mentre i 60 giorni di tempo sono «consentiti solo in casi eccezionali» (aziende sanitarie e ospedali). 
Le briglie imposte dal Patto di stabilità alle manovre di bilancio non consentono però di applicare interamente il decreto legislativo appena approvato, a causa del cosiddetto «visto di compatibilità monetaria», per cui il funzionario che adotta provvedimenti con impegni di spesa deve accertare preventivamente che il programma dei conseguenti pagamenti sia compatibile con i relativi stanziamenti di bilancio e con le regole di finanza pubblica (articolo 9, comma 1, del DL 78/2009). 
Può la Commissione far sapere come dovrà operare la pubblica amministrazione nel rispetto della direttiva e del Patto di stabilità? Quali sono le priorità delle direttive da adottare, al fine di non incorrere in sanzioni pecuniarie da parte dell’Unione europea? I debiti pregressi della pubblica amministrazione sono scorporabili dal computo del Patto di stabilità?
Risposta di Antonio Tajani a nome della Commissione
(17 gennaio 2013)
Conformemente all'articolo 4 della direttiva 2011/7/UE gli Stati membri devono assicurare che, nelle transazioni commerciali tra le autorità pubbliche e le imprese, il periodo per i pagamenti non superi i 30 giorni di calendario. La direttiva 2011/7/UE stabilisce l'obbligo per tutti gli Stati membri di attenersi a queste nuove disposizioni entro il 16 marzo 2013.
La Commissione è responsabile del monitoraggio degli sviluppi dei bilanci nazionali in forza del titolo sulla politica economica e monetaria che figura nel trattato e del diritto derivato, al fine di assicurare che ottemperino ai requisiti del Patto di stabilità e crescita. Tuttavia, le disposizioni specifiche mediante le quali si raggiungerà tale risultato rientrano in linea di principio nella responsabilità delle autorità nazionali. In particolare, la Commissione non decide in merito alle relazioni fiscali tra i diversi livelli di governo o al modo in cui è fatta la gestione di cassa ai diversi livelli di governo.
Il patto di stabilità e crescita non prevede eccezioni all'entrata in vigore della direttiva 2011/7/UE. Gli Stati membri dovrebbero pertanto trovare un modo per adeguarsi agli obblighi della direttiva nel rispetto del Patto di stabilità e crescita europeo e delle raccomandazioni del Consiglio del 6 luglio 2012. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010187/12
to the Commission
Matteo Salvini (EFD)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Contradiction in legislative decree for Directive 2011/7/EU
Following adoption of the legislative decree transposing Directive 2011/7/EU of 16 February 2011, new rules applying to contracts signed from 1 January 2013 mean that the civil service must pay firms within 30 days. Payment terms of 60 days will only be permitted ‘in exceptional cases’ (healthcare companies and hospitals). 
However the restrictions imposed on budgets by the Stability Pact will not allow the recently adopted legislative decree to be applied fully, owing to the need for ‘approval of financial compatibility’. This requires any official adopting measures entailing expenditure commitments to ascertain in advance that the schedule of payments arising is compatible with the budget appropriations relative thereto and with public finance rules (Article 9(1) of legislative decree 78/2009). 
Could the Commission provide information on how the civil service can comply with both the directive and the Stability Pact in its work? Which of the directives’ priorities should be followed to avoid being fined by the European Union? Can debts previously incurred by the civil service be separated out from the Stability Pact calculations?
Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(17 January 2013)
According to Article 4 of Directive 2011/7/EU the Member States shall ensure that, in commercial transactions between public authorities and undertakings, the period for payment is 30 calendar days. Directive 2011/7/EU establishes the obligation for all Member States to comply with these new provisions by 16 March 2013 at the latest. 
The Commission is responsible for monitoring national budgetary developments under the economic and monetary policy title of the Treaty and secondary legislation, with a view to ensuring their compliance with the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. However, the specific arrangements through which this is attained fall in principle under the responsibility of the national authorities. In particular, the Commission does not decide on the fiscal relations between the different levels of government, or the way in which cash management is conducted at the different levels of government. 
No exception is foreseen in the Stability and Growth Pact for the entry into force of Directive 2011/7/EU. Member States should thus find a way to comply with the obligations of the directive, while respecting the European Stability and Growth Pact and the Council recommendations of 6 July 2012. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010188/12
alla Commissione
Matteo Salvini (EFD)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Azioni intraprese dall'Europa per prevenire gli incidenti stradali e fondi stanziati per le vittime della strada
Un elevato numero di incidenti stradali si verifica ogni anno sulle strade italiane.
Con il recente decreto legge di stabilità approvato il 9 ottobre 2012 il governo italiano, per mezzo del suo commissario straordinario per la «spending review» Enrico Bondi, ha deciso di diminuire l’illuminazione stradale, fino al totale spegnimento delle sorgenti luminose nelle ore notturne.
Tale scelta mette a rischio l’incolumità degli automobilisti e dei motociclisti e rischia di far aumentare il numero di sinistri che avvengono sulle nostre strade.
Alla luce di quanto sopra, può la Commissione far sapere:






—


 se l’attuale decisione del governo italiano non contrasti con le linee guida europee volte a prevenire gli incidenti stradali e 










—


 quali azioni ha intrapreso l’Europa per prevenire tali incidenti e che tipo di fondi ha stanziato per le vittime della strada?




Risposta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione
(21 dicembre 2012)
L’attuazione della politica di sicurezza stradale è una responsabilità comune degli attori ai vari livelli, anche se la responsabilità principale incombe agli Stati membri. 
A livello di Unione non esiste una normativa riguardante i requisiti per l’illuminazione delle strade nazionali. Gli Stati membri sono tenuti ad applicare le disposizioni della direttiva 2008/96/CE sulla gestione della sicurezza delle infrastrutture stradali (502) nella rete transeuropea dei trasporti (TEN-T). Essi vengono inoltre invitati ad applicare la valutazione dei rischi alle altre strade presenti sul loro territorio.
Alcune delle azioni attualmente intraprese nell’ambito della sicurezza stradale a livello di Unione europea comprendono: sostegno a progetti di sensibilizzazione dei giovani in materia di sicurezza stradale, la proposta relativa al pacchetto sui controlli tecnici (503), la direttiva modificata concernente la patente di guida (504) e la preparazione di proposte riguardanti la pianificazione della mobilità urbana.
Il sostegno alle vittime degli incidenti stradali è una responsabilità che incombe principalmente agli Stati membri nell’ambito dei loro sistemi di assistenza sanitaria nazionale e di sostegno sociale.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010188/12
to the Commission
Matteo Salvini (EFD)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: EU measures to prevent road accidents and funds set aside to support road accident victims
There are a huge number of accidents on Italian roads every year.
By means of the decree-law adopted on 9 October 2012, the Italian Government, in the person of its Special Commissioner for the spending review, Enrico Bondi, has decided to cut back on the level of street lighting, and in some cases even to do away with such lighting altogether during the hours of darkness.
This move will jeopardise the safety of motorists and motorcyclists and may well increase the number of accidents on Italian roads even further.
Does the Commission not agree that the Italian Government’s decision is at odds with the European guidelines on the prevention of road accidents?
What action has the EU taken to prevent road accidents, and what funds have been set aside to support road accident victims?
Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
Implementation of road safety policy is a shared responsibility of actors at different levels, with a primary responsibility of Member States. 
There is no legislation at the Union level regarding requirements of street lighting on national roads. Member States are bound to apply the provisions of Directive 2008/96/EC on Road Infrastructure Safety Management  (505) on the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T). They are also encouraged to apply the risk assessment on other roads in their territory.
At the Union level, some actions currently taken in the area of road safety include: support for youth road safety awareness projects; the proposed Roadworthiness package (506); the amended Driving licence directive (507); and preparation of proposals regarding urban mobility planning.
Support to road accident victims is primarily a matter for Member States within their frameworks for national healthcare and social support systems.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010190/12
à la Commission
Philippe Boulland (PPE)
(8 novembre 2012)

Objet: Impossibilité d'effectuer un contrôle technique sur tous les deux-roues
La Commission européenne prévoit d'étendre le contrôle technique obligatoire aux motos et aux scooters à l'échelle européenne dans le but de réduire le taux d'accidents causés par des défaillances techniques.
Cependant, il existe un obstacle technique à l'exécution d'un contrôle technique sur certains véhicules: les motos enduro (motos homologuées pour rouler sur la route mais ayant principalement des aptitudes tout terrain); les motos trial (motos homologuées pour rouler sur la route mais ayant des aptitudes de franchissement tout terrain); les motos trail (motos homologuées ayant un caractère mixte: 50 % tout terrain, 50 % sur route).
En effet, la spécificité du montage pneumatique et à crampons de ces véhicules ne permet pas de faire le passage au rouleau soit pour le test de freinage soit pour le test de puissance. Ces véhicules sont donc en incapacité technique de subir un contrôle technique.
En ce sens, comment la Commission européenne entend-elle prendre en compte cet obstacle important dans sa proposition de législation sur le contrôle technique des deux roues alors qu'il existe une forte disparité mécanique entre motos et scooters?
Réponse donnée par M. Kallas au nom de la Commission
(12 décembre 2012)
En ce qui concerne l'efficacité des contrôles relatifs aux freins, l'annexe technique de la proposition de la Commission de règlement relatif au contrôle technique périodique (508) prévoit, comme méthode de contrôle recommandée, un essai sur route à l'aide d'un décéléromètre dans les cas où un banc d'essai de freinage à rouleaux ne peut pas être utilisé, comme par exemple dans la situation décrite par l'Honorable Parlementaire.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010190/12
to the Commission
Philippe Boulland (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Impossibility of roadworthiness tests on all two-wheeled vehicles
The Commission plans to extend compulsory roadworthiness testing to motorcycles and scooters throughout the EU in order to reduce the number of accidents caused by technical defects.
However, there is a technical impediment to roadworthiness tests on certain vehicles, namely: enduro bikes (motorcycles approved for on-road riding but designed mainly for off-road use); trial bikes (motorcycles approved for on-road riding but with off-road features); and trail bikes (hybrid bikes: 50% off-road, 50% on-road).
The way that the tyres on these vehicles are fitted and ridged means they cannot be brake-tested or dyno-tested on a rolling road. They are thus technically unsuitable for roadworthiness testing.
How does the Commission intend to address this significant obstacle in its proposal for legislation on roadworthiness testing for two-wheeled vehicles, given the considerable mechanical disparity between motorcycles and scooters?
Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(12 December 2012)
In relation to the efficiency testing for brakes, the technical annex to the Commission proposal for a regulation on periodic roadworthiness testing (509) foresees, as the recommended test method, a road test using a decelerometer in cases where a roller brake tester cannot be used, as for instance in the situation that the Honourable Member of the European Parliament describes.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010191/12
a la Comisión
Eider Gardiazábal Rubial (S&D)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Ejecución de la línea presupuestaria 05 03 02 08 Prima especial por carne de vacuno
¿Puede la Comisión detallar la ejecución presupuestaria de la línea 05 03 02 08 Primaespecial por carne de vacuno especificando el importe por tipo de ayuda y Estado miembro para los años 2011 y 2012 y qué tipo de ayudas financiará en 2013?
Respuesta del Sr. Cioloş  en nombre de la Comisión 
(17 de diciembre de 2012)
El régimen de prima especial por la carne de vacuno (partida presupuestaria 05 03 02 08) prevista en el artículo 110 del Reglamento (CE) n° 73/2009 se ha disociado a partir del ejercicio de 2013, lo que significa que los gastos a partir de 2013 incluirán únicamente importes residuales correspondientes a solicitudes de años anteriores. 
En 2011, el gasto total de la citada partida presupuestaria 05 03 02 08 ascendió a 71,61 millones de euros (30,25 millones de euros para Dinamarca, 33,61 millones de euros para Suecia y 7,60 millones de euros para Eslovenia). En 2012, a juzgar por unos datos aún provisionales, el gasto total ascendió a 72,73 millones de euros (30,11 millones de euros para Dinamarca, 33,76 millones de euros para Suecia y 8,9 millones de euros para Eslovenia).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010191/12
to the Commission
Eider Gardiazábal Rubial (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Implementation of budget line 05 03 02 08: Beef special premium
Can the Commission provide details on the implementation of budget line 05 03 02 08 (Beef special premium)? Please specify the amount by type of aid and Member State for the years 2011 and 2012. What type of aid it will fund in 2013?
Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(17 December 2012)
The Beef special premium scheme (budget item 05 03 02 08) provided for in Article 110 of Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 (510) has been decoupled as from financial year 2013. This implies that the expenditures from 2013 onwards will include only residual amounts corresponding to previous claim years. 
In 2011 the total expenditure on the abovementioned budget line 05 03 02 08 amounted to EUR 71.61 million (EUR 30.25 million to Denmark, EUR 33.61 million to Sweden and EUR 7.60 million to Slovenia). In 2012, on the basis of still provisional information, the total expenditure amounted to EUR 72.73 million EUR (EUR 30.11 million to Denmark, EUR 33.76 million to Sweden and EUR 8.9 million to Slovenia).
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010192/12
a la Comisión
Eider Gardiazábal Rubial (S&D)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Ejecución de la línea presupuestaria 05 03 02 22: Ayuda a la producción de tabaco
¿Puede la Comisión detallar la ejecución presupuestaria de la línea 05 03 02 22 Ayuda a la producción de tabaco, especificando el importe por tipo de ayuda y Estado miembro para los años 2011 y 2012?
Respuesta del Sr. Cioloş en nombre de la Comisión
(13 de diciembre de 2012)
La ayuda al tabaco no disociada, contemplada en el capítulo 10 quater del Reglamento (CE) n° 1782/2003, quedó disociada a partir del ejercicio 2011. Ello supone que los gastos realizados a partir de dicho ejercicio únicamente incluyen importes residuales correspondientes a años de solicitud anteriores.
En 2011, el gasto total correspondiente a la línea presupuestaria 05 03 02 22 ascendió aproximadamente a 257 000 euros (51 000 euros para España y 206 000 euros para Italia). En 2012, el gasto total ascendió a 97 000 euros (78 000 para España y 19 000 euros para Italia).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010192/12
to the Commission
Eider Gardiazábal Rubial (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Implementation of budget line 05 03 02 22: Tobacco aid
Can the Commission provide details on the implementation of budget line 05 03 02 22 (Tobacco aid), specifying the amount by type of aid and Member State for the years 2011 and 2012?
Answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)
The coupled tobacco aid provided for in the Chapter 10c of Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 has been decoupled as from financial year 2011. This implies that the expenditures from 2011 financial year onward include only residual amounts corresponding to previous claim years.
In 2011 the total expenditure on the budget line 05 03 02 22 amounted to approximately EUR 257 000 (EUR 51 000 to Spain and EUR 206 000 to Italy). In 2012 the total expenditure amounted to EUR 97 000 (EUR 78 000 to Spain and EUR 19 000 to Italy).
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010193/12
à la Commission
Philippe Boulland (PPE)
(8 novembre 2012)

Objet: Nouvelle communication de la Commission européenne sur les biocarburants
Le 17 octobre, la Commission a dévoilé sa proposition de directive du Parlement européen et du Conseil modifiant la directive 98/70/CE concernant la qualité de l'essence et des carburants diesel et modifiant la directive 2009/28/CE relative à la promotion de l'utilisation de l'énergie produite à partir des sources renouvelables (COM(2012)595).
Vu sa proposition de plafonner à 5 % la part des biocarburants de première génération dans l'objectif européen de 10 % d'énergie renouvelable dans les transports, la Commission peut‐elle préciser si elle s'est basée sur une autre étude que celle de l'IFPRI (Institut international de recherche sur les politiques alimentaires) pour orienter sa politique en ce sens?
Réponse donnée par M. Oettinger au nom de la Commission
(4 janvier 2013)
La proposition de la Commission est accompagnée d'une analyse d'impact exhaustive (511) qui s'appuie sur les rapports élaborés par l'IFPRI (Institut international de recherche sur les politiques alimentaires). La Commission considère que cet Institut représente la meilleure source d'information scientifique disponible en ce qui concerne les émissions liées aux changements indirects dans l'affectation des sols associées à une demande accrue de biocarburants dans l'UE. L'analyse d'impact repose également sur une série d'autres études, évoquées au point 2.4 (512), à l'annexe III (513) et à l'annexe IV (514), ainsi que sur une consultation publique.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010193/12
to the Commission
Philippe Boulland (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: New Commission communication on biofuels
 On 17 October 2012, the Commission published a proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 98/70/EC relating to the quality of petrol and amending Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (COM(2012)0595).
With regard to its proposal to restrict to 5% first‐generation biofuels’ share of the overall target of 10% set for for renewable fuel sources in the transport sector, can the Commission clarify whether it based this policy on any studies other than the one produced by the International Food Policy Research Centre?
Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The Commission's proposal is supported by a comprehensive Impact Assessment (515) which builds on the reports prepared by the International Food Policy Research Institute which the Commission believes represents the best available science on indirect land-use change emissions associated with an increased demand for biofuels in the EU. The Impact Assessment also relies on a range of other studies, as discussed in Chapter 2.4 (516), in Annex III (517), and in Annex IV (518), as well as a public consultation. 
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010194/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Prácticas en la India por empresas textiles españolas
Las compañías españolas El Corte Inglés, Inditex y Cortefiel, tres de las principales compañías del sector textil, fueron denunciadas en el informe «Captured by Cotton»,publicado en mayo de 2011, por utilizar trabajo en régimen de casi esclavitud y de trabajo de menores en las fábricas que elaboran sus tejidos.
El citado informe, elaborado por el «Center for the Research on Multinational Corporations» y por la ONG «India Commitee of the Netherlands» presentaba la situación de la explotación infantil en la India. El informe centra su atención en el seguimiento de la situación de niñas pertenecientes a la casta dalit, una de las más bajas en el orden social de la India, que son embaucadas con falsas promesas de una vida mejor para ser esclavizadas en condiciones miserables. Esta forma de adquisición de mano de obra supone uno de los principales elementos de la competitividad de los costes del sector textil en la India. Las citadas compañías españolas solo buscan optimizar sus costes de producción desentendiéndose de las condiciones en la que producen sus tejidos y evitando asumir cualquier tipo de responsabilidad. 
En octubre del año pasado, la Comisión Europea lanzó una comunicación para la promoción de la responsabilidad social corporativa en las compañías europeas. Cabe recordar que los hechos presentados suponen la violación de la mayoría de normativas internacionales sobre el tema como la guía para compañías multinacionales de la OECD o la Declaración de principios tripartita de la OIT sobre compañías internacionales y política social.
— ¿Considera la Comisión que las empresas citadas está cumpliendo la propuesta sobre responsabilidad social corporativa lanzó en dicha comunicación?
— ¿Está la Comisión dando seguimiento al citado caso para esclarecer si dichas compañías asumen o pretenden asumir cualquier tipo de responsabilidad social corporativa?
— ¿Piensa la Comisión actuar al respecto y ponerse en contacto con las empresas españolas para esclarecer si están controlando la situación de las menores dalit?,
— ¿Cómo pretende la Comisión que las empresas europeas introduzcan principios de responsabilidad social corporativa si las más competitivas no lo hacen, obteniendo costes más bajos que las demás?
Respuesta del Sr. Tajani en nombre de la Comisión
(14 de enero de 2013)
Las expectativas de la Comisión respecto de las grandes empresas en materia de responsabilidad social corporativa se fundamentan en directrices y principios reconocidos internacionalmente, entre los que figuran: las Directrices para las empresas internacionales, de la OCDE; la Declaración tripartita de principios sobre las empresas multinacionales y la política social, de la OIT; y los Principios rectores sobre las empresas y los derechos humanos, de las Naciones Unidas. Los puntos de contacto nacionales, establecidos por los gobiernos que observan las Directrices de la OCDE, deben investigar las acusaciones de incumplimiento de dichas Directrices y actuar como mediadores entre las partes afectadas.
Aunque la Comisión carece del mandato para investigar acusaciones relativas al incumplimiento de las directrices y de los principios de la responsabilidad social corporativa por parte de empresas concretas, sí reconoce la importancia de fomentar las mejores prácticas y la transparencia a través de la cadena de suministro. 
La Comisión colabora con las regiones y los países socios con el objetivo de avanzar hacia una situación en que las expectativas respecto de las empresas en términos de comportamiento responsable sean, por doquier, similares en sentido amplio. Asimismo, la UE no ha dejado de abordar la cuestión del trabajo infantil en el contexto del diálogo entre la UE y la India sobre el respeto de los derechos humanos a escala local. El Gobierno de la India ha aprobado recientemente la Ley de prohibición del trabajo infantil y adolescente, lo que constituye un paso positivo. La UE está dispuesta a prestar asistencia a las autoridades indias en lo relativo a la aplicación de dicha ley y continuará alentando la aplicación de la Ley sobre el derecho a la educación.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010194/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: The practices of Spanish textile companies in India
The Spanish companies El Corte Inglés, Inditex and Cortefiel, three of the leading companies in the textile industry, were denounced in the ‘Captured by Cotton’ report,published in May 2011, for using a near-slavery labour regime and child labour in the factories that produce their textiles.
The report drafted by the Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations and by the non-governmental organisation India Committee of the Netherlands, outlined the situation of child exploitation in India. The report focuses on monitoring the situation of girls belonging to the Dalit caste, one of the lowest in India’s social order, who are lured by false promises of a better life and enslaved in miserable conditions. This form of labour acquisition is one of the main elements of cost competitiveness in the textile industry in India. The aforementioned Spanish companies only seek to optimise their production costs, while ignoring the conditions under which their textiles are produced and avoiding taking any form of responsibility.
In October 2011, the Commission issued a communication to promote corporate social responsibility in European companies. It should be recalled that the facts presented concern the violation of most international standards regarding this issue, such as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises or the International Labour Organisation Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy.
— Does the Commission believe that these companies are complying with the proposal on corporate social responsibility issued in this communication?
— Is it monitoring the aforementioned case to clarify whether these companies are assuming or intend to assume any type of corporate social responsibility?
— Will it therefore act and contact the Spanish companies to clarify whether they are monitoring the situation regarding Dalit girls?
— How does it expect European companies to introduce corporate social responsibility principles when the most competitive companies do not do so and therefore obtain lower costs than these companies?
Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)
The Commission's expectations of large enterprises in the field of CSR are based on internationally recognised guidelines and principles, including the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, the ILO Tri-Partite Declaration on Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy, and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. National Contact Points, established by governments that adhere to the OECD Guidelines, should investigate allegations of non-respect of the Guidelines and seek to mediate between concerned parties.
Although the Commission does not have the mandate to investigate allegations regarding the non-respect of CSR guidelines and principles by individual enterprises, it does however recognise the importance of encouraging best practice and of transparency throughout supply chains. 
The Commission engages with partner countries and regions with the aim of moving towards a situation in which the expectations on enterprises in terms of responsible behaviour are broadly similar everywhere. The EU has also consistently addressed the issue of child labour in the context of the EU-India local human rights dialogue. The government of India has recently approved the Child and Adolescent Labour Prohibition Act, which is seen as a positive development. The EU stands ready to assist the Indian authorities with implementation of this act, and will continue to encourage the enforcement of the Right to Education Act.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010195/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Acuerdo de cooperación en investigación entre la UE e Israel
El pasado 9 de julio de este año, durante la visita del Sr. Barroso a Israel se firmó el acuerdo de cooperación en materia de investigación y desarrollo en el ámbito de la energía y de los recursos hídricos entre la Unión Europea e Israel. 
En dicho acuerdo no se hace mención explícita al hecho de que Israel ocupa desde 1967 el territorio perteneciente, según múltiples resoluciones de las Naciones Unidas, al pueblo de Palestina. Las investigaciones que, gracias a este acuerdo, pueden ser financiadas con fondos europeos, podrán desarrollarse en territorio palestino. El Estado de Israel considera unilateralmente los territorios ocupados como territorio israelí, como confirman numerosos documentos y declaraciones públicas del Gobierno y por tanto no puede ser considerado un garante de la soberanía palestina sobre los territorios ocupados. Con la firma de dicho acuerdo de investigación se deja la puerta abierta a que se realicen proyectos o se construyan instalaciones en los territorios ocupados que no han sido reconocidos como israelíes en ningún caso por la comunidad internacional.
Este riesgo, implícito a la firma de dicho acuerdo, desencadena un conflicto sin precedentes en la actividad académica europea. La Comisión deberá ser garante de que los proyectos de investigación que se realicen bajo dicho acuerdo de cooperación no supongan ninguna violación de la soberanía palestina sobre los territorios ocupados ilegalmente por Israel.
— ¿Cuáles son los mecanismos de control que la Comisión ha previsto para garantizar que no se viola la soberanía palestina sobre los territorios ocupados por ningún proyecto de investigación conjunto realizado bajo este acuerdo?
— ¿Cómo tomará en consideración la Comisión el problema presentado a la hora de evaluar las propuestas de proyectos de investigación conjuntos a realizar?
— ¿Alguno de los proyectos de investigación planteados bajo este acuerdo hasta el momento implica la realización de cualquier acción en los territorios ocupados?
Respuesta de la Sra. Geoghegan-Quinn en nombre de la Comisión
(7 de enero de 2013)







1.


El Memorando de Acuerdo entre el Ministerio israelí de Energía y Recursos Hídricos, por una parte, y, por la otra, el Centro Común de Investigación de la Comisión fue firmado el 9 de julio de 2012. Las medidas de intercambio y de cooperación enmarcadas en ese acto no obligatorio son de carácter científico y técnico y, tal y como se declara en el Memorando de Acuerdo, todos los ámbitos de cooperación, todos los objetivos y todas las actividades se mantendrán enmarcados en el Plan de Acción de la Política Europea de Vecindad entre la UE e Israel










1.


El Memorando de Acuerdo entre el Ministerio israelí de Energía y Recursos Hídricos, por una parte, y, por la otra, el Centro Común de Investigación de la Comisión fue firmado el 9 de julio de 2012. Las medidas de intercambio y de cooperación enmarcadas en ese acto no obligatorio son de carácter científico y técnico y, tal y como se declara en el Memorando de Acuerdo, todos los ámbitos de cooperación, todos los objetivos y todas las actividades se mantendrán enmarcados en el Plan de Acción de la Política Europea de Vecindad entre la UE e Israel




 (519). Dicho Plan establece un conjunto completo de prioridades en ámbitos que se sitúan dentro del ámbito de aplicación del Acuerdo de Asociación (en vigor desde el 1 de junio de 2000).





2.


No se producirá en aplicación del Memorando de Acuerdo ninguna transferencia de fondos entre las Partes, ni se prevé tampoco ninguna convocatoria que invite a la presentación de proyectos. En caso de que llegue a proponerse algún proyecto conjunto en el marco del Memorando, las Partes deberán proceder, antes de iniciar los trabajos, a la celebración de un acuerdo de cooperación escrito referido específicamente a ese proyecto.










3.


No habrá en el marco del Memorando de Acuerdo ningún proyecto financiado con fondos de la UE que contemple el desarrollo de actividades en los territorios ocupados.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010195/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Research cooperation agreement between the EU and Israel
On 9 July 2012, during President Barroso’s visit to Israel, the EU and Israel concluded a cooperation agreement on research and development in the field of energy and water resources. 
This agreement does not explicitly mention the fact that, according to multiple UN resolutions, Israel has occupied the territory of the Palestinian people since 1967. Research that may be financed with EU funds under this agreement may be conducted in Palestinian territory. Israel unilaterally considers the occupied territories to be Israeli territory, as numerous government documents and public statements confirm. It cannot therefore guarantee Palestinian sovereignty over the occupied territories. Concluding this research agreement has left the door open for projects to be conducted and facilities to be built in the occupied territories, which have not been recognised as Israeli territory by the international community.
The risk involved in concluding this agreement triggers an unprecedented dilemma in European academic activity. The Commission must guarantee that the research projects conducted under this cooperation agreement do not violate Palestinian sovereignty over the territories illegally occupied by Israel.
— What control mechanisms has the Commission implemented to ensure that joint research projects conducted under this agreement do not violate Palestinian sovereignty over the occupied territories?
— How will it take account of this problem when evaluating proposals to conduct joint research projects?
— Do any research projects arising from this agreement thus far involve any activity in the occupied territories?
Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)







1.


The Memorandum of Understanding between the Israel Ministry of Energy and Water Resources and the Commission's Joint Research Centre (MoU) was signed on 9 July 2012. The exchange and cooperation under this non-binding arrangement are of a scientific and technical nature. As it is stated in the MoU, all areas of cooperation, objectives and activities will remain within the framework of the EU-Israel ENP Action Plan










1.


The Memorandum of Understanding between the Israel Ministry of Energy and Water Resources and the Commission's Joint Research Centre (MoU) was signed on 9 July 2012. The exchange and cooperation under this non-binding arrangement are of a scientific and technical nature. As it is stated in the MoU, all areas of cooperation, objectives and activities will remain within the framework of the EU-Israel ENP Action Plan




 (520). This Action Plan sets out a comprehensive set of priorities in areas within the scope of the Association Agreement (in force since 1 June 2000). 





2.


There will be no transfer of funds between the Sides in the implementation of this MoU and no calls for projects are foreseen. Should joint projects be proposed under this MoU the Sides will, prior to starting work and on a case-to-case basis, conclude in advance, a specific written cooperation agreement relating to the joint project. 










3.


There will be no projects financed with EU funds under this MoU involving any activity in the occupied territories. 




(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010196/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Autorización de la creación de un Impuesto a las Transacciones Financieras
En la Decisión del Consejo del pasado 25 de octubre se autorizaba la creación del Impuesto sobre las Transacciones Financieras (ITF) en los 10 países que lo habían solicitado. Dicha autorización permite a los Estados interesados la creación de dicho impuesto para la recaudación de fondos. Un impuesto de este tipo ha sido demandado por innumerables movimientos cívicos y organizaciones sociales, especialmente europeas, desde 1998, al suponer un instrumento de redistribución y de control de la especulación financiera internacional. 
Estas reclamaciones de la ciudadanía europea han sido continuamente desoídas durante los años de «vacas gordas» de la burbuja especulativa internacional, que resultan precisamente los años en el que habría tenido sentido. Una vez desatada la crisis financiera internacional, el nivel de transacciones internacionales de este tipo comenzó a descender vertiginosamente y los capitales comenzaron a protegerse en «valores refugio» como las commodities, que ya no constituyen valores financieros sino complejos contratos de compra de bienes. Dentro de esta categoría encontramos los granos básicos, con la consiguiente crisis alimentaria que han desatado, el petróleo, los metales preciosos, las tierras raras, etc. 
Durante algún momento desde el inicio de la crisis hasta el presente quizás hubiera sido lógico la implantación de la citada tasa. Su implantación hoy día debe ser considerada un fracaso, debido a que el momento en el que se autoriza resulta demasiado tarde como para ser útil y su aplicación asimétrica supondrá una escasa efectividad y efectos indeseados sobre la fuga de capitales de estos países. De cara a esta realidad se debe esclarecer el efecto que dicho impuesto tendrá en la economía europea.
— ¿Cuál es la cantidad que la Comisión estima que se recaudará a través de este impuesto considerando el importante descenso de las transacciones internacionales de capital? ¿Considera que se podrán recaudar suficientes fondos para restaurar los daños causados a las arcas públicas por el sistema financiero?
— ¿Qué efectos estima la comisión que puede producir este impuesto al aplicarse en solamente 10 países del mercado único? ¿Ha considerado la Comisión que dicho impuesto puede agravar el proceso de fuga de capitales que se está dando en algunos de los 10 países autorizados?
Respuesta del Sr. Šemeta en nombre de la Comisión
(21 de diciembre de 2012)
La Comisión Europea está efectuando un análisis económico adicional como parte de la preparación de una propuesta sustancial que ha de presentarse a raíz de la decisión del Consejo de autorizar la cooperación reforzada en el ámbito del ITF (sobre la base de la propuesta inicial de la Comisión [COM(2011) 594)] en los once Estados miembros que han cursado una solicitud con vistas a establecer una cooperación recíproca reforzada en este ámbito.
Es de esperar que el análisis aborde las previsiones de ingresos y el riesgo de deslocalización de las actividades o agentes financieros de los Estados miembros de que se trata. En principio, los mecanismos económicos identificados en la evaluación de impacto original adjunta a la propuesta inicial de la Comisión también seguirían funcionando en el contexto de un grupo más pequeño de Estados miembros.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010196/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Authorisation for a financial transaction tax
The introduction of a financial transaction tax (FTT) in the 10 countries which have called for this was agreed to in the Council's Decision of 25 October 2012. Interested countries may now set up this tax to raise funds. Countless civic movements and, in Europe particularly, social organisations have been calling for a tax of this kind since 1998, seeing it as a tool to redistribute funds and control international financial speculation. 
During the ‘fat’ years of the international speculative bubble calls by the European public for a tax of this kind were constantly ignored, although these were the very years in which such a tax would have made sense. The number of international transactions of this kind started falling drastically once the international financial crisis was triggered and investors sought to protect capital by moving it to ‘safe havens’ such as commodities. However, commodities are not financial securities but complex purchase contracts for goods such as basic cereals — which caused a food crisis — oil, precious metals, rare earths, etc. 
Perhaps there was a moment between the start of the crisis and the present day when introducing this tax might have been logical. Its introduction now can only be regarded as a failure, as it is too late for it to be useful and its uneven application will limit its effectiveness and affect negatively the flight of capital from these countries. The effect this tax will have on the EU’s economy must be explained therefore.
— How much does the Commission estimate will be raised through this tax, bearing in mind the significant drop in international capital transactions? Does it believe enough money can be raised to rectify the damage inflicted on public funds by the financial system?
— How effective does the Commission think this tax can be when it is only implemented in 10 countries in the single market? Has the Commission considered the possibility that this tax could worsen the flight of capital in some of the 10 countries concerned?
Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
The European Commission is currently carrying out additional economic analysis as part of the preparation of a substantive proposal to be tabled following a Council decision to authorise enhanced cooperation in the area of FTT (based on the initial Commission proposal (COM(2011)594)) among the 11 Member States that have made a request with a view to establish enhanced cooperation between themselves in this area.
The analysis can be expected to address revenue estimates and the risk of delocalisation of financial activities or actors from the Member States in question. In principle, the economic mechanisms identified in the original impact assessment accompanying the initial Commission proposal would continue to be at work also in the context of a smaller group of Member States.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010197/12
a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — Acoso de EE.UU. a empresas españolas por mantener relaciones con Cuba
La Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), organismo estadounidense regulador de los mercados, presiona a las firmas españolas relacionadas con la isla de Cuba. Tras el acoso a Repsol y al BBVA, el último episodio ha sido la carta remitida por la SEC al presidente de Telefónica, fechada el 29 de noviembre de 2011. En su misiva, la SEC recuerda al grupo que ya le advirtió dos años atrás sobre su presencia en Cuba a través de filiales como Telefónica Data Cuba.

Telefónica se ha visto obligada a doblegarse a estas amenazas. El 30 de diciembre de  2011 confirmó por escrito a la SEC la liquidación de su filial Telefónica Data Cuba en 2005 y afirmó que no tiene ninguna inversión en la isla ni planes de tenerla. En el anexo a la carta, la empresa reconoce que ha mantenido contactos relacionados con la venta de Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Cuba, que sus filiales en España y Latinoamérica han firmado acuerdos de interconexión con proveedores de telecomunicaciones en Cuba, así como el tendido de cable submarino, un proyecto que, señala, está congelado y a la espera de la luz verde de EE.UU.

Por otra parte, la Embajada de EE.UU. en Madrid remite periódicamente al Departamento de Estado informes sobre las inversiones españolas en Cuba. En su lista negra de empresas susceptibles de ser sancionadas figuran firmas turísticas como Sol Meliá, Iberostar, Barceló, Riu o NH Hoteles, pero también compañías de otros sectores como Agbar, Altadis, Freixenet, Repsol o Iberia, hasta un total de 25 compañías. El Gobierno de Estados Unidos mantiene un bloqueo ilegal según la comunidad internacional, pero que las empresas españolas que tratan de iniciar actividades en la isla respetan debido al temor a represalias comerciales en EE.UU.

— ¿Cuál es la valoración de la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante de las presiones de Estados Unidos a empresas españolas por sus relaciones con Cuba?


— 
¿Qué iniciativas diplomáticas ha adoptado o piensa tomar en defensa de las actividades económicas y comerciales de las empresas europeas relacionadas con Cuba frente al acoso y las amenazas de la SEC estadounidense?


— 
¿Piensa presentar un recurso ante el Tribunal Permanente de Arbitraje de La Haya, o ante otras instancias internacionales, en defensa del libre comercio de las empresas europeas y ante las presiones de que son objeto por parte de la SEC estadounidense?


— 
¿Qué medidas piensa tomar la Comisión ante las actividades de espionaje económico desarrolladas por la Embajada de EE.UU. en Madrid sobre las inversiones españolas en Cuba?

Respuesta de la Alta Representante/Vicepresidenta Ashton en nombre de la Comisión
(30 de enero de 2013)
Las restricciones financieras y comerciales que se imponen a las empresas europeas forman parte de la política de sanciones contra Cuba impuesta por los Estados Unidos. Estas medidas se basan en la legislación sobre sanciones de los EE.UU. que se remontan a los años 90, cuando EE.UU. introdujo una legislación extraterritorial destinada, además de a los ciudadanos de los EE.UU., a las empresas no estadounidenses y a los individuos que se encuentran fuera de la jurisdicción de los EE.UU., con el fin de desincentivar los contactos comerciales y de otro tipo con Cuba (Ley Helms-Burton). Por principio, la UE no está de acuerdo con la legislación extraterritorial unilateral. Por consiguiente, el Reglamento (CE) n° 2271/96 del Consejo (521) que fue adoptado en aquel momento, prohíbe a las empresas y ciudadanos europeos la aplicación de las restricciones estadounidenses. 
De conformidad con lo dispuesto (artículo 2) en el Reglamento (CE) n° 2271/96 del Consejo, también conocido como «dispositivo de bloqueo», toda persona jurídica o física deberá comunicar los casos en los que sus intereses económicos o financieros puedan verse afectados de forma directa o indirecta por la Ley Helms-Burton de 1996. Hasta la fecha, ni el Servicio Europeo de Acción Exterior (SEAE) ni los servicios de la Comisión han recibido información alguna relativa a estos presuntos casos.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010197/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — US harassment of Spanish firms that maintain relations with Cuba
The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), their market regulator, is putting pressure on Spanish firms with links to Cuba. The most recent example of this, following its harassment of Repsol and BBVA, was a letter dated 29 November 2011 sent by the SECto the head of Telefónica. In this letter, the SECreminded the group that it had already warned it two years previously about its presence in Cuba through subsidiaries such as Telefónica Data Cuba.
Telefónica felt obliged to yield to these threats. On 30 December 2011 it wrote to the SECconfirming that its subsidiary Telefónica Data Cuba had been wound up in 2005, and said that it no longer had any investments in Cuba and nor was it planning any. In an attachment to the letter, Telefónica acknowledged that it had maintained contacts there in connection with the sale of Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Cuba, that its subsidiaries in Spain and in Latin America had signed connection agreements with telecommunication suppliers in Cuba, and confirmed a plan to lay an underwater cable which is on hold awaiting the go-ahead from the US.
In addition to this, the US Embassy in Madrid periodically sends reports on Spanish investments in Cuba to the Department of State. Firms in the tourism sector, such as Sol Meliá, Iberostar, Barceló, Riu and NH Hoteles, figure on its black list of companies liable for sanctions, but so do companies from other sectors, such as Agbar, Altadis, Freixenet, Repsol or Iberia. In total there are 25 companies on this list. The international community considers the US Government’s blockade to be illegal, but Spanish firms wanting to start up business in Cuba comply with it out of fear of retaliatory trade measures being imposed against them in the US.
— How does the Vice-President/High Representative view the pressure brought to bear on Spanish firms by the US because of their relations with Cuba? 
— What diplomatic steps has she taken or will she take to protect the economic and trade activities of EU firms with connections with Cuba from harassment and threats by the US Securities and Exchange Commission? 
— Is she thinking of going to the Permanent Court of Arbitration in the Hague, or to other international courts, to defend EU companies’ right to free trade and to protest about the pressure being bought to bear by the US Securities and Exchange Commission?
— What measures will the Commission take in regard to the US Embassy in Madrid’s economic espionage into Spanish investments in Cuba?
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(30 January 2013)
The financial and trade restrictions that are imposed on European companies are part of the United States (US) sanctions policy towards Cuba. These measures are based on US sanctions legislation that dates back to the 1990s, when the US introduced extraterritorial legislation which, in addition to US subjects, also targets non-US companies and individuals outside US jurisdiction, with a view to discouraging commercial and other contacts with Cuba (Helms-Burton Act). The EU disapproves of unilateral extraterritorial legislation as a matter of principle. Consequently, Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96 (522) which was adopted at the time forbids European companies and private individuals from complying with the US restrictions.
In accordance with the provisions (Article 2) of the Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96, also known as ‘Blocking Statute’, all legal and natural persons have to notify cases if their economic or financial interests are affected, directly or indirectly, by the Helms-Burton Act of 1996. So far neither the European External Action Service (EEAS) nor the Commission services have received any information concerning the alleged cases.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010198/12
a la Comisión
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Normativa europea de semillas hortícolas
En la sentencia del Tribunal de Justicia de la Unión Europea CJE/12/97, de 12 de julio de este mismo año, se da la razón a la asociación francesa sin ánimo de lucro
«
Kokopelli
». Dicha asociación fue denunciada por la empresa «
Graine Baumaux
» por competencia desleal, al comercializar supuestamente variedades que también comercializaba dicha empresa.
Las variedades locales y tradicionales responden a las condiciones ambientales y biológicas de su entorno a través de la diversidad, es por esto que la mayoría de variedades locales y tradicionales no pueden ser catalogadas bajo los criterios de los laboratorios. Estas variedades se mantienen en pequeñas explotaciones tradicionales que continúan plantando este tipo de semillas, pese a ser menos rentable hacerlo, lo cual puede ser puesto en discusión debido a la escasa diferenciación de las variedades convencionales. Estas pequeñas explotaciones han sido la salvaguardia de miles de variedades que han sobrevivido al intenso proceso de extinción de variedades alimentarias que supuso la revolución verde, y asociaciones como
«
Kokopelli
» han sido de las pocas que han hecho un trabajo fundamental de comercialización y recuperación de dicho material genético. 
El tribunal ha fallado a favor de
«
Kokopelli
»
, argumentando que la actividad de la asociación no contradice la Directiva 2002/55/CE del Consejo ni la Directiva 2009/145/CE de la Comisión, referentes a la comercialización de semillas hortícolas y a las excepciones en la aceptación de variedades tradicionales, respectivamente. La citada asociación sin ánimo de lucro lleva años recuperando y salvando de la extinción numerosas variedades tradicionales y locales que se habrían perdido, al ser una de las pocas asociaciones dedicadas a la conservación de este germoplasma. El germoplasma conservado debe carecer de «
valor intrínseco para la producción comercial
»
, según la Directiva 2009/145/CE, pero muchas de estas variedades tradicionales comienzan a obtener buenos rendimientos en cultivos ecológicos e incluso unos elevados precios debido a su capacidad de diferenciación del producto. Esto supone que estas variedades podrían quedar fuera de la protección de la citada Directiva si alcanzan este valor comercial.
¿Cómo piensa actuar la Comisión sobre estas variedades?, ¿Dejan de estar protegidas una vez sean rentables?, ¿Planea la Comisión elaborar normativas para proteger
«
variedades antiguas
»
que alcancen valor comercial?
Respuesta del Sr. Borg  en nombre de la Comisión
(4 de enero de 2013)
Las variedades vegetales que se desarrollan para ser cultivadas en condiciones determinadas entran en el ámbito de aplicación de la Directiva 2009/145/CE de la Comisión (523), y se benefician de las excepciones de la Directiva 2002/55/CE (524), si carecen de «
valor intrínseco para la producción de cultivos comerciales
»
. El valor comercial intrínseco de cada variedad debe evaluarse caso por caso y en relación con la extensión, ubicación, volumen y otras variables de su comercialización. Están revisándose las disposiciones relativas a las variedades de conservación y a las que se desarrollan para ser cultivadas en condiciones determinadas.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010198/12
to the Commission
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: European legislation on vegetable seeds
In its judgment in Case C-59/11 (ref: CJE/12/97) of 12 July 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled in favour of the French not-for-profit association Kokopelli. Kokopelli had been reported by the firm Graine Baumaux for unfair competition, alleging that it was marketing varieties also marketed by Graine Baumaux.
Local and traditional varieties diversify to suit the environmental and biological conditions of their surroundings. This is why the majority of local and traditional varieties cannot be catalogued using laboratory criteria. These varieties survive on traditional smallholdings, which continue to grow them despite their being less profitable. This could however be called into question, as they differ only slightly from conventional seed varieties. Smallholdings like these have been the salvation of thousands of varieties that survived the eradication, through the green revolution, of many food varieties. Kokopelli is one of the few associations that have undertaken the vital work of marketing and recovering this genetic material. 
The Court found in favour of ‘Kokopelli’, maintaining that the association’s activities did not contradict either Council Directive 2002/55/EC on the marketing of vegetable seed or Commission Directive 2009/145/EC on derogations allowing traditional varieties to be accepted. This not-for-profit association has spent years recovering a great many traditional and local varieties, which would otherwise have been lost, and saving them from extinction, as it is one of the few associations that conserve this germplasm. Directive 2009/145/EC states that conserved germplasm should not have any ‘intrinsic value for commercial crop production’ but many of these traditional varieties are beginning to produce good yields when grown ecologically and even, thanks to their product differentiation ability, high prices. This could lead to these varieties losing their protection under the directive if they reach the point where they have commercial value.
What is the Commission’s intention with regard to these varieties? Will becoming profitable mean they lose their protection? Is the Commission planning legislation to protect ‘old varieties’ which reach a point where they have commercial value?
Answer given by Mr Borg  on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
Vegetable varieties developed for growing under particular conditions are included in the scope of Commission Directive 2009/145/EC (525), and benefit from derogations to Directive 2002/55/EC (526), if they do not have any ‘intrinsic value for commercial crop production’. The intrinsic commercial value of each variety should be assessed on a case by case basis and in relation to the extend, location, volume and other variables of its marketing. Provisions concerning conservation varieties and varieties developed for growing under particular conditions are currently under review.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010199/12
à Comissão
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL) e Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Violentas intempéries na Região Autónoma da Madeira
Uma sucessão de violentas intempéries afetou a Região Autónoma da Madeira, fazendo-se sentir com especial incidência nos concelhos do norte da ilha da Madeira (Porto Moniz, São Vicente, Santana e parte de Machico) e na ilha do Porto Santo. Após dois dias de grande precipitação e de ventos fortes, contam-se inúmeras inundações, enxurradas, derrocadas, vários feridos, dezenas de desalojados, habitações destruídas, localidades isoladas, estradas danificadas, intransitáveis e encerradas, cortes nos serviços de fornecimento de água potável e energia elétrica, saneamento básico e telecomunicações, dezenas de viaturas destruídas, zonas de produção agrícola completamente devastadas, animais de criação mortos, equipamentos e infraestruturas públicas destruídas ou incapacitadas. De notar que, se por ocasião da tragédia de fevereiro de 2010 as zonas mais afetadas estavam situadas na costa sul da ilha da Madeira, desta vez a destruição foi mais sentida nas áreas que então foram relativamente poupadas, estendendo-se igualmente até à ilha vizinha do Porto Santo, causando cenários inusitados destruição, dos quais nem os mais idosos tinham memória.
Em face do exposto, solicitamos à Comissão que nos informe sobre que meios financeiros extraordinários podem ser disponibilizados, com caráter urgente, para acorrer às populações afetadas e reparar os prejuízos decorrentes desta catástrofe, tendo em conta especificamente cada um dos seguintes itens:







Apoios sociais comunitários de emergência para apoiar as populações e famílias mais afetadas;











Apoios comunitários para auxiliar as operações de limpeza e pronta recuperação de zonas urbanísticas sinistradas;











Apoios complementares para a pronta reabilitação de áreas habitacionais danificadas e concretização de alternativas habitacionais;











Apoios extraordinários à reconstrução de equipamentos e infraestruturas públicas;











Apoios dirigidos à economia rural, visando compensar os prejuízos causados à produção agrícola e incentivar a recuperação de áreas produtivas e de infraestruturas indispensáveis à continuidade da atividade produtiva;











Apoios ao desenvolvimento do mundo rural, abarcando medidas de revitalização de áreas de interesse relevante para a reconfiguração de iniciativas de desenvolvimento local.




Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010200/12
à Comissão
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Catástrofe na Madeira
Considerando que:






—


A 20 de fevereiro de 2010, a Madeira foi vítima de uma catástrofe, com cheias e derrocadas, que causaram a morte de mais de 40 cidadãos, e enormes prejuízos materiais;










—


Nesse mesmo ano, a região foi assolada por fogos florestais de grande dimensão;










—


Já em 2012, novos fogos foram responsáveis por prejuízos ambientais e paisagísticos com gravíssimas repercussões na principal atividade económica da Madeira, o turismo:










—


Tragicamente, a região foi atingida por chuvas diluvianas e deslizamento de terras em concelhos como Machico, Santana, São Vicente e Porto Moniz, que, de acordo com números provisórios, causaram 6 feridos, um deles em estado grave, 52 desalojados, 15 casas danificadas e, pelo menos, 28 viaturas destruídas, para além de milhões de euros em prejuízos materiais em propriedades privadas, em terrenos agrícolas e em infraestruturas públicas, nomeadamente na rede viária, na rede de água, nos cursos de água e em sítios de interesse turístico, como miradouros, ainda por contabilizar; 










—


A Região Autónoma da Madeira vive momentos financeiros muito difíceis, estando atualmente sujeita um Plano de Ajustamento Económico e Financeiro;










—


As populações e as autoridades têm obviamente a legítima expectativa de contar com o apoio, a coesão e a solidariedade europeias, perante circunstâncias tão trágicas;




Pergunto à Comissão:






—


Que mecanismos financeiros podem ser colocados pela Comissão ao dispor do país e da região, para fazer face aos danos causados pelas referidas catástrofes de 2012?










—


Para além do Fundo de Solidariedade da UE, existem outros passíveis de serem utilizados para o efeito?




Resposta conjunta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão
(3 de janeiro de 2013)
A Comissão tem conhecimento da situação na Região Autónoma da Madeira e das recentes inundações. Antes de a Comissão poder avaliar se a assistência financeira proveniente do Fundo de Solidariedade da UE pode ou não ser concedida, as autoridades nacionais portuguesas terão de apresentar um pedido à Comissão, no prazo de 10 semanas a contar da ocorrência dos primeiros prejuízos causados pela catástrofe. A Comissão não pode mobilizar o Fundo por sua própria iniciativa. 
Se as autoridades portuguesas considerarem a apresentação de um pedido, a Comissão está disponível para prestar aconselhamento e apoio. No caso de vir a concretizar-se, a ajuda financeira concedida pelo Fundo de Solidariedade poderia ser utilizada para prestar apoio de emergência à população afetada, proceder à limpeza das zonas urbanas afetadas, à disponibilização de alojamentos temporários e à reconstrução de infraestruturas danificadas.
Em relação ao primeiro pilar da Política Agrícola Comum (PAC), Portugal pode propor a reafetação dos recursos financeiros do programa POSEI para a Madeira, de modo a pagar as ajudas diretas adicionais destinadas aos agricultores afetados pelas circunstâncias excecionais supramencionadas, à semelhança do que foi feito na sequência das cheias de fevereiro de 2010.
No que respeita ao segundo pilar da PAC (política de desenvolvimento rural), o programa de desenvolvimento rural da Madeira já contém uma medida relativa ao restabelecimento do potencial de produção agrícola danificado por catástrofes naturais. Existem igualmente outras medidas disponíveis ao abrigo da política de desenvolvimento rural, destinadas a prestar um apoio de caráter mais geral ao desenvolvimento socioeconómico das zonas rurais. As modalidades de repartição do financiamento entre as diferentes medidas são essencialmente decididas pelas autoridades competentes do programa.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010199/12
to the Commission
João Ferreira (GUE/NGL) and Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Violent storms in the Autonomous Region of Madeira
A series of violent storms have hit the Autonomous Region of Madeira, affecting in particular the northern municipalities of the island of Madeira (Porto Moniz, São Vicente, Santana and part of Machico) as well as the island of Porto Santo. Two days of heavy rainfall and strong winds saw widespread flooding, mudslides, landslides, leaving several persons wounded, dozens homeless, houses destroyed, communities cut off from the outside world, roads damaged, impassable and closed off, cuts in the supply of drinking water and electricity, basic sanitation and telecommunications, dozens of vehicles destroyed, agricultural production areas wiped out, livestock dead, public equipment and infrastructure destroyed or incapacitated. Whereas the tragedy of February 2010 mainly affected parts of Madeira's southern coast, areas previously spared suffered the most destruction this time around; the havoc also extended to the neighbouring island of Porto Santo, causing rare scenes of destruction, the likes of which even the oldest inhabitants could not recall.
Given the above, will the Commission inform us what extraordinary financial means can be made available, as a matter of urgency, to come to the aid of the affected populations and remedy the damage caused by this disaster, specifically taking account of each of the following:







Community social support for emergencies to support the affected populations andfamilies; 











Community support to assist cleaning and the quick recovery of the affected urban areas; 











Additional support for early rehabilitation of damaged housing and delivery of housing alternatives;











Extraordinary support for the reconstruction of equipment and public infrastructure; 











Targeted support for the rural economy, to compensate the damage caused to agricultural production and encourage the recovery of production areas and infrastructure essential to the continuity of productive activity; 











Support for the development of rural areas, including measures to revitalize interest in local development initiatives. 




Question for written answer E-010200/12
to the Commission
Nuno Melo (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Catastrophe in Madeira
Given that:






—


On 20 February 2010, a disaster, with flooding and landslides, hit Madeira leavingmore than 40 dead and causing enormous material damage;










—


Also in 2010, the region was devastated by large-scale forest fires;










—


To date in 2012, new fires were responsible for damage to the environment andlandscape with serious consequences for the mainstay of Madeira's economy — tourism;










—


Tragically, the region was hit by torrential rains and landslides in municipalities suchas Machico, Santana, São Vicente and Porto Moniz, leaving, according to provisional figures, 6 persons injured, including one seriously, 52 persons homeless, 15 houses damaged and at least 28 vehicles destroyed; in addition, millions of euros of damage was done to private property, agricultural land and public infrastructure, especially the road network, water supply system, waterways, and tourist attractions such as lookouts;










—


Currently subject to the Economic and Financial Adjustment Programme, the Autonomous Region of Madeira is experiencing very difficult financial times;










—


In the face of such tragic circumstances, the people and the authorities obviously have the legitimate expectation of being able to count on European support, cohesion and solidarity.




Will the Commission say:






—


What financial arrangements can the Commission make available to the country and the region to deal with the damage caused by the 2012 disasters in question?










—


Apart from the EU Solidarity Fund, are there other means which might be used to this end?




Joint answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(3 January 2013)
The Commission is aware of the situation in Madeira and of the recent flooding disaster. Before the Commission can assess whether financial assistance from the EU Solidarity Fund can be granted, the national Portuguese authorities will have to present an application which has to reach the Commission within 10 weeks of the date of the first damage caused by the disaster. The Commission may not mobilise the Solidarity Fund upon its own initiative. 
Should the Portuguese authorities consider making an application, the Commission stands ready to provide guidance and support. If financial aid from the Solidarity Fund is granted, this could be used for emergency support for the affected population, cleaning of the affected urban areas, provision of temporary accomodation and the reconstruction of damaged infrastructure. 
In relation to the first pillar of the common agricultural policy (CAP), Portugal may propose the reallocation of the financial resources of the POSEI program for Madeira in order to pay additional direct aid to assist farmers hit by the abovementioned exceptional circumstances, as done already for the flooding of February 2010. 
With regard to the second pillar of the CAP (rural development policy), Madeira's rural development programme already contains a measure on restoring agricultural production potential damaged by natural disasters. Various measures are also available under rural development policy which support the general socioeconomic development of rural areas. How funding is divided up between the various measures is essentially a decision for the competent programme authorities.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010201/12
a la Comisión
Dolores García-Hierro Caraballo (S&D)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Emisiones de CO2

Esta Diputada considera que el Gobierno de España no está tomando suficientes medidas para avanzar hacia un futuro bajo en emisiones de dióxido de carbono y está poniendo freno a las energías renovables, la rehabilitación de edificios e incrementando la dependencia energética de los combustibles fósiles y los sectores industriales más contaminantes (y menos generadores de empleo), que no solo estancan la reducción de emisiones a nivel estatal, sino que las incrementan.
A pesar de la reducción en la actividad económica y en el transporte debido a la crisis, las emisiones de CO2 se han incrementado en España un 0,1 % respecto al año anterior.
¿Estima la Comisión Europea que España está en condiciones de cumplir con el Protocolo de Kyoto?
¿Considera la Comisión Europea que está haciendo todos los esfuerzos posibles?
¿Se ha dirigido oficialmente sobre este asunto el Comisario Hedegaard al Gobierno español? En caso de ser por medio de carta/s, esta Diputada le agradecería que le remitieran copia de la/s misma/s.
Respuesta de la Sra. Hedegaard en nombre de la Comisión
(22 de enero de 2013)
El último informe anual sobre los progresos realizados hacia la consecución de los objetivos de Kioto (527) señaló que, según las proyecciones agregadas de todos los sectores, las emisiones de los Estados miembros de la EU-15 con un objetivo común en virtud del primer período de cumplimiento del Protocolo de Kioto (2008-2012) se sitúan un 11,3 % por debajo de los niveles del año de referencia. Esto significa que la EU-15 superará su objetivo de reducir sus emisiones en un 8 % y, por tanto, cumple la obligación colectiva contraída en virtud del Protocolo de Kioto.
Para garantizar la contribución de los Estados miembros de la EU-15 a la consecución del objetivo de Kioto, la Decisión del Consejo 2002/358/CE (528) establece los objetivos individuales de cada Estado miembro (115 % en el caso de España). En este contexto, se prevé que las emisiones de España superen su objetivo de crecimiento del 15 % si se basan únicamente en las medidas nacionales existentes. No obstante, se espera que España alcance su objetivo con medidas adicionales, como los mecanismos flexibles de Kioto (mecanismo de desarrollo limpio y aplicación conjunta) y los sumideros de carbono (absorción de las emisiones resultantes de actividades de uso de la tierra, cambio del uso de la tierra y actividades forestales).
A raíz de una petición de la Comisión de información adicional sobre las acciones emprendidas, España ha reiterado su compromiso de cumplir sus objetivos. La Comisión continuará supervisando de cerca la situación.
La solicitud de Su Señoría de acceder a la correspondencia pertinente se examinará de acuerdo con las disposiciones del Reglamento (CE) n° 1049/2001 del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 30 de mayo de 2001, relativo al acceso del público a los documentos del Parlamento Europeo, del Consejo y de la Comisión (529).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010201/12
to the Commission
Dolores García-Hierro Caraballo (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Carbon emissions
I believe that the Spanish Government is not doing enough to move towards a low carbon future. It is halting renewable energy and building restoration and is increasing energy dependence on fossil fuels and the most polluting industries (which create less jobs), not only preventing national emissions reductions, but actually increasing emissions. 
Despite the reduction in economic activity and transport due to the crisis, carbon emissions in Spain have increased by 0.1% compared to the previous year.
Does the Commission believe that Spain is in a position to comply with the Kyoto Protocol?
Does it believe that it is making every effort possible?
Has Commissioner Hedegaard officially contacted the Spanish Government on this matter? If this contact was made by letter, I would appreciate a copy of this correspondence.
Answer given by Ms Hedegaard on behalf of the Commission
(22 January 2013)
The latest annual Progress Report towards achieving the Kyoto objectives (530) stated that the aggregate projections for emissions of the 15 EU Member States with a joint target under the Kyoto Protocol's first commitment period (2008-2012) are ‐11.3% below base year levels. This means that the EU-15 will overachieve their joint ‐8% Kyoto target and thus be in compliance with their collective Kyoto obligation.
To ensure that EU-15 MS contribute their share to the collective Kyoto target, Council Decision 2002/358/EC (531) sets out the individual targets that each is to meet (115% for Spain). In this context, Spain's emissions are projected to exceed its 15% growth target if relying solely on existing domestic action. Spain is however projected to achieve its target with additional measures, Kyoto flexible mechanisms (i.e. Clean Development Mechanism and Joint Implementation) and carbon sinks (i.e. emission removals resulting from land use, land-use change and forestry activities).
Following a request by the Commission for further information on the actions taken, Spain has reaffirmed its commitment to meet its target. The Commission will continue to closely monitor the situation.
The Honourable Member's request for access to relevant correspondence will be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to Parliament, Council and Commission documents (532).
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010202/12
to the Commission
Robert Sturdy (ECR)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Galgos and the strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015
On 29 September 2012, the Andalusian Regional Government announced legislation that would legalise the practice of training Spanish greyhounds (galgos) by tying them to motorised vehicles, quad bikes, mopeds etc. This results in many dogs being dragged along by these vehicles and severely injured or killed. Currently, this practice is illegal in Spain; however, in Andalusia these laws and their corresponding fines are often overlooked. 
The Commission has recently issued a communication on the European Union Strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals 2012-2015 (COM(2012) 6 final/2) which outlines the future work and goals of the EU on animal welfare. As part of this strategy, one of the actions foreseen in 2014 is a study on the welfare of dogs and cats involved in commercial practices.
Does the Commission plan to assess the specific situation of galgos in its study on the welfare of dogs and cats involved in commercial practices?
Is the Commission planning any other possible actions for the protection of dogs under the strategy for the Protection and Welfare of Animals? 
With regard to the welfare of dogs, does the Commission intend to take any measures to strengthen Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which requires Member States to pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals?
Does the Commission intend to undertake any direct action in regard to this horrific practice in Andalusia?
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(17 December 2012)
The Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its answers to written questions E-010625/2010 and E-009212/2011 (533) on the same issue. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010203/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(8 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Δραματική φτωχοποίηση ευρωπαίων πολιτών
Την ώρα που αυξάνεται δραματικά ο αριθμός των ελληνικών νοικοκυριών που αδυνατούν να ανταποκριθούν στους βασικούς όρους αξιοπρεπούς διαβίωσης, περικόπτοντας ακόμα και είδη διατροφής και πρώτης ανάγκης, οι διαπιστώσεις έρευνας της Ελληνικής Στατιστικής Αρχής έρχονται να επιβεβαιώσουν τις δυσοίωνες προοπτικές περαιτέρω φτωχοποίησης και εξαθλίωσης των Ελλήνων πολιτών. Ενδεικτικά είναι τα πορίσματα της εν λόγω έρευνας σύμφωνα με τα οποία: 






—


 42,7% του φτωχού πληθυσμού δηλώνει ότι στερείται διατροφής που περιλαμβάνει κάθε δεύτερη ημέρα κοτόπουλο, κρέας, ψάρι ή λαχανικά ίσης θρεπτικής αξίας 










—


 69,5% του φτωχού πληθυσμού και 24,9% του μη φτωχού έχει οικονομική δυσκολία να αντιμετωπίσει έκτακτες αλλά αναγκαίες δαπάνες, αξίας περίπου 600 ευρώ










—


 Το ποσοστό του συνολικού πληθυσμού που δηλώνει οικονομική αδυναμία ικανοποιητικής θέρμανσης ανέρχεται σε 18,7%, ενώ είναι 38,9% για το φτωχό πληθυσμό και 13,7% για το μη φτωχό πληθυσμό.










—


 38,8% του πληθυσμού που έχει λάβει καταναλωτικό δάνειο δηλώνει ότι δυσκολεύεται πάρα πολύ στην αποπληρωμή αυτού ή των δόσεων για αγορά αγαθών και υπηρεσιών.










—


 41,4% του φτωχού πληθυσμού δηλώνει δυσκολία στην πληρωμή πάγιων λογαριασμών, όπως αυτών του ηλεκτρικού ρεύματος, του νερού κ.λπ.




Οι παραπάνω διαπιστώσεις γίνονται ακόμα πιο ανησυχητικές από το γεγονός ότι αφορούν στατιστικά στοιχεία εισοδήματος και συνθηκών διαβίωσης του 2010. Δεδομένου ότι δύο χρόνια μετά η κατάσταση στην ελληνική κοινωνία είναι δραματικά χειρότερη, ενώ αναμένεται να επιδεινωθεί περαιτέρω το 2013, αφού η ύφεση θα συνεχιστεί (υπολογίζεται από το Υπουργείο Οικονομικών σε —4,5%), ερωτάται η Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή: 







Πώς κρίνει τα εν λόγω στοιχεία της συγκεκριμένης έρευνας; Ποιά τα αντίστοιχα στατιστικά στοιχεία στην υπόλοιπη Ευρώπη; 











Ποια η μέση μηνιαία δαπάνη των νοικοκυριών ανά κράτος-μέλος την τελευταία 3ετία στην ευρωζώνη; 











Ποιο το ποσοστό πληθυσμού ανά κράτος μέλος που στερείται είδη βασικής διατροφής και όρους αξιοπρεπούς διαβίωσης όπως στέγαση και θέρμανση; 











Σε ποιο στάδιο βρίσκεται η πρόταση της Επιτροπής για το «Ταμείο Ευρωπαϊκής Βοήθειας προς τους Απόρους»; 




Απάντηση του κ. Αndor εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(4 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Τα στοιχεία που αναφέρει ο κ. βουλευτής είναι παρόμοια με τα αποτελέσματα που έχουν δοθεί στην Επιτροπή από την Ελληνική Στατιστική Αρχή, στο πλαίσιο της έρευνας για το εισόδημα και τις συνθήκες διαβίωσης (EU-SILC) για το έτος 2011. Οι εκτιμήσεις για την υπόλοιπη Ευρώπη επισυνάπτονται στο παράρτημα.
Το μέγεθος της τελικής κατανάλωσης της δαπάνης των νοικοκυριών στην Ελλάδα μειώθηκε κατά 15,4% για την περίοδο από το 2008 έως το 2011. Σε σύγκριση με άλλα κράτη μέλη της ευρωζώνης που παρουσίασαν μειώσεις στην τελική κατανάλωση της δαπάνης, όπως η Εσθονία (-14,2%), η Ιρλανδία και η Κύπρος (-6%), καθώς και η Πορτογαλία και η Ισπανία (-4%), παρατηρείται ότι η Ελλάδα σημείωσε τη μεγαλύτερη μείωση εντός της ζώνης του ευρώ.
Το 2011, στην ΕΕ, από το ποσοστό του πληθυσμού που απειλείται με κίνδυνο φτώχειας, το 23,6% δεν είχε την οικονομική δυνατότητα να συμπεριλάβει στην διατροφή του γεύμα με κρέας, ψάρι ή τροφή με ισοδύναμο πρωτεΐνης κάθε δεύτερη ημέρα, ενώ το 21,7% δεν ήταν σε θέση να διαθέσει επαρκή θέρμανση στην κατοικία του. Αυτά τα στοιχεία χρησιμοποιούνται (μαζί με εφτά επιπλέον διαστάσεις) από την Επιτροπή, ώστε να εκτιμηθεί το μέγεθος των σοβαρών υλικών στερήσεων στο πλαίσιο της στρατηγικής «Ευρώπη 2020». Το 2011, στην Ευρώπη, 43,5 εκατομμύρια Ευρωπαίοι αντιμετώπισαν σοβαρές υλικές στερήσεις.
Η πρόταση της Επιτροπής για τη σύσταση του «Ταμείου Ευρωπαϊκής Βοήθειας προς τους Απόρους» υπεβλήθη στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο και το Συμβούλιο στις 24 Οκτωβρίου 2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010203/12
to the Commission
Konstantinos Poupakis (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Dramatic impoverishment of European citizens
At a time when the number of Greek households which are unable to afford decent basic living conditions is dramatically increasing, being forced to do without food and essentials, the findings of a survey carried out by the Greek Statistical Authority confirm the bleak prospect of further impoverishment and destitution facing Greek citizens. The following findings of this survey tell their own story:






—


42.7% of poor people state that every second day they do without a meal consisting of chicken, meat, fish or vegetables of the same nutritional value;










—


69.5% of poor people and 24.9% of non-poor people have financial difficulties in meeting extraordinary but necessary expenditure, worth approximately EUR 600;










—


The percentage of the total population that states it cannot afford adequate heating is 18.7%, broken down into 38.9% of the poor population and 13.7% of the non-poor population;










—


38.8% of those who have contracted a consumer loan to buy goods and services say that they have great difficulty in repaying it or the instalments thereof;










—


41.4% of the poor population report difficulties in paying regular bills, such as electricity, water, etc.




These findings are made even more worrying by the fact that they are based on statistics on income and living conditions for 2010. Given that two years later the situation in Greek society has dramatically worsened, and is expected to deteriorate further in 2013, as the recession is set to continue (by an estimated ‐4.5%, according to the Finance Ministry), will the Commission say:







How does it view the data contained in this survey? What are the corresponding statistics for the rest of Europe?











What is the average monthly household expenditure per Member State over the last 3 years in the eurozone?











What is the percentage of the population per Member State lacking basic food items and decent living conditions such as housing and heating?











What stage has the Commission's proposal for a ‘Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived’ now reached?




Answer given by Mr Andor on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The figures mentionned by the Honourable Member are similar to the results provided by the Greek Statistical Authority to the Commission for the survey on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) for the year 2011. The values for the rest of Europe are attached in an annex. 
The final consumption household expenditure in volume decreased by 15.4% between 2008 and 2011 in Greece, the strongest decrease within the Euro area. In comparison, other Eurozone Member States who experienced decreases in the final consumption expenditure were Estonia (-14.2%), followed by Ireland and Cyprus (-6%) and Portugal and Spain (-4%). 
In 2011, in the EU, among the population at risk of poverty, 23.6% was unable to afford a meal with meat, fish, or protein equivalent every second day and 21.7% was unable to keep its home adequately warm. These items are used (with seven other dimensions) by the Commission to measure severe material deprivation in the Europe 2020 framework. 43.5 million European were severely materially deprived in 2011 in Europe.
The Commission's proposal for a Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived was transmitted to the European Parliament and the Council on 24 October 2012.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010204/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Regimes fiscais na União Europeia
Considerando que:






—


O acórdão do Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia (Processo C-88/03) explicita a hipótese de uma autoridade regional ou local adotar, no exercício de poderes suficientemente autónomos em relação ao poder central, uma taxa de imposto inferior à taxa nacional, a qual é aplicável unicamente às empresas presentes no território sob jurisdição dessa autoridade;










—


O acórdão suprarreferido menciona que o quadro jurídico pertinente para apreciar a seletividade de uma medida fiscal pode limitar-se à zona geográfica em questão, no caso de a entidade infra-estatal, designadamente em razão do seu estatuto e dos seus poderes, desempenhar um papel fundamental na definição do contexto político e económico em que operam as empresas presentes no território sob sua jurisdição;










—


O acórdão, previamente mencionado, refere que, para que se possa considerar que uma decisão tomada em tais circunstâncias foi adotada no exercício de poderes suficientemente autónomos, importa: 










—


Que essa decisão tenha sido adotada por uma autoridade local provida, no plano constitucional, de um estatuto político e administrativo distinto do Governo central;










—


Em seguida, que tenha sido adotada sem que o Governo central possa intervir diretamente no seu conteúdo;










—


E, finalmente, que as consequências financeiras de uma redução da taxa de imposto nacional aplicável às empresas presentes na região não devem ser compensadas por contribuições ou subvenções provenientes das outras regiões ou do Governo central;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Quais as autoridades locais/regionais da União Europeia que cumprem os requisitos enunciados no âmbito do Processo C-88/03 do TJUE, permitindo-as adotar uma taxa de imposto inferior à nacional ou um sistema fiscal à parte do sistema fiscal central/nacional? Seria possível à Comissão fornecer uma lista dessas autoridades locais/regionais?











Como podem competir, em pé de igualdade, as regiões beneficiárias de auxílios estatais ao investimento com finalidade regional, sob a forma de benefícios fiscais, com as políticas fiscais das autoridades locais/regionais anteriormente mencionadas?




Resposta dada por Joaquín Almunia em nome da Comissão
(10 de janeiro de 2013)






1.


Os critérios estabelecidos pelo Tribunal no processo C-88/03 têm de ser avaliados caso a caso. Uma lista das autoridades locais e regionais que beneficiam de autonomia fiscal no sentido da jurisprudência mencionada não está disponível.










2.


O propósito do controlo dos auxílios estatais é o de evitar distorções da concorrência no mercado único. Isto implica, em particular, que se evitem corridas aos subsídios por parte dos Estados-Membros. As regras dos auxílios estatais são aplicadas de forma igualitária a situações similares para garantir condições equitativas no mercado único. Porém, as regras dos auxílios estatais não são aplicáveis nos casos de medidas fiscais gerais não seletivas.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010204/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Tax regimes in the European Union
Given that:






—


 The Court of Justice judgment in Case C‐88/03 refers to the situation where a regional or local authority adopts, in the exercise of sufficiently autonomous powers in relation to the central power, a tax rate lower than the national rate and which is applicable only to undertakings present in the territory within its competence;










—


 The abovementioned judgment mentions that the legal framework appropriate to determine the selectivity of a tax measure may be limited to the geographical area concerned where the infra‐State body, in particular on account of its status and powers, occupies a fundamental role in the definition of the political and economic environment in which the undertakings present on the territory within its competence operate; 










—


 The judgment goes on to say that in order that a decision taken in such circumstances can be regarded as having been adopted in the exercise of sufficiently autonomous powers;










—


 That decision must have been taken by a local authority which has, from a constitutional point of view, a political and administrative status separate from that of the central government;










—


 Next, it must have been adopted without the central government being able directly to intervene as regards its content;










—


 Finally, the financial consequences of a reduction of the national tax rate for undertakings in the region must not be offset by aid or subsidies from other regions or central government. 




Will the Commission say:







Which local/regional authorities in the European Union fulfil the requirements mentioned in Case C‐88/03 of the Court of Justice making it possible to adopt a tax rate lower than the national rate or a tax system other than the central/national tax system? Could the Commission provide a list of those local/regional authorities?











How can the regions which are beneficiaries of state aid for regional investment aid in the form of tax benefits compete on an equal footing with the tax policies of the abovementioned local/regional authorities?




Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)






1.


The criteria established by the Court in Case C-88/03 have to be assessed on a case by case basis. A list of the local/regional authorities that enjoy fiscal autonomy in the sense of the case law referred to is not available.










2.


The purpose of state aid control is to avoid distortions of competition in the Single market. This implies in particular avoiding subsidy races between the Member States. State aid rules are applied equally to similar situations, in order to ensure a level playing field in the Single market. State aid rules are, however, not applicable in the case of general, non-selective tax measures.




(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010589/12
a la Comisión
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)
(20 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: La tauromaquia y los subsidios europeos
En un momento de profunda crisis económica, de debate intenso sobre el presupuesto de la UE y el marco financiero plurianual 2014-2020, en un momento de austeridad aplicada desde Europa a los presupuestos de los Estados y las regiones en la EU, en este momento se sigue subvencionando la tauromaquia en Europa.
A pesar de ser una actividad violenta y prohibida en muchos Estados, y de que la UE alega no tener competencias sobre ella, los fondos provenientes del presupuesto comunitario acaban financiando y fortaleciendo el maltrato y la tortura de los animales con fines de ocio y diversión. Por citar algunos ejemplos, podemos comentar el caso de Estremoz y Azambuja, donde los municipios emplearon cientos de miles de euros para rehabilitar plazas de toros prácticamente abandonadas y sin una utilidad real en las poblaciones. Este dinero provenía de los fondos PRODER, originalmente necesarios para el impulso de las comunidades menos desarrolladas de la Unión Europea. En España, los ganaderos de toros de lidia, productores de los animales que acabarán mutilados en las plazas de toros, se llevan cada año alrededor de 72 000 000 euros de la PAC, la política agrícola común. A su vez, la denominada Fundación Andaluza de Tauromaquia percibió más de 750 000 euros en solo un año a través de un programa dedicado originalmente a mejorar las capacidades laborales de personas desempleadas.
La Comisión ha afirmado que no existen competencias con respecto a las corridas de toros y otros festejos taurinos. ¿Tiene conocimiento la Comisión de que el dinero comunitario es empleado en impulsar y promocionar la tortura de un animal como forma de espectáculo?
En un contexto de crisis sin precedentes, con cada vez más personas en riesgo de exclusión social y pobreza, sin embargo, se destinan fondos a la tauromaquia. ¿Qué opinión le merece? ¿Cómo controlará la asignación de fondos para que esto no suceda? ¿Eliminará la subvención de 72 000 000 euros de la PAC a los ganaderos de toros de lidia?
Respuesta conjunta del Sr. Cioloş en nombre de la Comisión 
(10 de enero de 2013)
La Política Agrícola Común (PAC) no contempla ninguna ayuda específica de la UE destinada a apoyar la cría de toros de lidia, ni en el «primer pilar» de la PAC, que se refiere a las medidas de mercado y a las ayudas directas, ni en el «segundo pilar», relativo al desarrollo rural.
Dentro del «primer pilar», la ayuda directa a los agricultores se abona principalmente con independencia de los cultivos que realizan o de los animales que crían (disociación) y no se efectúa ningún pago específico destinado a la cría de toros. Dentro del «segundo pilar», a través de las medidas de desarrollo rural pueden concederse ayudas de la UE a las explotaciones para diversos fines (por ejemplo, para mejorar su competitividad) sin que ello se haga depender del destino final de la producción agrícola de la explotación.
El artículo 13 del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea (534) (TFUE) establece lo siguiente en lo que se refiere a la política de la Unión en relación con el bienestar de los animales: «Al formular y aplicar las políticas de la Unión en materia de agricultura, pesca, transporte, mercado interior, investigación y desarrollo tecnológico y espacio, la Unión y los Estados miembros tendrán plenamente en cuenta las exigencias en materia de bienestar de los animales como seres sensibles, respetando al mismo tiempo las disposiciones legales o administrativas y las costumbres de los Estados miembros relativas, en particular, a ritos religiosos, tradiciones culturales y patrimonio regional». Las corridas de toros se consideran una tradición cultural y forman parte del patrimonio regional de varios Estados miembros. Por consiguiente, y de acuerdo con el principio de atribución de competencias, la Comisión no está facultada para adoptar iniciativas en relación con estas cuestiones que afectan a tradiciones culturales de los Estados miembros interesados.
(Dansk udgave)
Forespørgsel til skriftlig besvarelse E-010205/12
til Kommissionen
Dan Jørgensen (S&D)
(8. november 2012)

Om: Støtte til tyrefægtning i strid med Lissabontraktat
EU støtter hvert år tyrefægtning med et større pengebeløb via landbrugsstøtten, som i Spanien blandt andet går til landmænd, der opdrætter tyre til brug for tyrefægtning. Der er i øjeblikket intet i EU-lovgivningen, der forhindrer denne praksis i at fortsætte.
EU støtter derudover tyrefægtning via landbrugspolitikkens søjle 2 (landdistriktsmidlerne), som i flere tilfælde er blevet brugt til at renovere tyrefægterarenaer (se spørgsmål til kommissionen fra MEP Ana Miranda, 30.01.2012).
Tyrefægtning er dyrplageri. Det er derfor min opfattelse, at den fortsatte støtte er i strid med artikel 13 i Lissabontraktaten, hvor der står, at unionen og medlemsstaterne skal tage fuldt hensyn til dyrs velfærd, da dyr er følende væsener.
Kan kommissionen bekræfte, at EU-lovgivningen ikke forhindrer at landbrugsstøtte under søjle 1 bliver udbetalte til landmænd, der opdrætter tyre til brug for tyrefægtning?
Har Kommissionen et overblik over hvor mange penge der hvert år anvendes til at støtte tyrefægtning på denne måde?
Er Kommissionen enig med mig i, at det er i strid med Lissabontraktaten, at EU giver penge til tyrefægtning via landbrugsstøtten, og at denne praksis derfor bør stoppes?
Samlet svar afgivet på Kommissionens vegne af Dacian Cioloş
(10. januar 2013)
Inden for rammerne af den fælles landbrugspolitik findes der ingen specifik EU-støtte designet til at støtte opdræt af tyre til brug for tyrefægtning, hverken under landbrugspolitikkens søjle 1, som vedrører markedsforanstaltninger og direkte støtte, eller under søjle 2, som har med udvikling af landdistrikterne at gøre.
Under søjle 1 udbetales direkte støtte til landbrugere for det meste, uanset hvilke afgrøder de dyrker, eller hvilke dyr de opdrætter (afkobling), og der foretages ingen specifikke udbetalinger med henblik på at opdrætte tyre. Under søjle 2 kan der tildeles EU-støtte gennem foranstaltninger til udvikling af landdistrikterne, og disse kan tildeles med flere formål for øje, f.eks. med henblik på at forbedre et landbrugs konkurrenceevne, uanset hvad det endelige mål med dets produktion er.
Af artikel 13 i traktaten om Den Europæiske Unions funktionsmåde (535) (TEUF) vedrørende Unionens politik om dyrevelfærd fremgår det: »Når Unionens politikker inden for landbrug, fiskeri, transport, det indre marked, forskning og teknologisk udvikling samt rummet, fastlægges og gennemføres, tager Unionen og medlemsstaterne fuldt hensyn til velfærden hos dyr som følende væsner, samtidig med at de respekterer medlemsstaternes love og administrative bestemmelser samt deres skikke, navnlig med hensyn til religiøse ritualer, kulturelle traditioner og regionale skikke«. Tyrefægtning anses for at være en kulturel tradition og en del af en regional skik i flere medlemsstater. Derfor, og i overensstemmelse med princippet om den tildelte kompetence, har Kommissionen ikke kompetence til at igangsætte initiativer i forbindelse med sager om kulturelle traditioner i de berørte medlemsstater.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010205/12
to the Commission
Dan Jørgensen (S&D)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Subsidies for bullfighting are incompatible with Lisbon Treaty
Every year the EU provides a large subsidy to bullfighting via agricultural support, which in Spain also goes to farmers who raise bulls for fighting. At present there is nothing in EU legislation to prevent this practice from continuing.
The EU also supports bullfighting via Pillar 2 of the common agricultural policy (rural development), which in many cases has been used to renovate bullrings (see questions E-000690/2012 and E-000691/2012 of 30 January 2012 by Ana Miranda MEP to the Commission).
Bullfighting constitutes cruelty to animals. I therefore believe that continuing to support it conflicts with Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which states that the Union and the Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals.
Can the Commission confirm that EU legislation does not prevent agricultural support under Pillar 1 from being paid to farmers who raise bulls for bullfighting?
Can the Commission estimate how much money is spent every year on supporting bullfighting in this way?
Does the Commission agree that it conflicts with the Treaty of Lisbon for the EU to provide money for bullfighting via agricultural aid, and that this practice should therefore be halted? 
Question for written answer E-010589/12
to the Commission
Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE)
(20 November 2012)

Subject: Bullfighting and European subsidies
Even at this time of deep economic crisis and intensive discussion of the EU budget and the multiannual financial framework 2014-2020, when austerity is being imposed by Europe on the budgets of Member States and regions of the EU, bullfighting continues to be subsidised in Europe.
Despite being violent and forbidden in many Member States and even though the EU claims to have no power over it, funds from the Community budget end up paying for and perpetuating the mistreatment and torture of animals for entertainment, as a leisure activity. For example, the local authorities of Estremoz and Azambuja have spent hundreds of thousands of euros on rehabilitating virtually abandoned bullrings, without bringing any real benefit to the towns in question. The money came from the Proder funds, which were originally needed in order to boost less-developed regions of the European Union. In Spain, breeders of fighting bulls for mutilation in the bullring receive about 72 000 000 euros under the common agricultural policy (CAP) each year. In addition, the Fundación Andaluza de Tauromaquia [Bullfighting Foundation of Andalusia] received over 750 000 euros in just one year through a programme originally intended to improve the skills of the unemployed.
The Commission has confirmed that it has no power over bullfighting and other events involving bulls. Is the Commission aware that Community funds are used to encourage and promote the torture of animals as entertainment?
At a time of unprecedented crisis, with ever more people at risk of poverty and social exclusion, funds are nevertheless being channelled into bullfighting. What are your thoughts on this? How can the allocation of funds be monitored to prevent this occurring? Will the 72 000 000 euro subsidy paid to breeders of fighting bulls under the CAP be brought to an end?
Joint answer given by Mr Cioloş on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
In the framework of the common agricultural policy (CAP), there is no specific EU aid designed to support the breeding of bulls for fighting, neither under the ‘first pillar’ of the CAP which refers to market measures and direct support, nor under the second pillar, dealing with Rural Development.
Under the ‘first pillar’, direct support to farmers is mostly paid irrespective of the crops they grow or the animals they breed (decoupling) and no specific payments are made for the breeding of bulls. Under the ‘second pillar’, EU support through rural development measures can be granted to holdings for several purposes, e.g. in order to improve their competitiveness, independently from the final use of the agricultural produce of the farm.
Article 13 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (536) (TFEU) on the Union' policy on animal welfare states that ‘in formulating and implementing the Union’s agriculture, fisheries, transport, internal market, research, and technological development and space policies, the Union and Member States shall, since animals are sentient beings, pay full regard to the welfare requirements of animals, while respecting the legislative or administrative provisions and customs of the Member States relating in particular to cultural traditions and regional heritage’. Bullfighting is considered as a cultural tradition and part of the regional heritage of several Member States. Therefore, and following the principle of conferral of competences the Commission has no competence to take initiatives in relation to these issues concerning cultural traditions in the Member States concerned.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010206/12
alla Commissione
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)
(8 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Fiorente ed incontrastato commercio illegale di uccelli selvatici in Italia, in violazione della direttiva 2009/147/CE e del regolamento (CE) n. 865/2006
Esiste, in Italia, un fiorente commercio illegale di fauna selvatica grazie a individui senza scrupoli che lucrano, in particolar modo, sugli uccelli migratori catturati illegalmente, spesso con reti da uccellagione nei roccoli e nelle prodine, e poi immessi altrettanto illegalmente sul mercato grazie anche a ingegnosi sistemi di manomissione delle marcature identificative. 
Nei laboratori clandestini allestiti da queste associazioni criminali, alle zampe degli uccelli catturati illegalmente vengono applicati anelli che, a norma di legge, si possono applicare solo agli uccelli nei primi giorni di vita, così come previsto dall'articolo 66, punto 8 del regolamento (CE) n. 865/2006.
Questa operazione fraudolenta permette, di fatto, di trasformare migliaia di uccelli selvatici protetti e non commerciabili, in migliaia di uccelli di allevamento che si possono commerciare legalmente. 
Soprattutto in Veneto ed in Lombardia, alcuni delinquenti hanno escogitato un sistema che, procurando gravi sofferenze agli uccelli catturati illegalmente, prevede di applicare alla zampa dell'animale un anello, il cui diametro viene prima allargato e poi ridotto rendendolo inamovibile come previsto dal citato regolamento: in questo modo, sembra che l'anello sia stato applicato nei primi giorni di vita degli uccelli.
Questa operazione illegale è stata videoregistrata e tale documento è stato fatto pervenire allo scrivente (537).
Considerato che la manomissione di queste marcature può avvenire solo su anelli di alluminio o di leghe simili e che questa risulterebbe impossibile da effettuarsi, ad esempio, su anelli di acciaio, non ritiene la Commissione che, per porre fine a questo grave commercio illegale e garantire il rispetto dell'articolo 66 del regolamento (CE) n. 865/2006, tutti gli Stati membri dovrebbero consentire l'inanellatura solamente mediante anelli a prova di manomissione come, appunto, quelli in acciaio?
Risposta di Janez Potočnik a nome della Commissione
(15 gennaio 2013)
Ai sensi della direttiva 2009/147/CE (538) (direttiva «Uccelli selvatici») per tutte le specie di uccelli viventi naturalmente allo stato selvatico nell’UE, gli Stati membri vietano la cattura deliberata e la vendita, il trasporto per la vendita, la detenzione per la vendita, nonché l’offerta in vendita di uccelli vivi e di uccelli morti. Alcune eccezioni sono menzionate nell’articolo 6 della direttiva per le specie elencate nell’allegato III e alcune deroghe possono essere concesse in conformità delle specifiche condizioni di cui all’articolo 9. 
Vi sono inoltre una serie di prescrizioni stabilite da regolamenti dell’UE relativi al commercio della flora e della fauna selvatiche che si applicano al commercio di uccelli. Gli animali che vengono o potrebbero essere minacciati di estinzione a causa delle pressioni commerciali sono inclusi negli allegati del regolamento (CE) n. 338/97 del Consiglio, del 9 dicembre 1996, relativo alla protezione di specie della flora e della fauna selvatiche mediante il controllo del loro commercio (539). In particolare è vietato il commercio di esemplari prelevati dall’ambiente naturale di cui all’allegato A. Tuttavia, ai sensi del regolamento (CE) n. 865/2006 (540) della Commissione, gli uccelli nati e allevati in cattività di cui all’allegato A possono essere oggetto di commercio all’interno dell’UE se marcati mediante inanellatura applicata nei primi giorni di vita dell’animale della zampa recante una marcatura individuale di dimensioni tali da impedirne la rimozione dalla zampa dell’uccello quando questa sia pienamente sviluppata. Il presente regolamento non specifica tuttavia di quale materiale devono essere fatti gli anelli.
È pertanto un chiaro obbligo per le autorità degli Stati membri istituire un sistema opportuno di attuazione e applicazione dei divieti summenzionati e delle relative disposizioni.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010206/12
to the Commission
Andrea Zanoni (ALDE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Flourishing illegal trade in wild birds in Italy, in breach of Directive 2009/147/EC and Regulation (EC) No 865/2006
In Italy, a flourishing illegal trade in wide birds is being conducted by unscrupulous individuals who primarily target migratory birds, which they catch, often using snares and nets, and then sell as birds bred in captivity, having first fitted them with the type of leg ring used to mark such birds for sale. 
The leg rings are fitted to the illegally caught birds in underground workshops set up by these criminal organisations. Under Article 66(8) of Regulation (EC) No 865/2006, such rings may be fitted to birds only in the first days of life.
This system enables the criminals to transform thousands of protected wild birds, which may not be sold, into ‘birds bred in captivity’, which may be sold legally. 
Criminals in the Veneto and Lombardy regions have developed a method for fitting leg rings to birds caught illegally which involves first enlarging the diameter of the ring and then tightening it once it is on the bird’s leg. This makes it appear as if the ring was fitted in the first days of the bird’s life and ensures that it cannot be removed, in line with the directive’s requirements.
A video of this illegal marking method, which causes the bird great suffering, has been made and forwarded to the author (541).
Given that it is only possible to tamper in this way with rings made of aluminium or similar alloys and that it would be impossible to do so with rings made of, for example, steel, would the Commission not agree that in order to put an end to this scandalous illegal trade and ensure compliance with Article 66 of Regulation (EC) No 865/2006, all of the Member States should make sure that birds are marked only with rings made of materials, such as steel, which are tamper-proof?
Answer given by Mr Potočnik on behalf of the Commission
(15 January 2013)
According to Directive 2009/147/EC (542) (‘Birds Directive’) and in relation to all species of naturally occurring birds in the wild state in the EU, Member States shall prohibit the deliberate capture as well as the sale, transport for sale, keeping for sale and the offering for sale of live or dead birds. A few exceptions are mentioned by Article 6 of the directive for the species listed in Annex III and certain derogations may be granted under the specific conditions set by Article 9. 
There are also a number of requirements under EU Wildlife Trade Regulations which apply to trade in birds. Animals which are or may become threatened with extinction because of trade pressure are included in the annexes to Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 of 9 December 1996 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein (543). In particular, commercial trade in wild-taken specimens of Annex A is prohibited. However, according to Commission Regulation (EC) No 865/2006 (544), captive born and bred birds of Annex A can enter intra EU trade if marked by means of a uniquely marked seamlessly closed leg-ring, of a size which cannot be removed from the bird when its leg is fully grown after having been applied in the first days of the bird's life. This regulation does however not specify which material the rings are supposed to be made of.
It is therefore a clear obligation for the Member State authorities to establish an appropriate system to implement and enforce the abovementioned prohibitions and provisions.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010208/12
a la Comisión
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)
(8 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Obra social de Novacaixagalicia
La paulatina transformación del sistema de bancos y cajas del Estado español ha conllevado importantes perjuicios para la ciudadanía. La liquidación del sistema de cajas de ahorro, considerado un éxito de implantación social y solo explotado por la burbuja inmobiliaria, ha comportado su conversión en bancos. Es decir, que grandes entidades financieras han pasado de ser fundaciones de carácter privado sin ánimo de lucro a ser empresas financieras que basan su negocio en captar depósitos para ofrecer crédito. En el marco de esta transformación, se ha ido eliminando la obra social de las pequeñas cajas de ahorro que llevaban a cabo mediante sus fundaciones. De este modo, una parte importante de los beneficios obtenidos por las cajas de ahorro revertían en la sociedad (normalmente en pequeños núcleos de población o áreas de influencia de tamaño medio, en diversas actividades de tipo social, cultural y sin ánimo de lucro).
El caso de Novacaixagalicia no es ajeno a esta problemática. Luego de ser intervenida por el Fondo de Reestructuración Ordenada Bancaria (FROB) y controlada por Novagalicia Banco (NCB) (que ha dividido en 4 diferentes áreas de negocio de la primera) la participación de Novacaixagalicia en la sociedad resultante se reducía a un 6,84 % (181 millones de euros). La obra social, supeditada a unas estrictas condiciones y a expensas de la obtención de dividendo de la participación de Novacaixagalicia en NCG Banco, ve comprometido su futuro si finalmente, como se apunta, la recapitalización se realizará de manera que los accionistas absorban las pérdidas mediante la pérdida de su participación. De darse esta situación, Novacaixagalicia pasaría a tener un 0 % de la entidad resultante (NCG Banco). 
— ¿Entiende la Comisión Europea que la obra social de Novacaixagalicia se encuentra en peligro?
— ¿Considera la Comisión sugerir al Estado miembro que se reconozca el carácter singular de las cajas de ahorro como único modelo empresarial que socializa una parte de sus beneficios?
— ¿Que valoración hace la Comisión de la posibilidad de que el FROB recompre la participación accionarial de Novacaixagalicia en NCG Banco con en valor inicial (181 millones) para poder garantizar la continuidad de la obra social?
— En caso de que Novacaixagalicia se quedase sin participación en NCG Banco, ¿se establecerían condiciones para que el banco asumiese el mantenimiento financiero de la obra social?
Respuesta del Sr. Rehn en nombre de la Comisión
(11 de enero de 2013)
El sector financiero español ha experimentado un profundo proceso de reestructuración como consecuencia de la grave crisis financiera. Además, en el caso de las cajas de ahorros, el Gobierno español respondió a la presión particular a la que estas estaban expuestas con un conjunto de reformas jurídicas importantes. El traspaso de las actividades bancarias de algunas cajas de ahorros a bancos comerciales les ha permitido incrementar el capital y reforzar su solvencia.
No obstante, la prueba de resistencia del sector bancario que finalizó recientemente en España ha puesto de manifiesto algunas deficiencias y puntos vulnerables importantes centrados principalmente en algunas cajas de ahorros. Estas se han visto más seriamente afectadas que otras ramas del sector bancario debido a su mayor exposición al sector de la promoción inmobiliaria y a su enfoque nacional o regional. Sin embargo, algunas han superado la prueba con éxito, lo que indica que el modelo de cajas de ahorros puede funcionar si las entidades se gestionan correctamente. En esta línea, el Memorando de Entendimiento sobre condiciones de política sectorial financiera entre las autoridades españolas y la Comisión adoptado formalmente el 23 de julio de 2012 establece que debe reforzarse la estructura de gobernanza de las cajas de ahorros y de los bancos controlados por estas.
La Comisión acoge con satisfacción el compromiso social por parte de las cajas de ahorros y reconoce el papel fundamental que desempeñan para el conjunto de la economía. En principio nada impide que otros bancos promuevan los mismos objetivos sociales. De hecho, algunos bancos comerciales en España llevan a cabo obras sociales a través de sus propias fundaciones.
Actualmente, el NCG Banco está bajo el control del FROB y, a consecuencia de su déficit de capital, presentó un plan de reestructuración a la Comisión que se aprobó el 28 de noviembre de 2012.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010208/12
to the Commission
Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Novacaixagalicia's social work
The gradual transformation of the Spanish banking and savings system has led to major losses for citizens. The liquidation of savings banks, regarded as successful social initiatives which were only exploited by the housing bubble, has led to their conversion into banks. This means that large financial institutions have gone from being private non-profit foundations to financial companies that base their business on taking deposits to provide credit. As part of this transformation, the social work carried out by small savings banks through their foundations is being phased out. This work enabled a significant portion of the savings banks’ profits to benefit society (usually in small towns or medium-sized areas of influence, through various social, cultural and non-profit activities).
Novacaixagalicia is one of the affected savings banks. After being taken over by the Fund for Orderly Bank Restructuring (FOBR) and controlled by Novagalicia Banco (NCG) (which has been divided into four business areas), Novacaixagalicia’s share in the resulting company was reduced to 6.84% (EUR 181 million). Its social work is subject to strict conditions and is at the expense of obtaining dividend from Novacaixagalicia’s share in NCG Banco. Its future is in jeopardy should recapitalisation ultimately occur in a way that shareholders absorb losses by losing their shares. Should this happen, Novacaixagalicia would come to own 0% of the resulting entity (NCG Banco). 
— Does the Commission believe that Novacaixagalicia’s social work is in jeopardy?
— Will it suggest that the Member State recognises the uniqueness of savings banks as the only business model that gives a portion of its profits back to society?
— How does it view the possibility of the FORB repurchasing Novacaixagalicia’s share in NCG Banco at its initial value (EUR 181 million) to ensure that the social work continues?
— If Novacaixagalicia were left without any share in NCG Banco, would it establish conditions for the bank to continue funding social work?
Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission
(11 January 2013)
The Spanish financial sector has experienced a thorough restructuring process as a result of the severe financial crisis. Furthermore, in the case of saving banks, the Spanish Government responded with a set of significant legal reforms to the particular strain to which savings banks were exposed. The transfer of banking businesses of some saving banks to commercial banks has allowed them to increase capital and reinforce their solvency.
However, the banking-sector stress test recently finalised in Spain has showed some major weaknesses and vulnerabilities mainly focused on some savings banks. They have been more severely hit than other parts of the banking sector, due to their higher exposures to the real estate development sector and their regional or domestic focus. Nevertheless, some savings banks have successfully passed the test, suggesting that the savings banks model can work if the institutions are properly managed. In this line, the memorandum of understanding on financial-sector policy conditionality between the Spanish authorities and the Commission formally adopted on 23 July 2012 establishes that the governance structure of saving banks and of banks controlled by them should be strengthened.
The Commission welcomes the social commitment by savings banks and recognises its important role for the whole economy. Nothing prevents in principle other banks from promoting the same social objectives. In fact, some commercial banks in Spain develop social works through their own foundations.
NCG Banco is now under the control of the FROB and, as a result of its capital shortfall, presented a restructuring plan to the Commission. The plan was approved on 28 November 2012.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010209/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Investimento na Rede Transeuropeia de Transportes: 2007-2013
Tendo em conta que:






—


 A proposta relativa às orientações da União para o Desenvolvimento da Rede Transeuropeia de Transportes (RTE-T) (COM(2011)650 final), tem como um dos objetivos principais a coesão territorial, económica e social, e, como objetivo específicos, assegurar a mobilidade contínua de pessoas e mercadorias e a acessibilidade de todas as regiões da UE;










—


 As infraestruturas de transportes são uma fonte de criação de emprego e de riqueza, não só nas regiões, mas também no aumento da competitividade europeia; 










—


 O CEF será o instrumento financeiro que porá em prática a estratégia para a política de transportes, e que, segundo os últimos dados inscritos na «Negotiating Box
» sobre as perspetivas financeiras 2014-2020, de 29 de outubro, irá sofrer um duro corte orçamental;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Dispõe dos valores que cada Estado-Membro investiu em infraestruturas de transportes no período de 2007-2013? Em caso afirmativo, consegue fazer esta avaliação para os diferentes modos de transporte, nomeadamente o transporte marítimo, ferroviário, rodoviário e aeroportuário?











No caso português, quanto foi investido no mesmo período em infraestruturas de transportes nas diferentes regiões portuguesas?




Resposta dada por Siim Kallas em nome da Comissão
(4 de fevereiro de 2013)
A Comissão está a compilar vários dados sobre transportes com base nas informações facultadas pelos Estados-Membros, mas não dispõe de dados relativos às despesas totais em infraestruturas de transportes em cada Estado-Membro. No entanto, a Comissão está a proceder à recolha de dados relativos aos investimentos na rede transeuropeia de transportes (RTE-T). 
O primeiro anexo contém valores relativos ao investimento total na infraestrutura de transportes, por modo e por país, no período 2007-2010 (545), o segundo anexo fornece números relativos aos investimentos em transportes por país na RTE-T no período 2007-2010, 2011 (valores estimados) e 2012-2013 (investimentos previstos (546)) e o terceiro anexo apresenta os montantes afetados aos transportes nos programas operacionais adotados pela CE para o período 2007-2013. A última coluna representa o peso dos transportes no montante total da política de coesão.
Além disso, no que respeita às realizações em matéria de projetos de desenvolvimento de infraestruturas de transportes, a rubrica orçamental consagrada à RTE-T apoiou o desenvolvimento de dois aeroportos: o aeroporto de Faro recebeu 6,02 milhões de euros, enquanto o aeroporto de São Miguel beneficiou de um apoio da União no montante de 2,16 milhões de euros.
Portugal beneficiou igualmente de uma série de estudos e projetos transfronteiras apoiados pela rubrica orçamental relativa à RTE-T que não se inserem numa região específica, desde a implementação do SESAR e do Céu Único Europeu até às das autoestradas do mar, aos transportes rodoviários seguros, etc.
No caso de Portugal, a Comissão não dispõe de informações globais sobre as despesas em infraestruturas de transportes em cada região.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010209/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Investment in the trans-European transport network: 2007-2013
Taking into account that:






—


Among the main aims of the proposal on Union guidelines for the development of the Trans‐European Transport Network (TEN‐T) (COM(2011) 650 final) are territorial, economic and social cohesion, and among the specific aims, to allow the seamless mobility of persons and goods and ensure that all EU regions are accessible;










—


Transport infrastructures are a source of job creation and wealth creation, not only in the regions but also in increasing European competitiveness; 










—


The CEF will be the financial instrument that puts the transport policy strategy into practice, and according to the most recent information in the negotiating box on the financial perspective 2014‐2020, from 29 October 2012, its budget will be severely cut;




I would ask the Commission:







Does it know the amounts that each Member State has invested in transport infrastructure in the 2007‐2013 period? If so, can it provide this evaluation for the various forms of transport, namely maritime, rail, road and air transport?











In the case of Portugal, how much was invested in the same period in transport infrastructure in each of the Portuguese regions?




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(4 February 2013)
The Commission is compiling various transport data on the basis of information provided by the Member States, but doesn't have data for the total transport infrastructure spending in each Member State. However, the Commission is collecting data for investments on the TEN-T Network. 
The 1st annex contains figures for the total transport infrastructure investment per mode and per country for the period 2007-2010 (547) , the 2nd annex is providing figures for transport investments per country on the TEN-T Network for the period 2007-2010, 2011 — estimated values and 2012-2013 — foreseen investments (548) and 3rd annex shows the amounts allocated to Transport in the Operational programmes adopted by the EC for the period 2007-2013. The last column represents the weight of transport in the total amount of Cohesion Policy.
In addition, concerning achievements on transport infrastructural development projects, development of two airports have been successfully supported by the TEN-T budget line: Faro Airport received EUR 6.02 million, while São Miguel Airport benefited from EUR 2.16 million of Union support.
Portugal has also benefited from a variety of studies and cross-border projects supported by the TEN-T Budget line which do not fall specifically within a Region, ranging from SESAR and the Single sky implementation, to Motorways of the sea, Safe and Secure road transport, etc.
In the case of Portugal, the Commission doesn't have overall information about transport infrastructure spending for each region.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010210/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: O Crescimento Azul — Aquacultura
Considerando que:






—


 A CE apresentou a 13 de setembro a Comunicação «Crescimento Azul — Oportunidades para um crescimento sustentável marinho e marítimo», onde sublinha que a economia azul é a dimensão marítima da Estratégia UE2020, complementar da já existente Política Marítima integrada, e aponta, por isso, as áreas de investimento prioritárias, áreas onde há um potencial de crescimento para a União;










—


 As 5 áreas de investimento que assinala como prioritárias, ou seja, as energias marinhas, a aquacultura, o turismo marítimo, costeiro e de cruzeiro, a exploração e extração de minerais marinhos e a biotecnologia azul, estão dependentes e interligadas a outras atividades marinhas e marítimas;










—


 Atualmente, a economia azul representa 5,4 milhões de empregos e um valor acrescentado bruto de cerca de 500 milhões de euros por ano, e em 2020, a previsão é de 7 milhões de empregos e de um valor acrescentado bruto de 600 milhões de euros; 










—


 A aquacultura surge na reforma da Política Comum das Pescas como elemento de diversificação das economias costeiras, de redução da sobrepesca e preservação das unidades populacionais.




Pergunta-se à Comissão: 







Como pretende inverter a tendência de não crescimento da aquacultura no mercado Europeu, uma vez que o seu crescimento anual é de 6,6 %, sendo o mercado asiático um forte concorrente?











Como pretende eliminar a conceção errada que o cidadão europeu tem em relação à aquacultura?




Resposta dada por Maria Damanaki  em nome da Comissão
(8 de janeiro de 2013)






1)


A proposta de reforma da política comum das pescas apresentada pela Comissão prevê ações de promoção da aquicultura através de orientações estratégicas da UE não coercivas e de planos nacionais plurianuais.




 De acordo com as consultas das partes interessadas e os estudos existentes, os principais fatores que limitam o crescimento da aquicultura na UE são os elevados encargos administrativos, o acesso limitado ao espaço e às águas e a concorrência de países terceiros. Os Estados-Membros serão incentivados a simplificar os procedimentos, respeitando simultaneamente as rigorosas normas ambientais e sanitárias existentes, e a afetar nos planos de ordenamento integradoespaços adequados para o desenvolvimento da aquicultura.
A proposta de um Fundo Europeu para os Assuntos Marítimos e as Pescas (FEAMP) prevê um apoio financeiro às práticas aquícolas tradicionais e inovadoras; por outro lado, a investigação no domínio da aquicultura será promovida através do programa «Horizonte 2020».






2)


O setor aquícola da UE é regido por normas rigorosas em matéria de saúde e de sustentabilidade que deveriam constituir uma vantagem concorrencial. Contudo, essas normas não são suficientemente visíveis,




 o que contribui também para uma perceção negativa deste setor pelos cidadãos da UE. Há um mercado para produtos do mar frescos, fiáveis e sustentáveis, em que o setor da aquicultura da UE pode assumir um papel de liderança. As propostas de reforma da PCP incluem disposições sobre informações obrigatórias aos consumidores relativamente a todos os produtos do mar vendidos na UE. Por outro lado, os regimes que preveem informações adicionais, numa base voluntária, podem igualmente ser vantajosos tanto para os produtores como para os consumidores, desde que as informações sejam exatas e não induzam o consumidor em erro. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010210/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Blue Growth — aquaculture
On 13 September 2012 the Commission submitted a communication entitled ‘Blue Growth — opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth’, in which it described the blue economy as the maritime dimension of the EU 2020 strategy, complementing the existing integrated maritime policy, and listed the areas on which the EU should focus its investment in order to tap their growth potential.
The five focus areas considered to have priority, that is to say, marine energy sources, aquaculture, maritime, coastal, and cruise tourism, prospection for, and the extraction of, marine minerals, and blue biotechnology, depend on, and are interconnected with, other marine and maritime activities.
At present, the blue economy provides 5.4 million jobs and gross added value of approximately EUR 500 million a year, figures which, by 2020, are expected to rise to 7 million jobs and EUR 600 million in gross added value.
In the reform of the common fisheries policy, aquaculture is regarded as a means of diversifying coastal economies, reducing overfishing, and conserving stocks.






1.


How does the Commission propose to reverse the current stagnant growth trend on the European market, bearing in mind that, globally, the aquaculture sector is growing by 6.6% a year, Asia being a particularly strong competitor?










2.


How will it dispel the misconception which European citizens have about aquaculture?




Answer given by Ms Damanaki on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)






1.


The Commission's proposal for reform of the common fisheries policy foresees actions to promote aquaculture through non-binding EU strategic guidelines and multi-annual national plans. Stakeholder consultations and existing studies suggest that the main factors limiting EU aquaculture growth are high administrative burdens, limited access to space and water and competition from third countries. Member States will be encouraged to streamline procedures while upholding the existing high environmental and health standards, and to allocate suitable space for aquaculture development in integrated spatial plans.




The proposal for a European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) will provide financial support to both traditional and innovative aquaculture practices, while aquaculture research will be promoted through the ‘Horizon 2020’ programme. 






2.


EU aquaculture's high health and sustainability standards should represent a competitive advantage, but they are not visible enough. This also contributes to a negative perception of the sector by EU citizens. There is a market for fresh, trustworthy and sustainable seafood products, where the EU aquaculture sector can play a leading role. The proposals for CFP reform include provisions on mandatory information to consumers for all seafood products sold in the EU. Voluntary schemes can also benefit producers and consumers by providing additional information, as long as this is accurate and does not mislead the consumer. 




(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010211/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: O Crescimento Azul — Energias renováveis marinhas e política industrial
Considerando que:






—


 A CE apresentou a 13 de setembro a Comunicação «Crescimento Azul, oportunidades para um crescimento sustentável marinho e marítimo», onde sublinha que a economia azul é a dimensão marítima da Estratégia UE2020, complementar da já existente Política Marítima integrada, e aponta, por isso, as áreas de investimento prioritárias, áreas onde há um potencial de crescimento para a União;










—


 As 5 áreas de investimento que assinala como prioritárias, ou seja, as energias marinhas, a aquacultura, o turismo marítimo, costeiro e de cruzeiro, a exploração e extração de minerais marinhos e a biotecnologia azul, estão dependentes e interligadas a outras atividades marinhas e marítimas;










—


 Atualmente a economia azul representa 5,4 milhões de empregos e um valor acrescentado bruto de cerca de 500 milhões de euros por ano, e em 2020, a previsão é de 7 milhões de empregos e de um valor acrescentado bruto de 600 milhões de euros;










—


 O Vice-Presidente da CE, Antonio Tajani, referiu numa Conferência em Lisboa, no passado dia 26 de outubro, que sem eliminar o «discurso ecológico
» é preciso enquadrá-lo na economia real: «Devemos apoiar a luta contra as alterações climáticas, mas se obrigamos as empresas europeias a deixarem a Europa, elas irão provocar um enorme ferimento na luta contra as alterações climáticas
»; 




Pergunta-se à Comissão: 
Como encara as declarações sobre uma mudança no «discurso ecológico» para evitar uma deslocalização das indústrias europeias, tendo em conta que umas das prioridades do Blue Growth são as energias marinhas renováveis? Significa isto que irá haver uma flexibilização na legislação da UE em termos de combate às alterações climáticas?
Resposta dada por Antonio Tajani em nome da Comissão
(6 de fevereiro de 2013)
A UE estabeleceu para si própria objetivos ambiciosos e vinculativos para reduzir as emissões de gases com efeitos de estufa, reforçar a eficiência energética e aumentar a percentagem de energias renováveis até 2020 (os objetivos 20-20-20). A Comissão permanece totalmente empenhada em garantir a aplicação plena e correta da legislação relevante da UE (549). Além disso, existe o compromisso político de, até 2050, reduzir em 80-95 % as emissões de gases com efeito de estufa na UE. Por conseguinte, não se trata, de modo nenhum, de uma abordagem mais laxista do combate às alterações climáticas. 
No que diz respeito ao desenvolvimento de fontes de energia marinha renováveis, estas fazem parte, embora de forma limitada, das estratégias dos Estados-Membros destinadas a cumprir, até 2010, os respetivos objetivos nacionais no âmbito da Diretiva «Energias Renováveis». Simultaneamente, a Comissão reconheceu recentemente o futuro potencial desta fonte de energia tanto na Comunicação «Crescimento Azul» como na Comunicação «Energias Renováveis» (550).
Quanto à dimensão da política industrial, na Comunicação «Atualização das Ações de Política Industrial» (551), recentemente publicada, a Comissão reconhece explicitamente que as políticas da UE devem ser devidamente coordenadas e sincronizadas, como base para o êxito da política industrial. Ao mesmo tempo, indicava-se claramente que a sustentabilidade estava a ser integrada como princípio básico na política industrial europeia. 
De facto, uma base industrial forte é não só essencial para uma Europa rica e bem sucedida do ponto de vista económico, mas também para melhorar a utilização eficiente dos recursos e da energia em toda a economia, face à escassez de recursos a nível mundial, e para ajudar a encontrar soluções para outros desafios societais, como seja o das alterações climáticas. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010211/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Blue Growth — marine renewable energy sources and industrial policy
On 13 September 2012 the Commission submitted a communication entitled ‘Blue Growth — opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth’, in which it described the blue economy as the maritime dimension of the EU 2020 strategy, complementing the existing integrated maritime policy, and listed the areas on which the EU should focus its investment in order to tap their growth potential.
The five focus areas considered to have priority, that is to say, marine energy sources, aquaculture, maritime, coastal, and cruise tourism, prospection for, and the extraction of, marine minerals, and blue biotechnology, depend on, and are interconnected with, other marine and maritime activities.
At present, the blue economy provides 5.4 million jobs and gross added value of approximately EUR 500 million a year, figures which, by 2020, are expected to rise to 7 million jobs and EUR 600 million in gross added value.
Speaking at a conference in Lisbon on 26 October 2012, Commission Vice-President Antonio Tajani maintained that ecological thinking, without being jettisoned, needed to be dovetailed into the real economy: in his words, we have to help combat climate change, but the fact of forcing European companies to leave Europe will greatly undermine climate action. 
How does the Commission view the talk of altering ‘ecological thinking’ in order to prevent European companies from transferring their production out of Europe, bearing in mind that one of the ‘Blue Growth’ priority areas is renewable marine energy sources? Does this herald a more lax approach under EU legislation to climate action?
Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(6 February 2013)
The EU has set itself ambitious and binding targets for reducing its greenhouse gas emissions, enhancing energy efficiency and increasing the share of renewable energy until 2020 (the 20-20-20 targets). The Commission remains fully committed to ensuring that the relevant EU legislation is fully and correctly implemented (552). Moreover, a political commitment exists to reduce the EU's greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95% until 2050. Therefore there is no question of a more lax approach to climate action. 
As far as the development of marine renewable energy sources is concerned, these form part, albeit to a limited extent, of Member States' strategies to fulfil their national targets under the Renewable Energy Directive by 2020. At the same time the Commission has recently acknowledged the future potential of this energy source in both its Blue Growth as well as its Renewable Energy Communications (553).
As for the industrial policy dimension, in its recently published Industrial Policy Communication Update (554), the Commission explicitly acknowledged that EU policies must be properly coordinated and synchronised as a basis for a successful industrial policy. At the same time, it was also made clear that sustainability is being mainstreamed as a basic principle into European industrial policy. 
As a matter of fact, a strong industrial base is not only essential for a wealthy and economically successful Europe, but also in order to improve economy-wide energy‐ and resource-efficiency in the face of global resource scarcities and to help provide solutions to societal challenges such as climate change. 
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010212/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: O Crescimento Azul — A exploração e extração de minerais marinhos
Considerando que:






—


 A CE apresentou a 13 de setembro a Comunicação «Crescimento Azul — Oportunidades para um crescimento sustentável marinho e marítimo», onde sublinha que a economia azul é a dimensão marítima da Estratégia UE2020, complementar da já existente Política Marítima integrada, e aponta, por isso, as áreas de investimento prioritárias, áreas onde há um potencial de crescimento para a União;










—


 As 5 áreas de investimento que assinala como prioritárias, ou seja, as energias marinhas, a aquacultura, o turismo marítimo, costeiro e de cruzeiro, a exploração e extração de minerais marinhos e a biotecnologia azul, estão dependentes e interligadas a outras atividades marinhas e marítimas;










—


 Atualmente, a economia azul representa 5,4 milhões de empregos e um valor acrescentado bruto de cerca de 500 milhões de euros por ano; em 2020, a previsão é de 7 milhões de empregos e de um valor acrescentado bruto de 600 milhões de euros;




Pergunta-se à Comissão: 







Sendo a exploração e extração de minerais marinhos uma das prioridades, como pretende a UE promover o desenvolvimento da exploração e extração de minerais marinhos nos Estados-Membros, dada a necessidade de um elevado investimento em estudos e conhecimento do fundo e do subfundo marinho, antes mesmo do início da exploração em si?











Uma vez que existem elevados riscos ambientais, caso haja uma exploração descuidada, pretende a Comissão dar algum tipo de apoio aos Estados-Membros para a criação de legislação específica?




Resposta dada por Antonio Tajani em nome da Comissão
(22 de janeiro de 2013)






1.


O programa de investigação e inovação da UE é um mecanismo básico para a promoção do crescimento azul, que inclui, através da apresentação de propostas para o 7.° PQ, uma investigação sobre o impacto da exploração mineira dos fundos marinhos e uma sobre o desenvolvimento de tecnologias em ambientes extremos, incluindo os fundos marinhos. A realização de I&I relativas à exploração segura e sustentável dos recursos minerais e biológicos dos fundos marinhos foi identificada na proposta da Comissão relativa ao programa Horizonte 2020 como uma das cinco prioridades que exigem uma abordagem inter-temática.




No futuro, os minerais marinhos farão parte da Parceria Europeia de Inovação sobre Matérias-Primas, abordada nos pacotes de trabalho relacionados com o desenvolvimento de tecnologias e soluções inovadoras para o fornecimento seguro e sustentável de matérias-primas e com o melhoramento do quadro regulamentar e da base de conhecimentos da UE relativos a matérias-primas.






2.


A exploração e extração em zonas marinhas devem ter em conta todos os riscos ambientais, incluindo a biodiversidade. A Diretiva 2008/56/CE introduz uma abordagem ecossistémica à gestão das atividades humanas que afetam os ambientes marinhos. Os Estados-Membros serão, portanto, obrigados a avaliar, monitorizar e, se necessário, tomar medidas para abordar os impactos ambientais da extração de minérios. 




A extração de minérios através da dragagem marinha encontra-se enumerada no anexo II da Diretiva 2011/92/UE e os Estados-Membros têm decidir se a devem submeter a uma avaliação de impacto ambiental. A exploração e a extração mineral marinha também devem estar em conformidade com a Diretiva «habitats», no que diz respeito ao impacto em áreas protegidas ao abrigo da rede Natura 2000. A Comissão pretende completar esta rede no meio marinho. As orientações da rede Natura 2000 relativas à extração de minerais incluem as zonas marinhas.
A Comissão não considera que, nesta fase, seja necessária mais legislação.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010212/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Blue Growth — prospection for, and extraction of, marine minerals
On 13 September 2012 the Commission submitted a communication entitled ‘Blue Growth — opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth
’, in which it described the blue economy as the maritime dimension of the EU 2020 strategy, complementing the existing integrated maritime policy, and listed the areas on which the EU should focus its investment in order to tap their growth potential.
The five focus areas considered to have priority, that is to say, marine energy sources, aquaculture, maritime, coastal, and cruise tourism, prospection for, and the extraction of, marine minerals, and blue biotechnology, depend on, and are interconnected with, other marine and maritime activities.
At present, the blue economy provides 5.4 million jobs and gross added value of approximately EUR 500 million a year, figures which, by 2020, are expected to rise to 7 million jobs and EUR 600 million in gross added value.






1.


Given that prospection for, and the extraction of, marine minerals constitute a priority, how will the EU promote the development of this field in Member States, bearing in mind that substantial investment in research will be needed in order to acquire knowledge of the seabed and the subsea floor, before exploration as such can even start?










2.


Given that the environmental risks would be high if exploration were not carried out with due care, will the Commission provide any form of support to help Member States draw up specific legislation?




Answer given by Mr Tajani  on behalf of the Commission
(22 January 2013)






1.


The EU's research and innovation programme is a primary mechanism for promoting blue growth, including through FP7 calls, one on the impacts of deep-sea mining and another on developing technologies in extreme environments, including deep-sea. R&I on safe and sustainable exploitation of deep-sea mineral and biological resources have been identified in the Commission's proposal for Horizon 2020 as one of the 5 priorities requiring a cross-thematic approach.




In future, marine minerals will be part of the European Innovation Partnership on Raw Materials, addressed in the work packages on developing innovative technologies and solutions for sustainable and safe raw materials supply and on improving the EU's raw materials regulatory framework and knowledge base.






2.


Exploration and extraction in marine zones must take into account all environmental risks, including biodiversity. Directive 2008/56/EC introduces an ecosystem-based approach to the management of all human activities affecting marine environments. Member States will thus have to assess, monitor and, if necessary, take measures to address environmental impacts from mineral extraction. 




Extraction of minerals by marine dredging is listed in Annex II of Directive 2011/92/EU and Member States must decide whether to submit them to an environmental impact assessment. Marine mineral exploration and extraction should also comply with the Habitats Directive, as to potential impacts on areas protected under the Natura 2000 network. The Commission seeks the completion of this network in the marine environment. The Natura 2000 guidelines on mineral extraction already include marine zones.
The Commission does not see at this stage a need for additional legislation.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010213/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante)
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — O Crescimento Azul — Turismo
Considerando o seguinte:






—


 A CE apresentou a 13 de setembro a Comunicação «Crescimento Azul, oportunidades para um crescimento sustentável marinho e marítimo», onde sublinha que a economia azul é a dimensão marítima da Estratégia UE2020, complementar da já existente Política Marítima integrada, e aponta, por isso, as áreas de investimento prioritárias, áreas onde há um potencial de crescimento para a União;










—


 As 5 áreas de investimento que assinala como prioritárias, ou seja, as energias marinhas, a aquacultura, o turismo marítimo, costeiro e de cruzeiro, a exploração e extração de minerais marinhos e a biotecnologia azul, estão dependentes e interligadas a outras atividades marinhas e marítimas;










—


 Atualmente, a economia azul representa 5,4 milhões de empregos e um valor acrescentado bruto de cerca de 500 milhões de euros por ano, e em 2020, a previsão é de 7 milhões de empregos e de um valor acrescentado bruto de 600 milhões de euros;










—


 O turismo marítimo e costeiro representa atualmente a maior atividade económica marítima, representado 1,1 % do total de emprego na UE; 




Pergunta-se à Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante: 







Um dos desafios que o turismo marítimo enfrenta é a sazonalidade. Tendo em conta a ação preparatória «Calypso», está a Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante a pensar apresentar novos instrumentos e/ou programas neste sentido?











A falta de capital humano qualificado leva por vezes à prestação de serviços sem qualidade. Pensa a Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante apresentar um intercâmbio ou programa de estágios e formação para as profissões ligadas ao Turismo?











Uma vez que o QFP 2014-2020 não apresenta nenhuma rubrica para o Turismo, com que instrumentos e fundos pensa apoiar o setor do Turismo?




Resposta dada por Antonio Tajani em nome da Comissão
(11 de fevereiro de 2013)







1.


A ação preparatória Calypso foi lançada em 2009 para promover o turismo na época baixa e assim contribuir para combater a sazonalidade. Ao longo dos três anos de existência da ação preparatória










1.


A ação preparatória Calypso foi lançada em 2009 para promover o turismo na época baixa e assim contribuir para combater a sazonalidade. Ao longo dos três anos de existência da ação preparatória




 (555), a Comissão implementou com sucesso uma série de ações para assistir os Estados-Membros no desenvolvimento da época baixa de turismo (556). Porém, os esforços nesta área não cessaram com o fim do período de ação preparatória. Foram garantidos recursos financeiros adequados para as ações da Calypso ao abrigo dos programas de trabalho do PEEI de 2012 e 2013 (557). 






2.


O Programa de aprendizagem ao longo da vida prevê uma série de possibilidades de intercâmbios e formações e tem sido usado regularmente para projetos na área do turismo. Além disso, será lançado um projeto de aliança setorial de competências na área do turismo em 2013 para abordar os desafios das lacunas, insuficiências e não-correspondências nas competências que propõe soluções realistas e sustentáveis para o desenvolvimento dos recursos humanos em toda a Europa










2.


O Programa de aprendizagem ao longo da vida prevê uma série de possibilidades de intercâmbios e formações e tem sido usado regularmente para projetos na área do turismo. Além disso, será lançado um projeto de aliança setorial de competências na área do turismo em 2013 para abordar os desafios das lacunas, insuficiências e não-correspondências nas competências que propõe soluções realistas e sustentáveis para o desenvolvimento dos recursos humanos em toda a Europa




 (558). Além disso, a Comissão iniciou os seus trabalhos relativos à integração de secções específicas e de «passaportes de competências» no portal da mobilidade profissional EURES para os setores da hotelaria e da restauração, do turismo de aventura, do turismo de cultura e também do segmento marítimo e de cruzeiros (559). 






3.


No que diz respeito ao quadro financeiro plurianual de 2014-2020










3.


No que diz respeito ao quadro financeiro plurianual de 2014-2020




 (560), a Comissão propôs que fossem incluídas ações europeias e transacionais de valor acrescentado para o turismo no âmbito do futuro Programa para a Competitividade das Empresas e PME (561) com as dotações orçamentais adequadas (562). O financiamento de projetos e de investimentos no setor do turismo poderá também ser acedido ao abrigo de outros programas financeiros do futuro QFP, em conformidade com e sob reserva dos seus respetivos objetivos, requisitos e critérios de seleção (563).(English version)
Question for written answer E-010213/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Blue Growth — tourism
On 13 September 2012 the Commission submitted a communication entitled ‘Blue Growth — opportunities for marine and maritime sustainable growth’, in which it described the blue economy as the maritime dimension of the EU 2020 strategy, complementing the existing integrated maritime policy, and listed the areas on which the EU should focus its investment in order to tap their growth potential.
The five focus areas considered to have priority, that is to say, marine energy sources, aquaculture, maritime, coastal, and cruise tourism, prospection for, and the extraction of, marine minerals, and blue biotechnology, depend on, and are interconnected with, other marine and maritime activities.
At present, the blue economy provides 5.4 million jobs and gross added value of approximately EUR 500 million a year, figures which, by 2020, are expected to rise to 7 million jobs and EUR 600 million in gross added value.
Maritime and coastal tourism is currently the largest maritime economic activity, accounting for 1.1% of total employment in the EU. 






1.


One of the challenges for maritime tourism is seasonality. Taking into account the 




‘Calypso’ preparatory action, is the Vice-President/High Representative thinking of producing new measures and/or programmes along the same lines? 






2.


Because there is not enough skilled human capital, the services provided sometimes fall short of the requisite quality. Will the Vice-President/High Representative propose exchange arrangements or a traineeship and training programme for tourism-related professions?










3.


Given that there is no heading for tourism in the 2014-2020 MAFF, which instruments and funds will be used to support the tourism sector?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(11 February 2013)







1.


The CALYPSO preparatory action was launched in 2009 to promote tourism in the low season and thereby contribute to combating seasonality. Throughout the three-year life span of the preparatory action










1.


The CALYPSO preparatory action was launched in 2009 to promote tourism in the low season and thereby contribute to combating seasonality. Throughout the three-year life span of the preparatory action




 (564), the Commission successfully implemented a series of actions to assist Member States in developing low season tourism (565). Its endeavours within this field did not stop however with the end of the preparatory action period. Appropriate financial resources were secured for CALYPSO actions under the 2012 and 2013 Work Programmes of the EIP (566). 






2.


The Lifelong Learning Programme foresees a range of possibilities for exchanges and trainings and have been regularly used for projects in tourism. In addition to that, a Sector Skills Alliance project on tourism will be launched in 2013 to address the challenges of skills gaps, shortages and mismatches, proposing realistic and sustainable solutions for human resource development across Europe










2.


The Lifelong Learning Programme foresees a range of possibilities for exchanges and trainings and have been regularly used for projects in tourism. In addition to that, a Sector Skills Alliance project on tourism will be launched in 2013 to address the challenges of skills gaps, shortages and mismatches, proposing realistic and sustainable solutions for human resource development across Europe




 (567). Moreover, the Commission has started working on the integration in the EURES job mobility portal of dedicated sections and ‘skills passports’ for the hospitality sector, adventure tourism, cultural tourism, as well as the marine and cruise segment (568). 






3.


For the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework










3.


For the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework




 (569), the Commission proposed European and transnational added-value tourism actions to be included in the scope of the future Programme for the Competitiveness of enterprises and SMEs (570) with appropriate budget allocations (571). Funding for projects and investments in the tourism sector could however also be accessible under different other EU financial programmes of the future MFF, in line with and subject to their respective objectives, requirements and selection criteria (572).(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010214/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Consequências da desindustrialização na União Europeia
Tendo em conta que:






—


 Num artigo publicado no Diário de Notícias de Portugal, o Comissário da UE responsável pela Indústria e o Comissário da UE responsável pela Energia referiram que «a tendência para a desindustrialização das economias europeias, que já está em curso, poderá vir a acelerar-se. De 2000 a 2011, a parte da indústria no valor acrescentado bruto produzido na UE diminuiu para cerca de 16 % do PIB»;










—


 No mesmo artigo de opinião, os Comissários Europeus salientam que «precisamos de uma política industrial pró-ativa. Essa política deverá partir do pressuposto de que uma base produtiva forte poderá contribuir significativamente para que a União europeia saia da crise em que atualmente se encontra»;










—


 O vice-presidente da Comissão europeia, Antonio Tajani, referiu que «é preciso reduzir a dívida pública e para o conseguir são necessários sacrifícios. Mas é fundamental trabalhar no segundo pilar, o do crescimento. Não podemos pedir aos europeus para fazerem sacrifícios se não houver uma estratégia em favor do trabalho, ou seja, do crescimento»;










—


 A 10 de outubro de 2012, a Comissão Europeia apresentou a comunicação intitulada «Reforçar a indústria europeia em prol do crescimento e da recuperação económica» que tem como objetivo relançar a atividade económica e a criação de emprego, sendo necessário inverter rapidamente a trajetória de declínio verificada e enfrentar os desafios do século XXI.




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Quais os setores económicos que foram mais afetados na última década pela desindustrialização?











Quais os Estados-Membros onde se verificaram maiores consequências económicas e sociais devido à desindustrialização? Quantos postos de trabalho foram perdidos na União Europeia e em cada Estado-Membro?











Se alguns setores de atividade económica foram penalizados pela desindustrialização e se a CE apenas pretende apostar nos que atualmente são mais fortes, não considera que está a contribuir para a eliminação daqueles setores industriais mais fracos e desprotegidos?




Resposta dada por Antonio Tajani em nome da Comissão
(8 de janeiro de 2013)







1.


A indústria da UE mudou radicalmente nos últimos 10-15 anos. Vários setores










1.


A indústria da UE mudou radicalmente nos últimos 10-15 anos. Vários setores




 (573) já se encontravam em processo de reestruturação e de redução de mão-de-obra ainda antes da atual desaceleração. Além disso, o impacto da recente crise económica tem sido bastante severo para a maioria dos setores industriais. Os setores financeiro e de bens intermédios foram os mais afetados e alguns deles ainda continuam a sofrer problemas particulares que são causados principalmente por capacidades estruturais excedentárias criadas antes da crise. 





2.


O emprego na indústria diminuiu em quase todos os Estados-Membros desde 2001. Em 8 deles, o emprego diminuiu em mais de 20 %, sendo a Irlanda, Malta e Letónia os países mais afetados. O valor acrescentado da indústria diminuiu num terço dos Estados-Membros, entre 2001 e 2011. O Luxemburgo, a Dinamarca e o Reino Unido registaram as maiores descidas, enquanto o maior crescimento industrial foi verificado na República Checa, na Polónia e na Eslováquia.










3.


A Comissão não está a escolher vencedores, mas irá dar seguimento à sua abordagem horizontal da política industrial. Isto não exclui iniciativas dirigidas às necessidades específicas de alguns setores. A seleção de seis linhas de ação prioritárias na recente comunicação sobre política industrial baseou-se num consenso mais abrangente que reflete os resultados de uma extensa consulta pública realizada no verão passado. Estas são as áreas onde a mudança tecnológica é urgente e que irão criar um crescimento sustentável nos próximos anos. Porém, tal não implica que outros setores não irão beneficiar da nossa política. A introdução de novas tecnologias desenvolvidas nestas linhas de ação irá aumentar a competitividade nos setores tradicionais, tais como no elétrico e na engenharia mecânica.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010214/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Consequences of deindustrialisation in the European Union
Taking into account that:






—


 In an article published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias, the EU Commissioner responsible for Industry and the EU Commissioner responsible for Energy said that ‘the trend towards deindustrialisation in the European economies, which is already under way, may speed up. From 2000 to 2011, industry's share in the EU's gross value added fell to around 16% of GDP’;










—


 In the same opinion piece, the European Commissioners stress that ‘we need a proactive industrial policy. That policy must be based on the assumption that a strong production base can significantly help the European Union emerge from the current crisis’;










—


 The vice-president of the European Commission, Antonio Tajani, said that ‘public debt must be cut and sacrifices are needed to achieve this. But it is also essential to work on the second pillar, i.e. growth. We cannot ask Europeans to make sacrifices in the absence of a strategy for employment, that is, for growth’;










—


 On 10 October 2012, the European Commission presented a communication with the title ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’, the aim of which is to relaunch economic activity and job creation, given the urgent need to reverse the downward trajectory we have seen and to face the challenges of the 21st century.




Will the Commission say:







Which economic sectors have been most affected by deindustrialisation over the past decade?











Which Member States have experienced the most severe economic and social consequences of deindustrialisation? How many jobs have been lost in the European Union and in each Member State?











If some sectors of economic activity have suffered deindustrialisation but the Commission only wishes to support sectors which are currently strongest, does it not think that this will contribute to the elimination of weaker and less protected industrial sectors?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)







1.


EU industry has changed radically over the last 10-15 years. A number of sectors










1.


EU industry has changed radically over the last 10-15 years. A number of sectors




 (574) were undergoing restructuring and downsizing already before the current downturn. In addition, the impact of the recent financial crisis has been quite severe for most of the industrial sectors. Capital and intermediate goods sectors have suffered the most and some of them continue to experience particular problems, which are mainly triggered by structural excess capacities built up before the crisis. 





2.


Employment in industry has decreased in almost all Member States since 2001. In 8 of them employment fell by more than 20% with Ireland, Malta and Latvia being the most severely affected. The industrial added-value decreased in one third of the Member States between 2001 and 2011. Luxembourg, Denmark and the United Kingdom registered the highest declines, whilst the strongest industrial growth was registered in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia.










3.


The Commission is not picking winners, but will continue its horizontal approach to industrial policy. This does not exclude initiatives tailored to the specific needs of some sectors. The selection of six priority action lines in the recent industrial policy communication was based on a broad consensus reflecting the results of an extensive public consultation conducted last summer. These are the areas where technological change is urgent and that will generate sustainable growth in the coming years. But this does not imply that other sectors will not benefit from our policy. The introduction of new technologies developed in these action lines will increase the competitiveness in traditional sectors, such as electrical or mechanical engineering.




(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010215/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Diferença entre taxa de compromisso e taxa de execução no QREN 2007-2013
Tendo em conta que:






—


 O QREN define o enquadramento da política comunitária no que diz respeito à coesão económica, social e territorial no período compreendido entre 2007 e 2013, prevendo operações que, pela sua dimensão financeira, terão de ser alvo de uma avaliação pormenorizada por parte das instituições europeias;










—


 O apoio a estas operações, designadas por «Grandes Projetos», rege-se pelas disposições previstas no Regulamento (CE) n.° 1083/2006 do Conselho, de 11 de julho, com as alterações introduzidas pela entrada em vigor do Regulamento (CE) n.° 284/2009 do Conselho, de 7 de abril, e do Regulamento (UE) n.° 539/2010 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 16 de junho;










—


 Segundo o Boletim Informativo número 17 do QREN, que possui informação reportada até setembro de 2012, Portugal possui uma taxa de compromisso de 84,3 % e uma taxa de execução de 50,6 %, existindo uma grande disparidade nacional entre projetos comprometidos e projetos executados;










—


 Este problema é naturalmente saliente nos Programas Nacionais e regionais, dado que existe alguma dificuldade para cada entidade comparticipar a sua quota-parte de investimento.




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Quais as melhores práticas adotadas a nível europeu que poderão contribuir para reduzir a disparidade verificada entre taxa de compromisso e taxa de execução?











Como é que Portugal poderá rapidamente reduzir este diferencial de execução de projetos comunitários?




Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão 
(8 de janeiro de 2013)
Não existem orientações que possam ser usadas de forma universal para acelerar a taxa de execução financeira dos programas uma vez que as causas subjacentes podem ser bastante distintas e, portanto, têm de ser tomadas diferentes medidas corretivas.
No caso dos programas portugueses, a taxa de absorção financeira está claramente acima da média da UE. As autoridades nacionais adotaram várias medidas para acelerar a implementação e, assim, reduzir a disparidade entre a taxa de compromisso e a taxa de execução. Essas incluíram o aumento das taxas de cofinanciamento do projeto de fundos estruturais da UE que se refletiu de seguida nos programas modificados adotados pela Comissão, bem como o aumento dos pagamentos adiantados, o que permitiu simplificar as regras administrativas e anular os fundos para projetos aprovados que ainda não tinham sido iniciados devido a atrasos graves e que não poderiam, portanto, ser implementados atempadamente.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010215/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Difference between commitment rate and implementation rate in 2007-2013 NSRF
Taking into account that:






—


 The NSRF establishes the framework of Community policy on economic, social and territorial cohesion for the period 2007 to 2013, providing for operations which, given their financial dimension, will require detailed evaluation by the European institutions;










—


 Support for these operations, known as ‘major projects’, is governed by the provisions laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006, with modifications introduced by the entry into force of Council Regulation (EC) No 284/2009 of 7 April 2009 and of Regulation (EU) No 539/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 June 2010;










—


 According to NSRF Information bulletin No 17, which contains information up to September 2012, Portugal has a commitment rate of 84.3% and an implementation rate of 50.6%, indicating a wide disparity at national level between projects committed to and projects implemented;










—


 This problem is naturally salient in the national and regional programmes, given that it is somewhat difficult for each body to contribute its share of investment.




I would ask the Commission:







What are the best practices at European level that can help reduce the observed disparity between commitment rate and implementation rate?











How can Portugal swiftly reduce this implementation shortfall in Community projects?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(8 January 2013)
There are no guidelines that can be universally used to accelerate the financial absorption rate of programmes, as the underlying causes can be very distinct and therefore different corrective measures have to be undertaken.
In the case of the Portuguese programmes, the financial absorption rate is clearly above the EU average. The national authorities have taken a number of measures to accelerate implementation and therefore reduce the gap between committed funding and financial absorption. These included increasing project EU Structural Funds co-financing rates which were subsequently reflected in the modified programmes adopted by the Commission, and increasing advance payments, simplifying administrative rules and de-committing funds for approved projects that had not yet started due to serious delays and that could therefore no longer be implemented in due time.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010216/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Elegibilidade das regiões insulares na dotação específica adicional
Tendo em conta que:






—


 Em junho de 2011, a Comissão Europeia apresentou a proposta de QFP com um orçamento (autorizações de compromisso) de 1.033 mil milhões de euros, equivalente a 1,11 % do PIB Europeu;










—


 As verbas da Política de Coesão, orçamentadas em 339 mil milhões de euros, distribuem-se da seguinte forma: regiões menos desenvolvidas: 163,6 mil milhões de euros; regiões em transição: 36,5 mil milhões de euros; regiões mais desenvolvidas: 55,4 mil milhões de euros; Fundo de Coesão: 70,7 mil milhões de euros; cooperação territorial europeia: 11,9 mil milhões de euros; dotação específica adicional: 925 milhões de euros;










—


 O orçamento da dotação específica adicional é reduzido de 1.738 milhões de euros em 2007-2013 para 925 milhões de euros e, desta vez, ainda abrange as regiões que são ilhas, o que não estava confinado na proposta inicial da CE. O financiamento para a Madeira e Açores reduz-se de 35 euros/habitante para 20 euros/habitante;










—


 No documento de «Negotiating Box», de 29 de outubro de 2012, que o Conselho utiliza para as suas negociações é referido no método de alocação da dotação específica adicional que são elegíveis as regiões ultraperiféricas, regiões escassamente povoadas e regiões insulares;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Quais as regiões insulares NUTS 2 existentes na União Europeia?











Concorda com o facto de estas regiões europeias serem também elegíveis na dotação específica adicional, conforme apresenta o Conselho?




Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão
(14 de dezembro de 2012)






1.


As seguintes regiões NUTS 2 são compostas exclusivamente por uma ou mais ilhas:










EL41


Voreio Aigaio 




EL42


Notio Aigaio 




EL43


Kriti (Creta)




Es53


Illes Balears




Es70


Canarias




FR83


Corse




FR91


Guadaloupe




FR92


Martinique




FR94


Réunion




ITG1


Sicilia




ITG2


Sardegna




CY00


Κύπρος (Chipre)




MT00


Malta




PT20


Região Autónoma dos Açores




PT30


Região Autónoma da Madeira




FI20


Åland










2.


De acordo com a interpretação que a Comissão faz do quadro de negociações do QFP, a atribuição da dotação especial diz respeito apenas às regiões ultraperiféricas e às regiões nórdicas escassamente povoadas.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010216/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Eligibility of island regions for specific additional allocation
Taking into account that:






—


In June 2011, the European Commission presented a proposal for a multiannual financial framework with a budget (commitment authorisations) of EUR 1,033 thousand million, equivalent to 1.11% of European GDP;










—


Cohesion Policy payments, for which EUR 339 thousand million are budgeted, break down as follows: less developed regions: EUR 163.6 thousand million; transition regions: EUR 36.5 thousand million; more developed regions: EUR 55.4 thousand million; Cohesion Fund: EUR 70.7 thousand million; European territorial cooperation: EUR 11.9 thousand million; specific additional allocation, EUR 925 million;










—


The specific additional allocation budget has shrunk from EUR 1,738 million for 2007-2013 to EUR 925 million and this time round also covers regions which are islands, which was not the case in the Commission's initial proposal. Funding for Madeira and the Azores has fallen from EUR 35 per inhabitant to EUR 20 per inhabitant;










—


In the Negotiating Box document of 29 October 2012, which the Council uses for its negotiations, it is stated in the method for assigning the specific additional allocation that the outermost regions, sparsely populated regions and island regions are eligible.




I would ask the Commission:







What are the existing NUTS 2 regions in the European Union?











Does it agree with these European regions also being eligible for specific additional allocations, as proposed by the Council?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(14 December 2012)






1.


The following NUTS2 regions are composed exclusively of one or more islands:










EL41


Voreio Aigaio 




EL42


Notio Aigaio 




EL43


Kriti




ES53


Illes Balears




ES70


Canarias




FR83


Corse




FR91


Guadeloupe




FR92


Martinique




FR94


Réunion




ITG1


Sicilia




ITG2


Sardegna




CY00


Kypros




MT00


Malta




PT20


Região Autónoma dos Açores




PT30


Região Autónoma da Madeira




FI20


Åland










2.


According to the Commission's interpretation of the MFF negotiating box, the assignment of the special allocation only refers to the outermost regions and the sparsely populated nordic regions. 




(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010217/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Grandes Projetos notificados à Comissão Europeia
Tendo em conta que:






—


 O QREN define o enquadramento da política comunitária no que diz respeito à coesão económica, social e territorial no período compreendido entre 2007 e 2013, prevendo operações que, pela sua dimensão financeira, terão de ser alvo de uma avaliação pormenorizada por parte das instituições europeias;










—


 O apoio a estas operações, designadas por «Grandes Projetos», rege-se pelas disposições previstas no Regulamento (CE) n.° 1083/2006 do Conselho, de 11 de julho, com as alterações introduzidas pela entrada em vigor do Regulamento (CE) n.° 284/2009 do Conselho, de 7 de abril, e do Regulamento (UE) n.° 539/2010 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 16 de junho;










—


 Segundo o Boletim Informativo número 17 do QREN, que possui informação reportada até setembro de 2012, Portugal apresentou à Comissão Europeia 28 grandes projetos, tendo o país já desistido de 6 (Repsol Polímeros Lda; Rede ferroviária de alta velocidade em Portugal — Eixo Lisboa/Madrid: Subtroço Poceirão/Évora; Adutor Brinches — Enxoé; Águas de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro — Saneamento do Douro — 7. a fase; Criação de uma unidade industrial de biodiesel; Aquisição de 2 navios para transporte inter-ilhas de passageiros e viaturas) e 1 projeto não foi admitido (Modernização e Requalificação de Escolas com Ensino Secundário — Região Norte, Lote 3);










—


 Portugal tem assim 21 grandes projetos em curso;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Qual o nível de desenvolvimento e implementação no terreno de cada um destes 21 projetos?











Apresentou Portugal mais algum grande projeto para ser alvo de financiamento comunitário?




Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão
(21 de janeiro de 2013)






1.


De um total de 21 grandes projetos aceites para apreciação, 12 foram já aprovados pela Comissão. Quatro destes projetos foram objeto de um pedido de alteração:










—


 Está em preparação uma decisão de alteração do projeto «Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos do Litoral Centro», integrado no programa Valorização do Território (VT);










—


 A Comissão avalia presentemente o projeto «Centro de rastreio de satélites» na Madeira e a «Ligação Pisão-Roxo» do programa VT;










—


 O procedimento de avaliação do projeto «Hospital Pediátrico de Coimbra» foi interrompido; as autoridades portuguesas têm de rever a candidatura. 




Embora a adoção dos grandes projetos seja da competência da Comissão, cabe aos Estados‐Membros e às autoridades do programa monitorizar a sua implementação. Por conseguinte, para mais informações sobre a implementação dos grandes projetos, a Comissão sugere que o Senhor Deputado consulte os relatórios anuais dos programas, disponíveis nos respetivos sítios Web (www.qren.pt).
Os procedimentos de aprovação dos restantes nove projetos foram interrompidos uma vez que as autoridades portuguesas têm de rever as candidaturas. 






2.


As autoridades portuguesas não apresentaram quaisquer grandes projetos adicionais após a publicação do relatório do Quadro de Referência Estratégico Nacional em setembro de 2012. A Comissão espera que sejam ainda apresentados outros sete grandes projetos antes do fim do atual período, seis no âmbito do programa VT e um no âmbito do programa 




«Fatores de competitividade». 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010217/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Major projects notified to the Commission
The NSRFs have established the basis for EU economic, social, and territorial cohesion policy between 2007 and 2013; because of their financial scale, some of the operations covered have to be assessed in detail by the European institutions.
Support for these operations, termed ‘major projects’, is governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 284/2009 of 7 April 2009 and Regulation (EU) No 539/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 June 2010.
According to a report on the state of play of Portugal’s NSRF up to September 2012 (575), Portugal initially submitted 28 major projects to the Commission, of which 6 have been abandoned (Repsol Polimeros Lda; high-speed rail network in Portugal — Poceirão to Évora subsection of the Lisbon to Madrid axis; Brinches to Enxoé delivery pipeline; Trás-os-Montes and Upper Douro waters — seventh phase of the Douro improvement programme; construction of a bio-diesel plant; and the purchase of two inter-island passenger and vehicle transport vessels) and 1 was rejected (modernisation and upgrading of secondary schools — North Region, Lot 3).
Portugal thus has 21 major projects under way.






1.


How far have these 21 projects progressed, and what is the position in each case as regards implementation on the ground?










2.


Has Portugal submitted any further major projects to be financed by the EU?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(21 January 2013)






1.


Out of a total of 21 major projects accepted for appraisal, 12 have already been approved by the Commission. Four of these projects have been subject to a modification request:










—


 A modification decision is being prepared for ‘Resíduos Sólidos Urbanos do Litoral Centro’ in programme Valorização do Território (VT);










—


 The Commission is appraising ‘Centro de rastreio de satélites’ in Madeira and ‘Ligação Pisão-Roxo’ in programme-VT;










—


 The appraisal procedure is interrupted for ‘Hospital Pediátrico de Coimbra’; the Portuguese authorities have to revise the application. 




While the Commission adopts major projects, it is for the Member State and the programme authorities to monitor project implementation. Consequently, for further information on major project implementation, the Commission suggests that the Honourable Member consult the annual reports of the programmes which are available on their respective websites (www.qren.pt).
The approval procedures for the remaining nine projects are currently interrupted because the Portuguese authorities have to revise the applications. 






2.


The Portuguese authorities have not submitted any new major projects since the National Strategic Reference Framework report was published in September 2012. The Commission expects seven further major projects to be submitted before the end of the current period, six under the VT programme and one under the programme 




‘Compete’. 
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010218/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Grandes Projectos desenvolvidos na Região Autónoma da Madeira e notificados à Comissão Europeia
Tendo em conta que:






—


 O QREN define o enquadramento da política comunitária no que diz respeito à coesão económica, social e territorial no período compreendido entre 2007 e 2013, prevendo operações que, pela sua dimensão financeira, terão de ser alvo de uma avaliação pormenorizada por parte das instituições europeias;










—


 O apoio a estas operações, designadas por «Grandes Projetos», rege-se pelas disposições previstas no Regulamento (CE) n.° 1083/2006 do Conselho, de 11 de julho, com as alterações introduzidas pela entrada em vigor do Regulamento (CE) n.° 284/2009 do Conselho, de 7 de abril, e do Regulamento (UE) n.° 539/2010 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 16 de junho;










—


 Segundo o Boletim Informativo número 17 do QREN, que possui informação reportada até setembro de 2012, Portugal apresentou à Comissão Europeia 28 grandes projetos, tendo o país já desistido de 6 (Repsol Polímeros Lda; Rede ferroviária de alta velocidade em Portugal — Eixo Lisboa/Madrid: Subtroço Poceirão/Évora; Adutor Brinches — Enxoé; Águas de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro — Saneamento do Douro — 7.a fase; Criação de uma unidade industrial de biodiesel; Aquisição de 2 navios para transporte inter-ilhas de passageiros e viaturas) e 1 projeto não foi admitido (Modernização e Requalificação de Escolas com Ensino Secundário — Região Norte, Lote 3);










—


 Portugal tem assim 21 grandes projetos em curso;










—


 Um dos Grandes Projetos está a ser desenvolvido na Região Autónoma da Madeira intitulando-se «Instalação de um centro de rastreio de satélites e fornecimento de capacidade satelitar» no valor de 86,127 milhões de euros, tendo recebido um apoio comunitário de 2,775 milhões de euros;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Qual o valor acrescentado europeu que espera gerar com este projeto desenvolvido em Portugal?











Como será possível integrar este investimento na globalidade dos investimentos realizados pela Comissão Europeia na área dos satélites?




Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão
(22 de janeiro de 2013)
A decisão de propor o cofinanciamento para o grande projeto de um centro de localização de satélites na Madeira foi tomada inicialmente pelas autoridades regionais competentes em conformidade com os objetivos do programa «Intervir+» de 2007-2013. De seguida, a Comissão analisou e aprovou a candidatura a um grande projeto, enviada pelas autoridades portuguesas, tomando estes objetivos em consideração, especialmente o reforço da economia regional através do apoio aos setores chave e aos principais intervenientes da região.
A decisão de apoiar este projeto não está explicitamente ligada à política da UE em matéria de telecomunicações ou sistemas de localização de satélites. O apoio financeiro dado a este projeto deve ser visto essencialmente como um apoio ao desenvolvimento da economia regional da Madeira. Não obstante, a Comissão espera que as autoridades do programa garantam que o projeto é implantado em conformidade com os objetivos políticos da UE nesta área.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010218/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Major projects in the Autonomous Region of Madeira notified to the Commission
The NSRFs have established the basis for EU economic, social, and territorial cohesion policy between 2007 and 2013; because of their financial scale, some of the operations covered have to be assessed in detail by the European institutions.
Support for these operations, termed ‘major projects’, is governed by Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 284/2009 of 7 April 2009 and Regulation (EU) No 539/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 June 2010.
According to a report on the state of play of Portugal’s NSRF up to September 2012 (576), Portugal initially submitted 28 major projects to the Commission, of which 6 have been abandoned (Repsol Polimeros Lda; high-speed rail network in Portugal — Poceirão to Évora subsection of the Lisbon to Madrid axis; Brinches to Enxoé delivery pipeline; Trás-os-Montes and Upper Douro waters — seventh phase of the Douro improvement programme; construction of a bio-diesel plant; and the purchase of two inter-island passenger and vehicle transport vessels) and 1 was rejected (modernisation and upgrading of secondary schools — North Region, Lot 3).
Portugal thus has 21 major projects under way.
There is a major project being implemented in the Autonomous Region of Madeira with the aim of setting up a satellite tracking centre and providing satellite capacity; this project, involving a total cost of EUR 86.127 million, has received EU support amounting to EUR 2.775 million.






1.


What European added value is the Commission hoping to generate with this last-mentioned Portuguese project?










2.


How can the investment concerned be integrated into the Commission’s overall investment in the satellite field?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(22 January 2013)
The decision to propose co-financing the major project for a satellite tracking centre on Madeira was initially taken by the relevant regional authorities in accordance with the objectives of the 2007-2013 programme ‘Intervir+’. The Commission then analysed and approved the major project application submitted by the Portuguese authorities, taking into consideration these objectives, especially the enhancement of the regional economy through support to key sectors and key regional players.
The decision to support such a project is not explicitly linked to the EU's policy on telecommunications or satellite tracking systems. The financial support for this project should essentially be understood as support for the development of the regional economy in Madeira. Nevertheless, the Commission expects that the programme authorities will ensure that the project is implemented in line with the EU's policy goals in this area.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010219/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Importância dos custos energéticos industriais para uma maior competitividade empresarial
Tendo em conta que:






—


 A Europa está a atravessar sérias dificuldades económicas e financeiras, levando alguns países a adotarem duras medidas de austeridade com vista ao equilíbrio das suas contas públicas;










—


 O tecido industrial europeu é responsável por 80 % da inovação realizada e as suas mercadorias representam 75 % das exportações;










—


 O período de crise económica que se vive tem colocado a indústria europeia sob forte pressão, não só porque a produção está 10 % abaixo do nível registado anteriormente à crise, mas também porque já foram eliminados mais de 3 milhões de postos de trabalho;










—


 Num artigo publicado no Diário de Notícias de Portugal, o Comissário da UE responsável pela Indústria e o Comissário da UE responsável pela Energia referiram que «noutras regiões do mundo, em particular nos EUA e no Canadá, os preços da energia mantiveram‐se relativamente estáveis. Tendo em conta a revolução trazida pelo gás de xisto, essa tendência deverá mesmo continuar a manter-se»;










—


 No mesmo artigo de opinião, os Comissários europeus salientaram que «o preço por atacado por MWh de gás em certos centros de comercialização é três vezes mais baixo nos EUA do que na Europa»;










—


 A 10 de outubro de 2012, a Comissão Europeia apresentou a comunicação intitulada «Reforçar a Indústria Europeia em prol do Crescimento e da Recuperação Económica», que tem como objetivo relançar a atividade económica e a criação de emprego, sendo necessário inverter rapidamente a trajetória de declínio verificada e enfrentar os desafios do século XXI;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Qual o custo energético industrial em cada Estado-Membro? Considera que a diferença de custos energéticos penaliza alguns Estados-Membros a favor de outros?











Qual a diferença de preço médio entre os custos energéticos industriais verificados nos EUA e na Europa?











Quais as boas práticas adotadas por outros países ou regiões à escala global que poderão ser benéficas para a UE?




Resposta dada por Günther Oettinger em nome da Comissão
(22 de janeiro de 2013)






1.


A Comissão considera que as diferenças de custos energéticos são um dos fatores principais que afetam a concorrência entre empresas de diferentes Estados‐Membros. Os preços do gás e da eletricidade para a indústria nos Estados‐Membros constam do quadro 2.11.3 da publicação 




«EU energy in figures» da Comissão, acessível pela seguinte ligação: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/publications/doc/2012_energy_figures.pdf. 







2.


Segundo a Agência Internacional de Energia, os preços do gás natural para a indústria, incluindo impostos, no primeiro trimestre de 2012 foram, em média, 241 % superiores nos membros da OCDE que pertencem à UE do que nos EUA










2.


Segundo a Agência Internacional de Energia, os preços do gás natural para a indústria, incluindo impostos, no primeiro trimestre de 2012 foram, em média, 241 % superiores nos membros da OCDE que pertencem à UE do que nos EUA




 (577).





3.


As diferenças dos preços da energia entre países e regiões são determinadas em grande medida pelos custos de combustível, impostos e taxas aplicáveis (incluindo as tarifas de rede e as taxas de renováveis), pela concorrência no mercado e pelas diferentes perspetivas de regulação de preços. A UE e os seus Estados‐Membros devem ponderar os impactos nos preços da energia e a acessibilidade destes ao preparem, adotarem e aplicarem políticas neste domínio. Completar o mercado interno da energia da UE para reforçar a concorrência e o comércio transnacional de energia, desenvolver novas fontes de energia e continuar a diversificar o fornecimento de energia à UE terá um efeito benéfico para os preços. No entanto, a regulação de preços não é, em termos gerais, a abordagem adequada para conter os preços da energia, visto que tende a desincentivar os comportamentos mais eficientes do ponto de vista energético, não se destina especificamente aos consumidores mais necessitados, distorce a concorrência, impede a entrada de novos operadores no mercado e não dá os sinais de preços corretos para garantir o investimento.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010219/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Importance of energy costs for greater business competitiveness
Because Europe is going through serious economic and financial difficulties, some countries are taking swingeing austerity measures in an attempt to balance their public accounts.
European industry is the source of 80% of innovation and the goods which it produces make up 75% of exports.
The continuing economic crisis has been putting European industry under severe pressure, not just because production is 10% lower than what it was before the crisis, but also because more than 3 million jobs have been shed.
In an article published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias the Industry and Energy Commissioners noted that energy prices in other parts of the world, especially the United States and Canada, remain relatively stable, a trend which, given the revolution being brought about by shale gas, was likely to continue unchanged. They also pointed out that in certain marketing centres the wholesale US gas price, per MWh, is a third of the European price.
On 10 October 2012 the Commission issued a communication entitled ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’, its aim being to revitalise economic activity and job creation, given the need to reverse the downward trend without delay in order to tackle the challenges of the 21st century.






1.


What is the industrial energy cost in each Member State? Does the Commission consider that energy cost differences penalise some Member States and hence help others?










2.


In terms of average prices, what is the extent of the difference between industrial energy costs in the United States and those in Europe?










3.


Which forms of best practice adopted in other countries or parts of the world might be useful to the EU?




Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(22 January 2013)






1.


The Commission considers that differences in energy prices are one of several major factors affecting competition between companies in different Member States. Gas and electricity prices for industry in EU Member States are set out in Table 2.11.3 of the Commission's publication 




‘EU energy in figures’, accessible via the following link:
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/publications/doc/2012_energy_figures.pdf







2.


According to the International Energy Agency, natural gas prices for industry including taxes in the first quarter of 2012 were on average 241% higher in EU OECD members than in the US










2.


According to the International Energy Agency, natural gas prices for industry including taxes in the first quarter of 2012 were on average 241% higher in EU OECD members than in the US




 (578).





3.


Difference in energy prices between countries and regions are to a large extent determined by the underlying fuel costs, taxes and levies (including network tariffs and renewable levies), competition on the market, and different approaches to price regulation. The EU and its Member States should consider impacts on energy prices and the affordability of energy when preparing, adopting and implementing related policies. Completing the EU internal energy market to enhance competition and cross-border trade in energy, developing new sources of energy, and further diversifying energy supplies to the EU will have beneficial effects on prices. However, price regulation is, generally speaking, not the appropriate approach to containing energy prices as it tends to reduce the incentives for energy-efficient behaviour, does not specifically target the most in-need consumers, distorts competition and prevents new entrants, and does not give the right price signals needed to secure investment.




(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010220/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Contribuição da política industrial da UE para o relançamento económico
Tendo em conta que:






—


 A Europa está a atravessar sérias dificuldades económicas e financeiras, levando alguns países a adotarem duras medidas de austeridade com vista ao equilíbrio das contas públicas;










—


 O tecido industrial europeu é responsável por 80 % da inovação realizada e as suas mercadorias representam 75 % das exportações;










—


 O período de crise económica que se vive tem colocado a indústria europeia sob forte pressão, não só porque a produção está 10 % abaixo do nível registado anteriormente à crise, mas também porque já foram eliminados mais de 3 milhões de postos de trabalho;










—


 A 10 de outubro de 2012, a Comissão Europeia apresentou a comunicação intitulada «Reforçar a Indústria Europeia em prol do Crescimento e da Recuperação Económica», que tem como objetivo relançar a atividade económica e a criação de emprego, sendo necessário inverter rapidamente a trajetória de declínio verificada e enfrentar os desafios do século XXI;










—


 O vice-presidente da Comissão Europeia, Antonio Tajani, referiu que «é preciso reduzir a dívida pública e, para se conseguir isto, são necessários sacrifícios. Mas é fundamental trabalhar no segundo pilar, o do crescimento. Não podemos pedir aos Europeus para fazerem sacrifícios, se não houver uma estratégia em favor do trabalho, ou seja, do crescimento»;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Como poderá a nova política industrial europeia contribuir para o relançamento económico?











Qual o montante de investimento disponibilizado pela Comissão para esta nova política industrial?




Resposta dada por Antonio Tajani em nome da Comissão
(9 de janeiro de 2013)
A economia da UE continua a ter dificuldades em corrigir os efeitos da crise financeira. A adoção de políticas credíveis que abordem as deficiências orçamentais e financeiras, o crescimento lento e uma taxa de emprego elevada são cruciais para restabelecer a confiança. O desafio para os responsáveis pela elaboração de políticas será apoiar o crescimento sem ameaçar a disciplina orçamental.
Um dos principais objetivos da política industrial da UE, tal como está descrito na recente Comunicação de atualização das ações da política industrial (579), é promover o crescimento da indústria europeia. A Comunicação centra-se em quatro pilares:






—


 Investimentos na inovação, com especial atenção nas áreas com mais potencial. 










—


 Melhores condições de mercado, tanto no mercado interno como nos mercados internacionais. 










—


 Acesso ao financiamento e ao mercado de capitais através de um melhor uso dos recursos públicos, incluindo do BEI; e através do desbloqueamento de fundos privados. 










—


 Capital e competências humanos para promover a criação de emprego e melhorar a previsão das de competências necessárias à competitividade da indústria. 




A atual fraca confiança dos consumidores e das empresas tem um impacto direto nos investimentos. 
As ações da Comunicação abordam esta questão e uma parceria com a indústria e as partes interessadas será necessária para que se obtenham resultados positivos. Os recursos serão disponibilizados pelos programas COSME e Horizon 2020 e haverá mais capacidade de financiamento do BEI. O aumento em 10 mil milhões de euros do capital do BEI irá permitir a este disponibilizar de mais de 68 mil milhões de euros para novos empréstimos do Banco Europeu de Investimento em 2013. Além disso, o Fundo de Coesão poderá ser utilizado nas áreas da indústria que foram selecionadas como linhas de ação prioritária da política industrial. O sucesso desta política depende da capacidade de a articular de forma eficiente com ações a nível nacional e regional e em parceria com a indústria.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010220/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Contribution of industrial policy to economic recovery
Because Europe is going through serious economic and financial difficulties, some countries are taking swingeing austerity measures in an attempt to balance their public accounts.
European industry is the source of 80% of innovation and the goods which it produces make up 75% of exports.
The continuing economic crisis has been putting European industry under severe pressure, not just because production is 10% lower than what it was before the crisis, but also because more than 3 million jobs have been shed.
On 10 October 2012 the Commission issued a communication entitled ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’, its aim being to revitalise economic activity and job creation, given the need to reverse the downward trend without delay in order to tackle the challenges of the 21st century.
Commission Vice-President Antonio Tajani has said that government debt has to be reduced and sacrifices will be necessary to make than happen. But he also considers it essential to focus on the second strand, growth. Europeans cannot, in his view, be asked to make sacrifices if there is no strategy to promote employment or, to put it another way, growth.






1.


How can the new European industrial policy contribute to economic recovery?










2.


What volume of investment is the Commission setting aside for this new policy?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(9 January 2013)
The EU economy continues to deal with a difficult post-financial crisis correction. Adopting credible policies addressing fiscal and financial weaknesses, slow growth, and high unemployment is crucial to restore confidence. The challenge for policy-makers will be to support growth without threatening budgetary discipline.
One major aim of the EU industrial policy, as outlined in the recent Industrial Policy Communication Update (580), is to promote growth of European industry. The communication focuses on four pillars:






—


Investments in innovation, with a focus on areas with particular potential. 










—


Better market conditions, both in the internal market, and in international markets. 










—


Access to finance and capitals, by better use of public resources, including from the EIB, and by unlocking private funds. 










—


Human capital and skills, to promote job creation and better anticipation of the skills needed for industry's competitiveness. 




The current low consumer and business confidence have a direct impact on investments. 
The actions of the communication address this issue, and a partnership with industry and stakeholders will be necessary for positive results. Resources will be made available by COSME and Horizon 2020, and more financing capacity from the EIB will be available. The EUR 10bn capital increase of the EIB will allow for more than EUR 68bn of new lending capacity for the Bank for 2013. Moreover, Cohesion Funds could be used in the industrial areas that were selected as industrial policy priority action lines. The success of the policy depends on the capacity to articulate it properly with actions at national and regional level, in partnership with industry.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010221/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Política industrial apoia apenas alguns setores de atividade económica
Tendo em conta que:






—


 A Europa está a atravessar sérias dificuldades económicas e financeiras, levando alguns países a adotarem duras medidas de austeridade com vista ao equilíbrio das contas públicas;










—


 O período de crise económica que se vive tem colocado a indústria europeia sob forte pressão, não só porque a produção está 10 % abaixo do nível registado anteriormente à crise, mas também porque já foram eliminados mais de 3 milhões de postos de trabalho;










—


 A 10 de outubro de 2012, a Comissão apresentou a comunicação intitulada «Reforçar a Indústria Europeia em prol do Crescimento e da Recuperação Económica», que tem como objetivo relançar a atividade económica e a criação de emprego, sendo necessário inverter rapidamente a trajetória de declínio verificada e enfrentar os desafios do século XXI;










—


 O vice-presidente da Comissão, Antonio Tajani, referiu que «temos que ajudar as PME e toda a indústria. Por isso, apresentei a estratégia de reindustrialização da União Europeia. É um modelo industrial mais moderno, focado em alguns setores mais importantes, com o qual podemos ganhar a competição a nível mundial em termos de qualidade, e não de quantidade»;










—


 A Comissão pretende dar maior importância aos setores económicos em que a Europa é líder mundial, como é o caso das indústrias automóvel, aeronáutica, espacial, farmacêutica, química ou da engenharia;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Qual o valor económico e de criação de emprego existente nos setores económicos referidos?











Qual o valor acrescentado (em termos de riqueza, valor acrescentado bruto e criação de emprego) que espera alcançar com a nova política industrial europeia?











Existirão apenas apoios para os setores económicos referidos na comunicação ou os restantes também terão direito a receber outro tipo de apoios públicos?




Resposta dada por Antonio Tajani em nome da Comissão
(24 de janeiro de 2013)






1.


O emprego e valor acrescentado dos seis setores são os seguintes:














Número de pessoas empregadas (em milhões, 2009)


Valor acrescentado ao custo dos fatores (% do total transformado, 2010)




Indústria automóvel


2,22


9 %




Aeronáutica e espaço (em conjunto)


0,36


2 %




Produtos farmacêuticos


0,55


5 %




Produtos químicos


1,18


7 %




Engenharia (elétrica e mecânica)


4,36


16 %




A importância económica destes setores vai muito além dos empregos diretos e do valor acrescentado que criam. Sendo setores intensivos em conhecimento, nos quais as novas tecnologias e a inovação desempenham um papel importante, as soluções neles desenvolvidas têm vastos efeitos económicos indiretos noutros setores da economia; estes setores terão também um papel importante na abordagem de desafios sociais como o envelhecimento da população.






2.


A Comissão propôs um aumento da participação da indústria no PIB do valor atual de cerca de 16 % para 20 % em 2020. A indústria é um motor importante para o crescimento e a produtividade e tem um impacto económico significativo noutros setores, como é o caso dos serviços. Na condição de maior setor exportador, a indústria também se encontra numa posição favorável para explorar as oportunidades de crescimento nas economias emergentes. Assim, atingir a meta dos 20 % resultaria num aumento significativo do valor acrescentado, da produtividade e do emprego e contribuiria de forma importante para a recuperação económica.










3.


Em vez de selecionar ou promover setores específicos, a última comunicação identifica seis linhas prioritárias que têm como objetivo apoiar o desenvolvimento dos mercados que possuem um elevado potencial para impulsionarem o crescimento e o emprego. As linhas prioritárias foram selecionadas após uma ampla consulta pública. Os setores mencionados na comunicação são aqueles que podem beneficiar mais destes mercados. Isto não significa, porém, a exclusão de outros setores.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010221/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Industrial policy: support for some sectors only
Because Europe is going through serious economic and financial difficulties, some countries are taking swingeing austerity measures in an attempt to balance their public accounts.
The continuing economic crisis has been putting European industry under severe pressure, not just because production is 10% lower than what it was before the crisis, but also because more than 3 million jobs have been shed.
On 10 October 2012 the Commission issued a communication entitled ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’, its aim being to revitalise economic activity and job creation, given the need to reverse the downward trend without delay in order to tackle the challenges of the 21st century.
Commission Vice-President Antonio Tajani has said that we have to help SMEs and industry as a whole. To that end he has put forward a strategy for the reindustrialisation of the EU, a more modern industrial model focusing on a number of major sectors in which we can win through in global competition on the strength of quality as opposed to quantity.
The Commission intends to lay emphasis on economic sectors in which Europe is a world leader, for example the motor industry, aeronautics, space, pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and engineering.






1.


What is the economic and job creation value of the abovementioned sectors?










2.


What added value (in terms of wealth, gross added value, and job creation) is the Commission hoping to attain with the new European industrial policy?










3.


Will support be confined to the economic sectors mentioned in the communication, or will the remaining sectors also be entitled to receive other types of public support?




Answer given by Mr Tajani on behalf of the Commission
(24 January 2013)






1.


The employment and value added of the 6 sectors are: 














Number of persons employed (in millions, 2009)


Value added at factor costs (% of manufacturing total, 2010)




Motor industry


2.22


9%




Aeronautics & space (combined)


0.36


2%




Pharmaceuticals


0.55 


5%




Chemicals 


1.18


7%




Engineering (electrical and mechanical)


4.36


16%




The economic importance of these sectors goes well beyond their direct job and value added creation. As knowledge-intensive sectors where new technologies and innovation play an important role, the solutions developed in these sectors have large indirect economic effects on other sectors of the economy, and these sectors will have an important role in addressing societal challenges such as ageing population.






2.


The Commission proposed to increase the share of industry in GDP from the current level of around 16% to 20% in 2020. Industry is an important engine for growth and productivity with a high indirect economic impact on other sectors such as services. As the biggest export sector industry is also well placed to exploit the growth opportunities in the emerging economies. Thus, reaching the 20% target would result in a significant increase in value added, productivity and employment and would contribute importantly to economic recovery.










3.


Rather than select or promote specific sectors, the latest communication identifies 6 priority lines aimed at supporting development of markets with high potential of boosting growth and employment. The priority lines were selected after a wide public consultation. The sectors mentioned in the communication are those that can benefit most from these markets. However, this will not be to the exclusion of other sectors.




(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010222/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Mecanismo de efeito de difusão
— O artigo 3.° do Tratado da União Europeia refere que «a União promove a coesão económica, social e territorial, e a solidariedade entre os Estados‐Membros»;
— A política de desenvolvimento regional é um instrumento de solidariedade financeira e um importante motor da coesão e da integração económica, sendo responsável pela definição estratégica dos fundos comunitários afetos à política de coesão;
— O mecanismo de efeito de difusão (spill-over effect) foi adotado pelo Governo português em setembro de 2009, com o intuito de «desviar» para a região de Lisboa verbas dos fundos comunitários (por exemplo: FEDER e FSE) que estavam consignadas a outras regiões do país (Norte, Centro, Alentejo e Açores);
— O efeito difusor permite a atribuição de verbas comunitárias a projetos realizados por entidades da região de Lisboa, desde que estes apresentem um efeito positivo e de alavancagem para as outras regiões mais desfavorecidas;
— O Boletim Informativo número 17 do Quadro de Referência Estratégico Nacional de Portugal, com informação reportada a setembro de 2012, refere que, «até ao final do 3.° trimestre de 2012, as operações aprovadas com relevante efeito de difusão representavam nestes dois programas 203,1 milhões de euros de FEDER e 8,5 milhões de euros de FSE»;
— Portugal já transferiu mais de 211 milhões de euros das regiões menos desenvolvidas para a região mais competitiva do país;
— Na resposta à minha pergunta formulada em 6 de julho de 2011 (E-007004/2011), o Comissário Europeu da Política Regional, Johannes Hahn, referiu que «a Comissão gostaria de informar o Senhor Deputado de que outros Estados‐Membros da UE podem beneficiar do mesmo tipo de programas, sempre que os efeitos de difusão tenham sido considerados apropriados»;
Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Tem informação pormenorizada sobre quais os investimentos realizados em Lisboa ao abrigo do mecanismo de efeito de difusão?











Quais foram os outros países europeus que decidiram aplicar o mesmo mecanismo de efeito de difusão e qual a percentagem face à globalidade dos fundos estruturais que foram utilizados ao abrigo do efeito de difusão?




Resposta dada por Johannes Hahn em nome da Comissão
(7 de janeiro de 2013)
Como já foi referido na resposta da Comissão à pergunta escrita E-007004/2011 (581), o Quadro de Referência Estratégico Nacional 2007-2013 (QREN) para Portugal e o texto dos programas «Fatores de Competitividade» e «Potencial Humano» incluem regras para determinar a elegibilidade das despesas em função da afetação e quantificação dos efeitos de difusão  (582).
Em conformidade com essas regras, as autoridades portuguesas apresentam regularmente um relatório sobre a questão, nomeadamente através das informações prestadas no «Boletim Informativo» — o relatório trimestral n.° 17, de 30 de setembro de 2012, emitido pelo comité de coordenação do QREN português. Até à data, dispomos das seguintes informações: Programa «Fatores de Competitividade» (POFC): 203 milhões de euros aprovados, correspondentes a 6,5 % da dotação total do programa e a 7 % dos recursos do Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional para o programa. Programa «Potencial Humano» (POPH): 8,5 milhões de euros aprovados, correspondentes a 0,1 % da dotação total do programa e a 0,2 % dos recursos do Fundo Social Europeu para o programa.
Este conceito de efeito de difusão não pode ser considerado como um «desvio» de recursos dos Fundos Estruturais.
Se existem outros Estados-Membros que aplicam o mesmo mecanismo de efeito de difusão, a Comissão não foi informada do facto.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010222/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Spillover effect mechanism
— Article 3 of the Treaty on European Union states that the Union ‘shall promote economic, social and territorial cohesion, and solidarity among Member States’;
— Regional development policy is a tool of financial solidarity and a key motor of cohesion and economic integration, which is responsible for the strategic definition of the Community funds under cohesion policy;
— The spillover effect mechanism was adopted by the Portuguese Government in 2009 to divert to the Lisbon region sums from Community funds (such as the ERDF and ESF) which had been assigned to other regions of the country (such as North, Centre, Alentejo and Azores);
— The spillover effect mechanism allows sums under Community funding to be allocated to projects carried out by Lisbon region entities, provided that they have a positive, leveraging effect for other, less favoured regions;
— Portugal's NSRF (National Strategic Reference Framework) Information bulletin No 17, of September 2012, states that ‘by the end of the third quarter of 2012, operations approved with a major spillover effect totalled, for those two programmes, EUR 203.1 million EUR from the ERDF and EUR 8.5 million from the ESF’;
— Portugal has already transferred more than EUR 211 million from the less developed regions to the most competitive region in the country;
— In response to my question of 6 July 2011 (E-007004/2011), the European Commission for Regional Policy, Johannes Hahn, said that ‘the Commission would like to inform the Honourable Member that other EU Member States may benefit from the same type of programmes where the spillover effect was deemed to be appropriate’;
I would ask the Commission:







Does it have detailed information on which investments have been made in Lisbon under the spillover effect mechanism?











Which other European countries have decided to apply the spillover effect mechanism, and what percentage of total structural funds has been used under the spillover effect?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
As already mentioned in the Commission's reply to Written Question E-007004/2011 (583), the 2007-2013 National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) for Portugal, as well as the text of the programmes ‘Factores de Competitividade’ and ‘Potencial Humano’, include rules for determining expenditure eligibility according to the allocation and quantification of spill-over effects (584).
In conformity with these rules, the Portuguese authorities report regularly on this issue, namely through information provided in the ‘Boletim Informativo’, the quarterly report nr.17 of 30 September 2012 delivered by the coordination committee of the Portuguese NSRF. The available information up to date is the following: ‘Factores de Competitividade’ Programme (POFC): EUR 203 million approved, corresponding to 6.5% of the total allocation to the programme and to 7% of European Regional Development Fund resources in the programme. ‘Potencial Humano’ Programme (POPH): EUR 8.5 million approved, corresponding to 0.1% of the total allocation to the programme and to 0.2% of European Social Fund resources in the programme.
This concept of the spill-over effect cannot be considered as diverting Structural Funds resources.
If there are other Member States applying the spill over effect mechanism, they have not informed the Commission of this.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010223/12
à Comissão
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: Importância da energia para a nova política industrial europeia
Tendo em conta que:






—


 A Europa está a atravessar sérias dificuldades económicas e financeiras, levando alguns países a adotarem duras medidas de austeridade com vista ao equilíbrio das contas públicas;










—


 O tecido industrial europeu é responsável por 80 % da inovação realizada e as suas mercadorias representam 75 % das exportações;










—


 O período de crise económica que se vive tem colocado a indústria europeia sob forte pressão, não só porque a produção está 10 % abaixo do nível registado anteriormente à crise, mas também porque já foram eliminados mais de 3 milhões de postos de trabalho;










—


 A Europa sempre defendeu à escala internacional que era necessário conciliar a proteção do ambiente com a atividade económica, tendo adotado medidas relativas às emissões de CO2 e economia verde;










—


 Num artigo publicado no Diário de Notícias (Portugal), o Comissário da UE responsável pela Indústria e o Comissário da UE responsável pela Energia referiram que «os preços da energia na Europa aumentaram substancialmente ao longo dos últimos sete anos — mais concretamente, 27 % entre 2005 e 2012»;










—


 Se entende que os custos energéticos são atualmente o segundo fator de produção mais dispendioso para a atividade industrial, sendo muito difícil as empresas europeias competirem à escala internacional;










—


 A 10 de outubro de 2012, a Comissão Europeia apresentou a comunicação intitulada «Reforçar a Indústria Europeia em prol do Crescimento e da Recuperação Económica», que tem como objetivo relançar a atividade económica e a criação de emprego, sendo necessário inverter rapidamente a trajetória de declínio verificada e enfrentar os desafios do século XXI;










—


 Na proposta apresentada, consta a intenção de investir numa sociedade hipocarbónica, com claras vantagens associadas para a competitividade da indústria europeia;




Pergunta-se à Comissão:







Quais as ações que pretende adotar para diminuir os custos da energia na Europa?











Como é que a nova política industrial irá contribuir para a redução da fatura energética das empresas europeias e, assim, aumentar a sua competitividade global?











Que incentivos ou medidas podem ser adotados pelos Estados‐Membros para a resolução deste problema?




Resposta dada por Günther Oettinger em nome da Comissão
(25 de janeiro de 2013)






1.


A Comissão está a contribuir ativamente para tornar a energia na UE mais acessível, em especial através da realização do mercado interno da energia que mantém o controlo sobre os preços a nível grossista. De igual modo, as políticas de investigação e desenvolvimento, de eficiência energética ou de diversificação do fornecimento de energia têm efeitos benéficos para a fatura energética tanto das famílias como da indústria.










2.


A comunicação recentemente adotada pela Comissão sobre a política industrial reconhece plenamente o papel dos preços da energia para a competitividade da indústria da UE. Nela se assinala também a importância de ponderar os potenciais efeitos dos preços da energia ao preparar novas iniciativas neste domínio. Os elementos essenciais nesta matéria são a efetiva realização de um mercado interno da energia plenamente eficiente, mais investimentos em infraestruturas energéticas, uma maior diversificação das fontes de energia e uma maior eficiência energética.










3.


Os Estados‐Membros devem, entre outros aspetos, apoiar as políticas da UE destinadas a baixar os custos da energia e, em especial, remover todos os obstáculos que ainda impedem a realização do mercado interno da energia. Os Estados‐Membros devem também evitar efeitos desproporcionados em matéria de preços da energia ao fixar os impostos e taxas aplicáveis ao setor.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010223/12
to the Commission
Nuno Teixeira (PPE)
(8 November 2012)

Subject: Importance of energy for the new European industrial policy
Because Europe is going through serious economic and financial difficulties, some countries are taking swingeing austerity measures in an attempt to balance their public accounts.
European industry is the source of 80% of innovation and the goods which it produces make up 75% of exports.
The continuing economic crisis has been putting European industry under severe pressure, not just because production is 10% lower than what it was before the crisis, but also because more than 3 million jobs have been shed.
In its international dealings Europe has invariably maintained that environmental protection needs to be reconciled with economic activity, and it has itself been taking action on CO2 emissions and moving towards a green economy.
In an article published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias, the EU Industry and Energy Commissioners stated that energy prices in Europe have risen substantially over the past seven years — to be more precise, by 27% between 2005 and 2012.
Energy costs are at present the second most expensive production factor for industrial activity, and European companies are finding it very hard to compete at international level.
On 10 October 2012 the Commission issued a communication entitled ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’, its aim being to revitalise economic activity and job creation, given the need to reverse the downward trend without delay in order to tackle the challenges of the 21st century.
The proposal sets out the intention of investing in a low-carbon society, which will bring clear benefits as regards the competitiveness of European industry.






1.


What steps will the Commission take to cut energy costs in Europe?










2.


How will the new industrial policy help to reduce European companies’ energy bill and hence enhance their global competitiveness?










3.


What incentives or measures could Member States adopt to resolve this problem?




Answer given by Mr Oettinger on behalf of the Commission
(25 January 2013)






1.


The Commission is actively contributing to making energy in the EU more affordable, in particular through the completion of the internal market for energy which keeps prices at the wholesale level in check. Also, EU policies on research and development, energy efficiency or diversification of energy supplies have a positive impact on the energy bills for households and industry alike.










2.


The Commission's recently adopted communication on industrial policy fully acknowledges the important role of energy prices in the competitiveness of the EU industry. It also underlines the importance of considering potential impacts on energy prices when preparing new initiatives in the energy field. Effective implementation of a fully efficient internal market for energy, more investments in energy infrastructure, further diversification of energy sources as well as increased energy efficiency are the key elements in this respect. 










3.


Member States should, 




inter alia
, support EU policies aimed at driving down energy costs and in particular remove all remaining obstacles to achieve the internal energy market. Member States should also avoid disproportionate effects on energy pricing when establishing taxes and levies in the energy field.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta P-010224/12
alla Commissione
Tiziano Motti (PPE)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Diritti dei passeggeri aerei in caso di negato imbarco per «overbooking»
Dagli atti istituzionali correlati a questi primi anni di applicazione del regolamento (CE) n. 261/2004, relativo ai diritti spettanti ai passeggeri di vettori aerei in caso di mancato imbarco, cancellazione del volo, smarrimento di bagagli o ritardo eccessivo, emerge che spesso le compagnie aeree si sottraggono ai precisi doveri, quando non obblighi, imposti dal testo normativo. I casi più frequentemente segnalati sono la povertà d'informazione ai passeggeri in merito ai loro diritti in caso di mancato imbarco, di assistenza in caso di ritardo prolungato, di risarcimento dovuto. Il regolamento demanda agli Enti Nazionali per l'Aviazione (ENA) il controllo dell'applicazione del disposto del suddetto regolamento da parte delle compagnie aeree, sotto sorveglianza della Commissione europea tramite gli Stati membri. 
Le risposte date alle interrogazioni parlamentari poste recentemente alla Commissione (E-007949/2011 ed E-008309/2011) ammettono implicitamente che la sentenza della Corte di giustizia nelle cause riunite C-402/07 e C-432/07 (cosiddetta sentenza «Sturgeon») rischia di essere disattesa dalle compagnie aeree e che la Commissione veglierà sulla corretta applicazione del diritto, in collaborazione con gli ENA. Il Parlamento europeo, a maggioranza, ha votato infine lo scorso 23 ottobre una risoluzione volta a rafforzare i diritti di tutti i passeggeri europei, indipendentemente dal settore di trasporto. 
Constatando che il regolamento n. 261/2004 non ha eliminato la pratica di overbooking, certamente lesiva dei diritti dei passeggeri anche alla luce di quanto sopra esposto, si chiede quale posizione ritiene la Commissione di esprimere in merito ai seguenti diritti dei passeggeri in «overbooking» non ancora garantiti:







il diritto di essere informati in anticipo che stanno acquistando un biglietto in «overbooking», soggetto pertanto ad una certa probabilità di non garantire l'imbarco;











il diritto di avere, conseguentemente, accesso ad agevolazioni (anche tariffarie) accessorie a quelle già garantite per il rischio che oggi corrono inconsapevolmente;











il diritto di godere di particolari agevolazioni qualora si tratti di un nucleo familiare con minori, parlando il regolamento n. 261/2004 di «priorità di riprotezione sui voli successivi di minori non accompagnati», ma non di diritti e priorità di una famiglia con figli minori al seguito a viaggiare unita in caso di negato imbarco per «overbooking» ad una parte di questa.




Risposta di Siim Kallas a nome della Commissione
(13 dicembre 2012)






1. e 2.


Come ricordato dall’onorevole parlamentare, il regolamento (CE) n. 261/2004 disciplina i casi di negato imbarco. Come sottolineato nella comunicazione della Commissione dal titolo «Una visione europea per i passeggeri: comunicazione sui diritti dei passeggeri in tutti i modi di trasporto» (COM(2011)898 definitivo), la Commissione sostiene fermamente il diritto dei passeggeri di disporre di informazioni adeguate. Tuttavia, poiché fino a poco prima della partenza un vettore aereo può non avere consapevolezza del fatto che un imbarco sarà negato, la Commissione non ritiene possa risultare utile un diritto a essere informati di tale eventualità nel corso della prenotazione; anzi, tale informazione potrebbe avere l’effetto di compromettere la fiducia dei passeggeri riguardo al proprio diritto di viaggiare. La Commissione ritiene che, in un mercato concorrenziale, i vettori aerei debbano essere liberi di stabilire le proprie tariffe.










3.


La Commissione è del parere che, nella pratica, le compagnie aeree tendano a soddisfare il desiderio dei membri di una famiglia di viaggiare insieme in caso di negato imbarco e non ritiene utile stabilire un nuovo diritto a tale riguardo.




(English version)
Question for written answer P-010224/12
to the Commission
Tiziano Motti (PPE)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Air passenger rights in the event of denied boarding due to overbooking
Following the first few years of application of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 concerning the rights of air passengers in the event of denied boarding, flight cancellation, loss of luggage or excessive delay, it has officially emerged that airlines often evade the specific duties and obligations imposed upon them by this regulation. The cases reported most often relate to the lack of information to passengers about their rights in the event of denied boarding, assistance in the event of a long delay and compensation due. The regulation makes the national aviation authorities (such as the ENA) responsible for monitoring the application of the provisions of this regulation by the airlines, under the supervision of the Commission, through the Member States.
The answers given to parliamentary questions recently put to the Commission 
(E-007949/2011 and E-008309/2011) implicitly admit that the judgment of the Court of Justice in joined cases C-402/07 and C-432/07 (the so-called Sturgeon case) is likely to be rejected by airlines and that the Commission will, in cooperation with the ENA, ensure that the law is correctly implemented. On 23 October 2012 the European Parliament, by a majority, finally adopted a resolution to strengthen the rights of all European passengers in all transport sectors.
Regulation No 261/2004 has not eliminated the practice of overbooking, which is certainly detrimental to the rights of passengers, also in the light of the above. Can the Commission therefore give its view on the following — as yet unguaranteed — rights of passengers who have been victims of overbooking:







the right to be informed in advance that they are buying a ticket for a flight which is overbooked and for which there is therefore a certain likelihood that boarding might not be guaranteed;











the right, accordingly, to have access to favourable terms (including discounts) in addition to those already guaranteed for the risk that they are unwittingly running at present;











the right for families with children to be granted special terms, given that regulation No 261/2004 stipulates that priority should be given to placing unaccompanied children on later flights but does not mention the rights (and priorities) of a family with children to travel together in the event of denied boarding to some family members due to overbooking. 




Answer given by Mr Kallas on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)
1 and 2. As the Honourable Member has pointed out, Regulation 261(2004) regulates denied boarding.As set out in the Commission's Communication, ‘A European vision for Passengers: Passenger Rights in all transport modes’ (COM(2011) 898), the Commission strongly supports the right of passengers to be provided with appropriate information. However, given that an air carrier may not beaware that boarding will be denied until shortly prior to departure, the Commission does not consider that a right to be advised of such a possibility during the course of booking would be helpful. Indeed, such information may inadvertently undermine passengers confidence in their right to travel. The Commission considers that in a competitive market air carriers should be free to set their own fares.






3.


The Commission is of the view that in practice, airlines will tend to respond favourably to members of a family wishing to travel together in the event of denied boarding. It does not consider that creating a new right in this respect would be useful.




(English version)
Question for written answer P-010225/12
to the Commission
Ashley Fox (ECR)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Access to EU documents for visually impaired people
I recently met with a constituent regarding access to EU documents for visually impaired people. I was saddened to learn that her attempts to receive accessible information about the EU from the London Office of the European Parliament had been unsuccessful. Please advise:







What EU documents are currently available in formats accessible to those who are visually impaired, such as audio, Braille or jumbo print format? 











Will the Commission be honouring its commitment to make all public websites accessible via a screen reader by 2015?











What further steps will the Commission be taking to improve accessibility to EU documents and information for visually impaired people?




Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)






1.


T




he Publications Office of the EU is focusing on the accessibility of digital formats. More and more of the visually impaired are using screen-reader software, which can convert digital text to a Braille pad or read it aloud. The Official Journals available on the EUR-Lex website are readable by screen-reader software programs. The accessibility of general publications presented in EU Bookshop is currently more variable. The number of highly accessible publications is expected to increase substantially over time. The Publications Office receives requests for an authorisation to reproduce publications in Braille or in other media for visually impaired, which are always granted free of charge.






2.


The Commission has recently adopted a proposal for a directive aimed at ensuring the full accessibility of public sector bodies website. A European Accessibility Act is also under preparation, which could include provisions concerning the accessibility of other websites providing services to citizens. The Commission has updated its own guidelines, targeting compliance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines of the World Wide Web Consortium for all Europa websites published since January 2010.










3.


The 




forthcoming new EUR-Lex website is being tested by visually impaired users and their feedback is taken into account in the development iterations. A pilot study on the accessibility, including for visually impaired people, of the EU Bookshop website and publications displayed therein is planned for the first semester of 2013. For 2013, the Commission also foresees working on the ‘EU Real Time Sign Language’ Pilot Project that aims to facilitate the access of sign language users to EU institutions.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita P-010226/12
a la Comisión
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(9 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: OPA del IAG a Vueling
Con la nacionalización de BFA-Bankia por parte del Gobierno español a través del FROB, este ha pasado a controlar de manera directa un 12,087 % de las acciones del International Airlines Group (IAG), que se suman al 2,71 % que ya controlaba la Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (SEPI), de titularidad pública. Es decir, que en total el Gobierno español controla un 14,8 % de las acciones de IAG. Esta participación, es la más alta de las ostentadas por un sólo accionista, tal y como se puede comprobar en la página 87 del último Informe anual consolidado (585). IAG es un holding que controla dos compañías aéreas: Iberia y British Airways. Iberia tiene la base de operaciones en el aeropuerto de Barajas, Madrid. A su vez, Iberia (IAG) es el accionista principal de la aerolínea Vueling con el 45,85 % de las acciones, que tiene como base de operaciones el aeropuerto de Barcelona. En ambos casos, es su principal operadora. Ahora, IAG, a través de Iberia, ha decidido lanzar una OPA a Vueling, que será presentada el día 9 de noviembre (586). De prosperar, IAG controlaría dos compañías que trasladan cada año unos 41 millones de pasajeros, y que actualmente son la segunda y la tercera con más actividad (sin tener en cuenta la desaparición de Spanair) (587). Además, Iberia ha tenido este año unas pérdidas de 263 millones de euros solo en el primer semestre (588). Por otra parte, en España existe un control público centralizado de todos los aeropuertos a través de la empresa de titularidad pública AENA, controlada a su vez por el Gobierno central.
¿No cree la Comisión que el Gobierno español puede incurrir en ayudas del Estado, tal y como las define el artículo 107 del TUE, al controlar a su vez todas las decisiones relacionadas con los aeropuertos y ser el máximo accionista del que sería el principal holding aeronáutico en el Estado español?
¿No cree la Comisión que la OPA de IAG sobre Vueling, puede suponer una vulneración del TUE en lo que se refiere a la libre competencia, con una posición dominante en los dos aeropuertos principales? ¿Considera la Comisión que a la luz del posible conflicto de intereses y de las pérdidas de Iberia el Gobierno español debería vender con urgencia sus participaciones en IAG?
Respuesta del Sr. Almunia en nombre de la Comisión
(13 de diciembre de 2012)
La propiedad estatal de los aeropuertos y la propiedad simultánea, total o parcial, de algunas de las compañías aéreas usuarias de dichos aeropuertos no contradice necesariamente las normas sobre ayudas estatales.
La recientemente anunciada adquisición de las acciones restantes de Vueling por parte de IAG no requerirá la aprobación de la Comisión de conformidad con el Reglamento UE n° 139/2004 de concentraciones (589). La Comisión ya examinó en 2009 la adquisición del control exclusivo de Vueling por parte de Iberia. Cuando Iberia propuso adquirir el 45,8 % del capital social de Vueling, la Comisión consideró que se trataba de la adquisición del control exclusivo con arreglo al Reglamento de concentraciones de la UE. Por lo tanto, la Comisión tenía jurisdicción y autorizó la operación en enero de 2009 bajo determinadas condiciones (590).
La operación recientemente anunciada no constituye un cambio de control en el sentido del Reglamento de concentración de la UE y no es notificable a la Comisión.
El Tratado de la UE no excluye la propiedad o la posesión de acciones por parte de un Estado miembro, por lo que en la actualidad la Comisión no ve razones para pedir al Gobierno español que venda sus acciones en IAG. No obstante, y en el contexto del plan de reestructuración de BFA/Bankia que la Comisión aprobó el 28 de noviembre de 2012 (591), BFA/Bankia deberán vender sus participaciones industriales no estratégicas en un plazo de tiempo acordado.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010226/12
to the Commission
Ramon Tremosa i Balcells (ALDE)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Takeover bid for Vueling by the International Airlines Group (IAG)
Following the Spanish Government’s nationalisation of BFA-Bankia through the Fund for Orderly Bank Restructuring (FROB), the Government now owns 12.087% of IAG shares; this is in addition to the 2.71% stake already held by the state‐owned Sociedad Estatal de Participaciones Industriales (SEPI). In other words, the Spanish Government now has a total stake of 14.8% in IAG. This makes the Spanish Government the biggest single shareholder in the company, as confirmed on page 87 of the latest Consolidated Annual Report (592). IAG is a holding company with control over two air carriers, Iberia and British Airways. Iberia’s hub is Barajas Airport in Madrid. Iberia (owned by IAG) is, in turn, the main shareholder in the airline Vueling, with a 45.85% stake; Vueling’s hub is Barcelona Airport. Both Iberia and Vueling are the main airlines operating out of their respective hubs. At present, IAG, through the intermediary of Iberia, has decided to launch a takeover bid for Vueling, which will be submitted on 9 November 2012 (593). If the bid is successful, IAG would own two companies that together carry around 41 million passengers annually, and which are currently the second and third largest airlines in Spain in terms of passenger numbers (even without taking Spanair’s collapse into consideration) (594). Furthermore, in the first half of 2012 alone, Iberia sustained losses of EUR 263 million. (595). Moreover, all Spanish airports are managed centrally by the State through the publicly-owned company AENA, which is under the control of the Spanish Government.
Does the Commission agree that the Spanish Government runs the risk of infringing the rules governing state aid, as defined in Article 107 of the TFEU, by having control over all decisions relating to airports while also being the majority shareholder in what would be the main airline group in Spain?
Does the Commission agree that IAG’s takeover bid for Vueling might violate the Treaty provisions regarding free competition because of the dominant position it would give the company in Spain’s two main airports? In the light of the potential conflict of interest and the losses sustained by Iberia, does the Commission believe that the Spanish Government should sell its holding in IAG as a matter of urgency?
Answer given by Mr Almunia on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)
State ownership of airports and the simultaneous ownership or partial ownership of some of the airline users of these airports does not necessarily contradict state aid rules.
The recently announced acquisition by IAG of the remaining shares in Vueling will not need Commission approval under the EU Merger Regulation 139/2004 (596). Acquisition of sole control by Iberia over Vueling was already reviewed by the Commission in 2009. When Iberia proposed to acquire 45.8% of Vueling's share capital, the Commission considered that this constituted acquisition of sole control according to the EU Merger Regulation. The Commission thus had jurisdiction and cleared the transaction in January 2009 subject to conditions (597).
The recently announced transaction does not constitute a change of control within the meaning of the EU Merger Regulation and will not be notifiable to the Commission. 
The EU Treaty does not preclude the ownership/holding of shares by a Member State, so that in this sense the Commission currently sees no grounds for asking the Spanish Government to sell its shares in IAG. Nevertheless, and in the context of the restructuring plan of BFA/Bankia that the Commission has approved on the 28th of November 2012 (598), BFA/Bankia will have to sell its non-strategic industrial participations within an agreed timetable.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite P-010227/12
à la Commission
Frédéric Daerden (S&D)
(9 novembre 2012)

Objet: Redistribution par les grandes surfaces des invendus alimentaires encore consommables
En réponse à ma question P-006780/2012 sur la redistribution aux plus démunis des invendus alimentaires encore consommables, la Commission mentionne plusieurs intentions, sans préciser le calendrier de celles-ci, ni leur caractère contraignant au moment où précisément se profile la menace de réduction, voire de suppression, de cette aide alimentaire au niveau communautaire.
La Commission peut-elle préciser :






—


 comment elle entend faire examiner «si les prescriptions en matière de sécurité des aliments sont respectées»,










—


 quand elle entend définir les mesures qui «à l'échelon de l'UE pourraient le mieux compléter celles appliquées aux échelons national et local»,










—


 quand elle compte créer la «base de données de l'UE sur les bonnes pratiques relatives aux initiatives de réduction des déchets alimentaires dans les États membres», annoncée dans la réponse à ma question,










—


 quelles suites elle entend donner, par des mesures concrètes et contraignantes, à sa «Feuille de route pour une Europe dans l'utilisation des ressources» du 20 septembre 2011?




Réponse donnée par M. Borg au nom de la Commission
(11 décembre 2012)
Avant d'envisager la redistribution des excédents de denrées alimentaires, il convient de garantir le respect de la législation de l'Union en matière de sécurité des aliments. 
La Commission collabore avec toutes les parties prenantes pour déterminer les mesures les plus appropriées au niveau de l'Union dans le contexte du groupe consultatif de la chaîne alimentaire et de la santé animale et végétale (première réunion le 5.10.2012, deuxième réunion le 8.2.2013). Aucune décision n'a encore été prise à ce stade sur la nature de l'action à entreprendre.
Dans le cadre du projet «Fusions» (599) réalisé sur la période 2012-2016, une vaste base de données sur les bonnes pratiques de réduction du gaspillage alimentaire sera mise en place. Entre-temps, de telles pratiques seront recensées et présentées de façon conviviale au début de 2013, sur les pages Internet de la Commission consacrées au gaspillage des denrées alimentaires.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010227/12
to the Commission
Frédéric Daerden (S&D)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Redistribution by supermarkets of unsold foodstuffs which are still edible
In its answer to my Question P-006780/2012 on the redistribution to the most disadvantaged people in the Union of unsold foodstuffs which are still edible, the Commission refers to a number of measures it may take, but without saying when this would happen or whether the measures would be binding. This is worrying given the current plans to reduce, or even scrap, Community food aid. 
Could the Commission state:






—


 how it intends to assess ‘respect of relevant food safety requirements’?










—


 when it plans to define ‘the most appropriate actions at EU level to complement the actions carried out at national and local level’?










—


 when it intends to establish the ‘EU database on good practices on food waste reduction initiatives in the Member States’ referred to in its answer to my question? 










—


 what specific and binding measures it will take to implement the ‘Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe’ adopted on 20 September 2011?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(11 December 2012)
Before considering the re-use of food surpluses for human consumption, compliance with EU Food Safety legislation is to be ensured. 
The Commission is working with all relevant stakeholders to identify the most appropriate actions at EU level in the context of the Advisory Group on the Food Chain, Animal and Plant Health (first meeting on 5/10/2012 — second meeting on 8/2/2013). At this stage no decision has been taken on the nature of the follow-up. 
In the context of the ‘FUSIONS (600)’ project that runs from 2012 till 2016 an extensive EU database on good practices on food waste reduction initiatives will be set up. In the meantime a user-friendly compilation of good practices will be included in the Commission's food waste website in early 2013.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010228/12
al Consejo
María Irigoyen Pérez (S&D)
(9 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: Creación de un Consejo para la política de cohesión
Desde hace años se viene planteando la necesidad y la idoneidad de crear un Consejo para la política de cohesión. En 2009, el Informe Barca subrayó la importancia del refuerzo del sistema de contrapoderes institucionales entre la Comisión, el Parlamento Europeo y el Consejo, mediante la creación formal de un Consejo para la política de cohesión. En 2012, la actual crisis económica y financiera ha puesto de manifiesto la importancia de fortalecer el vínculo entre la política de cohesión europea y la gobernanza económica europea con el objetivo de asegurar que la efectividad del gasto de los Fondos del Marco Estratégico Común se sostenga a través de políticas económicas sólidas pero sin que ello suponga la desvirtuación del objetivo central de la política de cohesión: la expresión de la solidaridad de la Unión Europea (UE) con los países y regiones menos desarrollados.
Hace unos días, en la celebración de la última reunión informal de ministros responsables de la política de cohesión europea, la Presidencia chipriota presentó una propuesta para la creación de una nueva formación del Consejo, compuesta por los ministros del ramo, que se reuniría por lo menos dos veces al año. ¿Cómo ha sido acogida esta propuesta entre los Estados miembros? ¿Cuando podría celebrarse la primera reunión? 
Al hilo de esa reunión informal de los ministros responsables de la política de cohesión europea, el Comisario de Política Regional de la UE, Johannes Hahn, ha llamado la atención sobre el cambio dramático que está sufriendo la política de cohesión al pasar de ser un instrumento de solidaridad a una estrategia de inversiones, tal y como vengo manifestando desde que comenzaron los trabajos sobre la nueva estrategia de los fondos estructurales y la política de cohesión de la UE para el periodo 2014-2020. ¿Cómo piensa frenar el Consejo esta evolución que supone la subordinación de la política de cohesión para objetivos de política económica y que amenaza con echar por tierra los esfuerzos realizados y los éxitos conseguidos hasta ahora?
Respuesta
(30 de enero de 2013)
Como se esboza en las conclusiones de la reunión informal de Ministros encargados de la política de cohesión que tuvo lugar en Nicosia el 6 de noviembre de 2012, elaboradas por la Presidencia, los Ministros respaldaron la idea de celebrar periódicamente a nivel político un debate sobre la política de cohesión y su aplicación en el marco formal del Consejo, pero no precisaron qué formación del Consejo debía celebrarlo.
El Consejo no ha tomado ninguna posición formal al respecto.
Cabe mencionar asimismo que el Consejo de 16 de diciembre de  2012, en su formación de Asuntos Generales, al que asistieron principalmente los Ministros responsables de la política de cohesión, mantuvo un debate de orientación sobre política de cohesión.
En cuanto a la futura política de cohesión para el próximo periodo de financiación, que se está examinando en el Consejo, las orientaciones generales parciales ya acordadas no incluyen disposiciones relativas a la condicionalidad macroeconómica, sobre la cual el Consejo debe aún adoptar su posición.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010228/12
to the Council
María Irigoyen Pérez (S&D)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Creation of a council for cohesion policy
For some years now, people have been talking about the need for a special council for cohesion policy. The Barca report of 2009 emphasised the importance of strengthening the system of checks and balances between the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council, through the creation of a formal council for cohesion policy. In 2012, the economic and financial crisis has highlighted the need for the link between European cohesion policy and European economic governance to be strengthened in order to ensure that funding under the Common Strategic Framework continues to be channelled effectively through the implementation of sound economic policies, but without diverging from the principal objective of cohesion policy, which is to express the EU's solidarity with the least developed countries and regions.
A few days ago, at the last informal meeting of the ministers responsible for European cohesion policy, the Cypriot Presidency presented a proposal to create a new council, comprising relevant ministers, which would meet at least twice a year. How has this proposal been received by Member States? When could the first meeting be held? 
Following the informal meeting of the ministers responsible for cohesion policy, the EU Commissioner for Regional Policy, Johannes Hahn, said that cohesion policy was changing dramatically from a solidarity instrument into an investment strategy. I have been emphasising this point since work began on the new structural fund strategy and the EU cohesion policy for 2014-2020. What does the Council intend to do to slow down this process whereby cohesion policy is being subordinated to economic policy objectives and which could nullify everything that has been achieved until now?
Reply
(30 January 2013)
As outlined in the Presidency Conclusions of the Informal Meeting of Ministers responsible for Cohesion Policy in Nicosia on 6 November 2012, Ministers supported the idea of a regular dedicated debate on Cohesion Policy and its implementation at political level within the formal framework of the Council, but did not say which Council formation this should be.
The Council has not taken any formal position on this issue.
It should also be mentioned that the Council of 16 December 2011, in its General Affairs formation, which was mainly attended by Ministers responsible for Cohesion Policy, held an orientation debate on cohesion policy.
As to the future Cohesion Policy for the next financing period, which is under examination by the Council, the partial general approaches which have already been agreed on do not cover the provisions relating to macroeconomic conditionality, on which the Council still has to establish its position.
(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris E-010229/12
adresată Comisiei
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(9 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: Situaţia terenurilor agricole din Ungaria
Primul ministru al Ungariei a anunţat că guvernul său va adopta în curând un nou act normativ prin care va interzice străinilor să cumpere terenuri agricole. Premierul Orban a precizat că investitorii străini nu vor mai putea cumpăra terenuri arabile şi a afirmat că reguli similare se aplică în ţări precum Franţa şi Austria.
Comisia este rugată să răspundă la următoarele întrebări:







Are Ungaria sau alt stat membru posibilitatea de a adopta astfel de reglementări?











Care este regimul achiziţionării de terenuri de către investitorii străini în Franţa şi Austria, statele menţionate de primul ministru ungar?




Răspuns dat de dl Barnier în numele Comisiei
(16 ianuarie 2013)






1.


Comisia reamintește că legislația din statele membre cu privire la achiziționarea de terenuri agricole trebuie să fie conformă cu dreptul UE, în special cu dispozițiile TFUE privind libera circulație a capitalurilor, precum și cu jurisprudența relevantă a CJUE. Aceasta a stabilit că libera circulație a capitalurilor poate fi restricționată doar de normele naționale justificate prin motivele menționate la articolul 65 alineatul (1) din TFUE, în special din motive de ordine publică și siguranță publică, și de cerințele prioritare de interes public, cu condiția ca legislația națională în cauză să fie adecvată pentru realizarea obiectivului urmărit și să nu depășească ceea ce este necesar în vederea îndeplinirii acestuia (principiul proporționalității). În plus, trebuie să se respecte articolul 65 alineatul (3), care prevede că aceste măsuri și proceduri „nu trebuie să constituie un mijloc de discriminare arbitrară”.




Totuși, în mai multe state membre care au aderat la UE în 2004 și 2007 se aplică derogări temporare în acest domeniu. În cazul Ungariei, Tratatul de aderare și Decizia 2010/792/UE a Comisiei permit ca interdicțiile prevăzute de legislația națională existentă la momentul aderării să fie menținute până la 1 mai 2014 în ceea ce privește achiziționarea de terenuri agricole de către cetățenii nerezidenți și toate persoanele juridice (601).






2.


Comisia consideră că autoritățile celor două state membre în cauză sunt cele mai în măsură să furnizeze informații complete cu privire la legislația lor specifică. Cu toate acestea, Comisia ar dori să sublinieze că orice eventuale restricții existente cu privire la achiziționarea de terenuri agricole trebuie să facă obiectul unui control în cadrul contextului lor specific, ținându-se cont de posibilele justificări și circumstanțe care pot varia pe teritoriul UE.




(English version)
Question for written answer E-010229/12
to the Commission
Rareş-Lucian Niculescu (PPE)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Farmland in Hungary
Viktor Orban, the Hungarian Prime Minister, has announced his government’s intention of adopting new legislation in the near future to prevent the purchase of farmland by non-nationals, indicating that similar rules apply to foreign investors in countries such as France and Austria.
In view of this:







Can the Commission indicate whether the adoption of such measures by Hungary or other Member States is admissible?











What rules apply to the purchase of land by foreign investors in France and Austria, the countries referred to by the Hungarian Prime Minister?




Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission
(16 January 2013)






1.


The Commission recalls that legislation in Member States on the acquisition of agricultural land has to comply with EC law, in particular the provisions of the TFEU on the free movement of capital as well as the relevant jurisprudence of the CJEU. The CJEU has established that the free movement of capital may only be restricted by national rules which are justified by reasons referred to in Article 65(1) of the TFEU, notably on grounds of public policy and public security, and by overriding requirements of the general interest provided that the national legislation in question is suitable for securing the objective which it pursues and does not go beyond what is necessary in order to attain it (principle of proportionality). In addition, Article 65(3), stating that such measures and procedures 




‘shall not constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination’, has to be respected.
Nevertheless, in a number of Member States that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007 temporary derogations apply in this field. For Hungary, the Accession Treaty and Commission Decision 2010/792/EU allow that prohibitions in the national legislation existing at the time of accession be maintained until 1 May 2014 concerning the acquisition of agricultural land by non-resident citizens and all legal persons (602).






2.


The Commission considers that the authorities of the two Member States concerned are in the best position to give complete information on their specific legislation. The Commission would like to emphasise, however, that any possible restrictions existing on the acquisition of agricultural real estate are to be scrutinised within their given context, taking into consideration possible justifications and circumstances that may vary across the EU.




(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010230/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Traffico di donne in Bosnia-Erzegovina: l'UE intervenga
La Bosnia-Erzegovina risulta essere uno dei paesi dell'area dei Balcani maggiormente coinvolti nel traffico di donne a scopo di sfruttamento sessuale; questo paese, inoltre, non è solo paese di destinazione, ma sempre più un paese di transito per i traffici di esseri umani. 
In Bosnia, secondo il progetto di ricerca finanziato dell'UE HUMSEC (Human Security, Terrorism and Organised Crime in the Western Balkans), le vittime della tratta sono donne di età variabile tra i 14 e i 32 anni, originarie di solito delle zone più povere del paese, con situazioni familiari difficili, un livello di educazione e di cultura molto basso.
Nel documento «Strategia di allargamento e sfide principali per il periodo 2012-2013» (COM(2012)600), la Commissione dedica solo una frase a questa problematica: «Occorre intensificare la lotta contro la tratta di esseri umani e ovviare alle carenze in termini di identificazione delle vittime».
Può dire la Commissione come intende intervenire e ovviare a tali carenze?
Può dire, altresì, se sta finanziando, o ha intenzione di finanziare anche per i prossimi anni, il progetto Humsec? E a quanto ammonta tale finanziamento?
Risposta di Štefan Füle a nome della Commissione
(7 gennaio 2013)
Nelle sue relazioni periodiche sui progressi realizzati dalla Bosnia-Erzegovina, la Commissione controlla l'impegno profuso dal paese nella lotta contro la tratta di esseri umani; nella relazione di quest'anno ha notato che i progressi sono stati limitati e ha registrato carenze dal punto di vista istituzionale e legislativo. La Commissione continuerà a sorvegliare la situazione ed a stimolare la riforma, anche nel contesto del meccanismo di controllo per il periodo successivo alla liberalizzazione dei visti.
L'assistenza, che costituisce uno strumento per rimediare alle carenze, è stata elargita tramite lo strumento di assistenza preadesione (IPA), con interventi che comprendono varie azioni di potenziamento delle capacità in settori interconnessi quali la migrazione irregolare, la gestione della migrazione e la tratta di esseri umani. È stato inoltre lanciato un ampio progetto a sostegno delle autorità di contrasto alla criminalità in tutta la Bosnia-Erzegovina. 
Il progetto HUMSEC («Human Security in the Western Balkan region: the impact of transnational terrorist and criminal organisations on the peace-building process of the region
», «Sicurezza umana nei Balcani occidentali: l'incidenza delle organizzazioni terroristiche e criminali transnazionali sul processo di pace nella regione»), finanziato tramite un invito a presentare proposte nell'ambito del Sesto programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo, è stato completato nel 2009. I programmi di ricerca e sviluppo non prevedono la possibilità di continuare direttamente a finanziare un progetto di ricerca dopo il suo termine. Nell'ambito del Settimo programma quadro di ricerca, la Commissione ha pubblicato nel luglio 2012 un invito a presentare proposte che comprende il tema della tratta di esseri umani: «Addressing demand in anti-trafficking efforts and policies
» («Far fronte alla domanda nelle iniziative e nelle politiche antitratta»). Il progetto o i progetti di ricerca che saranno finanziati in seguito a questo invito potranno beneficiare di un contributo massimo di 2,5 milioni di euro da parte dell'Unione europea.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010230/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Trafficking of women in Bosnia-Herzegovina: call for EU intervention
Bosnia-Herzegovina is one of the Balkan countries most heavily involved in the trafficking of women for sexual exploitation. Furthermore, not only is it a destination country but it is increasingly becoming a transit country for the trafficking of human beings.
In Bosnia, according to the EU-funded HUMSEC(Human Security, Terrorism and Organised Crime in the western Balkans) research project, the victims of this trade are women between 14 and 32 years of age, usually from the poorest areas of the country, from difficult backgrounds and very poorly educated.
In the document ‘Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2012‐2013’ (COM(2012)600), the Commission dedicates just one sentence to this problem: ‘Efforts to fight trafficking in human beings need to be intensified and identification of victims improved’.
Can the Commission say what action it will take to remedy those shortcomings?
Can it also say whether it is funding, or if it intends to fund the HUMSECproject in future years? What is the amount of this funding?
Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(7 January 2013)
The Commission has been monitoring efforts of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) with regard to the fight against trafficking in human beings in its regular Progress Reports. In this year's Report, the Commission pointed out that BiH had made only limited progress. Institutional and legislative deficiencies were identified. The Commission will continue monitoring the situation and stimulating the reform, including within the framework of the Post-Visa Liberalisation Monitoring Mechanism.
As regards the assistance which is also a tool to remedy short comings, it has been channelled through the Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA): initiatives included several capacity-building actions in interlinked sectors such as illegal migration, migration management, and human trafficking. A broader project in support to law enforcement agencies throughout BiH has also been launched. 
The project ‘Human Security in the Western Balkan region: the impact of transnational terrorist and criminal organisations on the peace-building process of the region (HUMSEC)’, was funded through a Call for Proposals under the Sixth Research and Development Framework Programme, and completed in 2009. The Research and Development Framework Programmes do not foresee the possibility of directly continuing the funding of a research project beyond its duration. Under the Seventh Research Framework Programme, the Commission has published in July 2012 a Call for Proposals that includes a topic on trafficking in human beings: ‘Addressing demand in anti-trafficking efforts and policies’. The research project(s) that will be funded as a result of this Call for Proposals will have a maximum EU contribution of EUR 2.5 million.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010231/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Situazione economica della regione dei Balcani occidentali
Nella comunicazione «Strategia di allargamento e sfide principali per il periodo 2012-2013» (COM(2012)600) la Commissione afferma che «la maggior parte delle economie dei Balcani occidentali ha conosciuto una nuova contrazione nel 2012, sulla scia degli sviluppi negativi all’interno dell'Unione. Croazia, Bosnia-Erzegovina e Serbia sono di nuovo in una fase di recessione».
La Commissione non ritiene che, come nel caso particolare della Croazia prossima all'entrata nell'UE, l'accollarsi un paese già di per sé in difficili situazioni finanziarie possa contribuire ad aggravare la già non prospera economia europea?
Risposta di Štefan Füle a nome della Commissione
(10 gennaio 2013)
In passato gli allargamenti dell'Unione europea hanno garantito vantaggi economici sia ai paesi di nuova adesione, sia all'UE nel suo complesso. Tali vantaggi sono derivati per lo più dall'ampliamento del mercato interno. È prevedibile che l'effetto positivo si ripeterà con l'allargamento ai Balcani occidentali, in particolare con l'imminente adesione della Croazia.
Prima della crisi economica e finanziaria mondiale le economie dei paesi dei Balcani occidentali crescevano ad un ritmo superiore a quello dell'UE. La risposta di questi paesi alla crisi è stata nel complesso appropriata, anche se, per garantire una ripresa sostenibile, deve essere ancora attuata una serie di riforme. L'economia croata è attualmente in fase di recessione, così come le economie di vari Stati membri dell'UE. La Commissione prevede che il PIL nazionale calerà dell'1,9 % nel 2012, per poi stabilizzarsi nel 2013. Il debito dell'amministrazione pubblica croata è aumentato in modo costante dall'inizio della crisi, ma è ancora al di sotto del 60 % del PIL. Secondo i servizi della Commissione, nel 2012 il disavanzo pubblico dovrebbe essere pari al 4,4 % del PIL.
L'economia croata, compreso il settore finanziario, è già fortemente integrata nell'UE; si assiste quindi ad un'interazione tra le condizioni economiche e finanziarie dell'UE e della Croazia e ciò a prescindere dall'effettiva adesione della Croazia all'Unione europea. I preparativi del paese per l'adesione all'UE, anche attraverso il dialogo economico con la Commissione, hanno rafforzato la resilienza dell'economia. Le sfide attuali della Croazia potranno essere affrontate meglio nel quadro dell'adesione all'Unione europea.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010231/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Economic situation in the western Balkans
In the communication ‘Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2012‐2013’ (COM(2012)600), the Commission states that ‘the majority of economies of the western Balkans contracted again in 2012, following negative developments in the European Union. Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia are back in recession’.
As in the specific case of Croatia, which is about to join the EU, does the Commission not believe that the accession of a country that is already experiencing financial difficulties of its own might help make matters worse for the already floundering European economy?
Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(10 January 2013)
Previous enlargements of the EU have brought economic benefits to both the acceding countries and the EU as a whole. Such benefits mostly stemmed from the widening of the internal market. The same can be expected to happen with the enlargement to the western Balkans, and in particular with the imminent accession of Croatia.
Before the global economic and financial crisis, the economies of the Western Balkan countries were growing faster than the EU. Their response to the crisis was by and large appropriate, although, in order to ensure sustainable recovery, a number of reforms remain to be implemented.
The Croatian economy is currently in recession, just as the economies of several EU Member States. The Commission forecasts that the country's GDP will contract by 1.9% in 2012, before stabilising in 2013. The debt of Croatia's general government has been steadily increasing since the beginning of the crisis, but is still below 60% of GDP. The Commission forecasts a fiscal deficit of general government corresponding to 4.4% of GDP in 2012.
The Croatian economy, including the financial sector, is already highly integrated into the EU, hence the economic and financial conditions in the EU and in Croatia already interact. This is irrespective of Croatia's actual accession to the Union. The country's preparations for EU accession, including through its economic dialogue with the Commission, have strengthened the economy's resilience. Croatia's present challenges can be best addressed in the framework of EU membership.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010232/12
alla Commissione
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Intervento dell'UE in difesa dei luoghi di culto cristiani a Cipro del Nord
Negli ultimi 38 anni le libertà religiose nella parte settentrionale di Cipro, ovvero la parte dell'isola occupata dai turchi, non sono state né rispettate né applicate. 
Nel suo intervento l'arcivescovo Chrysostomos II denuncia le distruzioni e i saccheggi che «sistematicamente» subiscono i luoghi di culto e i monumenti, le chiese e i monasteri, e tutto ciò che è sacro per i cristiani, compresi i cimiteri. 
In generale si sta distruggendo ogni traccia dell'esistenza e della presenza di una popolazione cristiana nel nord di Cipro. 
Come intende la Commissione intervenire affinché anche a Cipro del Nord vengano rispettati i luoghi di culto e le libertà religiose esercitate senza restrizioni e timori da parte della minoranza cristiana?
Risposta di Štefan Füle a nome della Commissione
(4 gennaio 2013)
La Commissione europea deplora i danni arrecati al patrimonio religioso e culturale nella parte settentrionale di Cipro e prende atto delle preoccupazioni espresse dall’onorevole deputato. La Commissione attribuisce grande importanza alla conservazione del patrimonio culturale di Cipro, come dimostrato dal suo costante sostegno al comitato tecnico bicomunitario sul patrimonio culturale.
Il programma di aiuti alla comunità turco-cipriota ha erogato 2 milioni di euro nel 2011 a sostegno delle attività svolte dal suddetto comitato che opera sotto l’egida dell’ONU. Nel quadro del programma di aiuti per il 2012, la Commissione si è impegnata a continuare a sostenere il lavoro di tale comitato con un ulteriore contributo di 2 milioni di euro.
Il comitato tecnico bicomunitario sul patrimonio culturale è stato istituito nell’aprile 2008, a seguito di un accordo tra i leader delle due comunità ed è responsabile della conservazione del vasto patrimonio culturale dell’isola. Sinora, il comitato ha individuato 10 siti culturali sul territorio dell’isola, tra cui alcune chiese nella parte settentrionale di Cipro, che necessitano di provvedimenti urgenti e ai quali verranno destinati i fondi UE.
La situazione specifica del patrimonio culturale e religioso nella parte settentrionale di Cipro è stata anche analizzata nel corso di un forum a Limassol nel novembre 2012, organizzato dalla presidenza del Consiglio cipriota e dal Sovrano Ordine di Malta, con il sostegno dell’Unesco e della Commissione.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010232/12
to the Commission
Mario Borghezio (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Intervention by the EU in defence of places of Christian worship in Northern Cyprus
During the past 38 years, religious freedoms have been neither respected nor permitted in the northern part of Cyprus, i.e. the part of the island occupied by the Turks.
In a statement, Archbishop Chrysostomos II has denounced the destruction and pillaging ‘systematically’ inflicted on places of worship, monuments, churches and monasteries and indeed everything which Christians hold sacred, including cemeteries.
In general, all traces of the existence of a Christian population in Northern Cyprus are being wiped out.
What action will the Commission take to secure respect, in Northern Cyprus as elsewhere, for places of worship and religious freedoms, enabling the Christian minority to exercise them without restrictions or fear?
Answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The Commission deplores any damage to religious and cultural heritage in the northern part of Cyprus and takes note of the concerns of the Honourable Member. The European Commission attributes great importance to the preservation of cultural heritage in Cyprus, as is demonstrated by its continuing support for the bi-communal Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage. 
The Aid Programme for the Turkish Cypriot community provided EUR2 million in 2011 for the support of activities of the bi-communal Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage operating under UN auspices. Under the 2012 Aid Programme, the Commission is committed to continue supporting the work of the bi-communal committee with a further contribution of EUR2 million. 
The bi-communal Technical Committee on Cultural Heritage was established in April 2008, following an agreement between the leaders of the two communities. The bi-communal committee is responsible for the preservation of the island wide cultural heritage. So far, the bi-communal technical Committee has identified 10 cultural sites throughout the island in need of emergency measures, including churches in the northern part of Cyprus, to which EU funds will be devoted. 
The specific situation of the religious and cultural heritage in the northern part of Cyprus was also analysed during a forum in Limassol in November 2012 organised by the Cypriot Council Presidency and the Sovereign Order of Malta, and supported by Unesco and the Commission.
(Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej E-010233/12
do Komisji
Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR)
(9 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: Łamanie wolności słowa w Polsce
Jak Komisja Europejska ocenia przykłady łamania wolności słowa w Polsce w kontekście wyrzucenia z pracy zastępcy redaktora naczelnego i szefa działu krajowego „Rzeczpospolitej” przez jej właściciela pana Grzegorza Hajdarowicza? To jeden z wielu przykładów ograniczania swobody wypowiedzi w Polsce w ostatnim czasie, zarówno przez prywatnych właścicieli mediów, jak i władzę. W tej sprawie protestują organizacje dziennikarskie w Polsce oraz opinia publiczna i liczne media. Czy w tak ewidentnej sprawie Komisja zabierze głos?
Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarz Neelie Kroes w imieniu Komisji
(19 grudnia 2012 r.)
Wolność mediów jest chroniona przez art. 11 ust. 2 Karty praw podstawowych. Jednakże, zgodnie z jej art. 51 ust. 1, postanowienia zawarte w Karcie są wiążące dla państw członkowskich jedynie wtedy, gdy wdrażają one prawo unijne. Z informacji dostarczonych przez Szanownego Pana Posła wynikałoby, że fakty, o których mowa w pytaniu, nie są związane z wdrażaniem prawa unijnego. To organy krajowe, w tym sądy, ustalają, czy wolność mediów została naruszona.
Komisja Europejska regularnie śledzi rozwój sytuacji w zakresie wolności mediów w różnych państwach członkowskich, lecz jej kompetencje są ograniczone. Komisja Europejska powierzyła Centrum ds. Pluralizmu i Wolności Mediów Europejskiego Instytutu Uniwersyteckiego we Florencji przeprowadzenie analizy zakresu kompetencji UE w obszarze wolności mediów.
Komisja Europejska nadal pracuje nad różnymi inicjatywami związanymi z wolnością i pluralizmem mediów. Komisja powołała grupę wysokiego szczebla pod przewodnictwem prof. Vike-Freibergi, byłej prezydent Łotwy, w celu rozważenia najważniejszych kwestii oraz udzielania porad w ich zakresie. Grupa przedstawi sprawozdanie w przyszłym roku.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010233/12
to the Commission
Ryszard Czarnecki (ECR)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Violation of free speech in Poland
What is the Commission’s assessment of the cases in which freedom of speech has been violated in Poland, with specific reference to the sacking by the owner of the daily newspaper ‘Rzeczpospolita
’, Grzegorz Hajdarowicz, of the editor‐in‐chief and the head of the paper’s national section? This is just one of many cases in which freedom of expression has been restricted — both by the owners of private media and by the government — in recent times in Poland. This case has provoked protests from organisations representing journalists in Poland, as well as from the public and numerous media sources. Does the Commission intend to speak out on such a blatant violation of free speech?
Answer given by Ms Kroes on behalf of the Commission
(19 December 2012)
The freedom of the media is protected by the article 11(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. However according to its Article 51(1) the Charter is binding on the Member States only when they implement Union law. On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member it would appear that the facts referred to in the question do not relate to the implementation of Union law. It is for national authorities, including courts, to determine if the freedom of the media was violated.
The European Commission regularly follows developments in different Member States concerning media freedom but its competences are limited. The European Commission has entrusted the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom of the European University Institute of Florence to conduct an analysis on the scope of EU competences in the field of media freedom
The European Commission continues to work on different initiatives related to freedom and pluralism of media. The Commission has set up a High Level Group Chaired by Prof. Vike-Freiberga, former President of Latvia, to reflect and advise on the underlying issues. The Goup will deliver its report early next year.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010234/12
an die Kommission
Renate Sommer (PPE)
(9. November 2012)

Betrifft: Garten‐ und Landschaftsbau im neuen Forschungsrahmenprogramm „Horizont 2020“
Innerstädtische Grünflächen haben eine unschätzbare Bedeutung für die Verbesserung des Stadtklimas. Sie können z. B. ganz wesentlich zur Verringerung der Lärm-, Treibhausgas‐ und Feinstaubbelastung beitragen, was insbesondere in Räumen mit hoher Besiedelungsdichte und dichter Verkehrsinfrastruktur dringend notwendig ist. Daher erscheint die Einbeziehung entsprechender Forschungsaktivitäten in das neue Forschungsrahmenprogramm „Horizont 2020“ als wichtiger Beitrag zur Untersuchung der Wechselwirkungen von Biosphäre und menschlicher Gesundheit, zum innerstädtischen Management von Grund‐ und Oberflächenwasser, zur nachhaltigen Stadtentwicklung sowie insgesamt zur Bewältigung des Klimawandels.






1.


Teilt die Kommission die Auffassung über die hohe Bedeutung innerstädtischer Grünflächen, insbesondere für die menschliche Gesundheit und eine nachhaltige Stadtentwicklung und insbesondere angesichts der Tatsache, dass rund 80 % der europäischen Bevölkerung in städtischen Gebieten leben?










2.


In welchem Maße plant die Kommission, entsprechende Forschungsaktivitäten mit garten‐ und landschaftsbaulichem Hintergrund in den Ausschreibungen von 




„Horizont 2020“ zu berücksichtigen?






3.


Teilt die Kommission die Auffassung, dass im Bereich 




„innerstädtisches Grün“ gegebenenfalls neben Grundlagenforschung insbesondere die anwendungsorientierte Forschung gefördert werden sollte?
Antwort von Frau Geoghegan-Quinn im Namen der Kommission
(21. Dezember 2012)






1.


Die Kommission ist sich des vielfältigen Nutzens bewusst, den innerstädtische Grünflächen bieten können, beispielsweise in Bezug auf die Anpassung an den Klimawandel, die qualitative Verbesserung von Leben und Gesundheit der Menschen sowie die Erhaltung von Ökosystemen und ihrer Dienstleistungen.




Grüne Städte waren Gegenstand mehrerer EU-Initiativen wie der „Thematischen Strategie für die städtische Umwelt“ , des Wettbewerbs „Grüne Hauptstadt Europas“  und des Berichts „Städte von morgen: Herausforderungen, Visionen, Wege nach vorn“ . Die Forschung spielt eine wichtige Rolle, wenn es darum geht, eine solide Faktengrundlage für die Entwicklung und Unterstützung von Strategien zu schaffen. 
2., 3. Aus dem RP7  (603) wird bereits Forschung in Bereichen wie „Biologische Vielfalt in der Stadt“ und „Grüne Infrastruktur“ finanziert, um die Bereitstellung von Ökosystemdienstleistungen sowie kurze Nahrungsmittellieferketten in städtischen und stadtnahen Gebieten zu fördern. 
Der Vorschlag der Kommission für das Programm „Horizont 2020“ umfasst die gesamte Bandbreite von Forschung und Innovation zur Bewältigung der in der Strategie Europa 2020 und ihren Leitinitiativen genannten großen gesellschaftlichen Herausforderungen. Vor allem im Rahmen der Herausforderung 5 „Klimaschutz, Ressourceneffizienz und Rohstoffe“  wird auf Forschungsarbeiten zu städtischen Ökosystemen verwiesen.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010234/12
to the Commission
Renate Sommer (PPE)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Horticulture and landscaping in the new Horizon 2020 framework programme for research and innovation
Green areas in inner cities are invaluable for improving the urban climate. They can, for example, play a very important role in reducing sound, greenhouse gas and particulate matter pollution, which is urgently needed, particularly in densely populated areas and in areas with dense transport networks. Therefore, the inclusion of appropriate research activities in the new Horizon 2020 framework programme for research and innovation would appear to be an important contribution towards studying the interaction between the biosphere and human health, the management of ground and surface water in inner cities, sustainable urban development and, in general, addressing climate change. 






1.


Does the Commission share the view that inner-city green areas are very important, in particular for human health and sustainable urban development and in view of the fact that around 80% of Europeans live in urban areas?










2.


To what extent is the Commission planning to take account of appropriate research activities relating to horticulture and landscaping in invitations to tender under Horizon 2020?










3.


Does the Commission share the view that, where appropriate, applied research as well as basic research should be promoted in connection with inner-city green areas?




Answer given by Ms Geoghegan-Quinn on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)






1.


The Commission is well aware of the 




wide range of benefits and services that urban green infrastructure can deliver such as adaptation to climate change, improving the quality of life and health of people, and preserving ecosystems and their services.
Green cities were addressed by several EU policy initiatives such as the ‘Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment’ (604), the ‘European Green Capital Award’ (605), and the report ‘Cities of Tomorrow: Challenges, Visions, Ways Forward’ (606). Research plays a significant role in providing sound evidence base for the development and for underpinning strategies. 
2, 3. FP7 (607) already funds research on areas such as urban biodiversity and green infrastructure to enhance the provision of ecosystem services as well as short chain delivery of food for urban-peri-urban areas. 
The Commission's proposal for Horizon 2020 comprises the full range of research and innovation to tackle the major societal challenges mentioned in the Europe 2020 strategy and its flagship initiatives. In particular, under the Challenge 5 ‘Climate action, resource efficiency and raw materials’ (608), a reference is made to research on urban ecosystems. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010235/12
alla Commissione
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Ritiro urgente e precauzionale del vaccino esavalente: quali azioni in attuazione del principio di precauzione ex articolo 191 del TFUE?
È recente la notizia che l'Istituto di Stato per il controllo dei farmaci in Slovacchia, diffondendo un documento urgente (riferimento n. 12/5541 — 389/2012/900) ha imposto il ritiro immediato dal commercio del farmaco Infanrix Hexa, nome commerciale del cosiddetto vaccino esavalente. La motivazione ufficiale è che durante il controllo di qualità è stata riscontrata una contaminazione microbica dell'ambiente di produzione. Il comunicato riporta che «il vaccino in oggetto non è microbicamente contaminato, ma, allo scopo di assicurare il mantenimento dello standard di qualità, l'ente di registrazione accetta il ritiro del farmaco Infanrix Hexa dalle farmacie e dai fornitori sanitari». Il ritiro è stato disposto con urgenza massima: classe 1. Secondo la classificazione stabilita dalle norme europee (EMA/INS/GMP/459921/2010) nella cosiddetta «classe d'urgenza 1» sono incluse le urgenze che minacciano potenzialmente la vita oppure possono causare gravi danni alla salute; essa prevede l'attuazione immediata ed urgente del provvedimento. Allo stato attuale, gli Stati membri che hanno ritirato d'urgenza ed in via precauzionale il vaccino Infanrix Hexa sono: Slovacchia, Spagna, Germania, Australia, Francia e Canada (a metà ottobre: 20 nazioni).Le note ufficiali evidenziano che nei laboratori di produzione di questo vaccino esavalente è stata trovata una piccola contaminazione da parte del «Bacillus cereus» — un batterio beta-emolitico patogeno a bastoncino Gram-positivo che produce tossine responsabili d'intossicazioni alimentari anche fatali. Tale batterio è comunemente presente nel suolo e nella polvere e contamina frequentemente alimenti a base di riso e pasta, carne e vegetali, prodotti lattiero-caseari, minestre, salse, dolciumi non raffreddati rapidamente ed efficacemente dopo la cottura e/o adeguatamente conservati. La resistenza delle spore ne rende difficile l'eliminazione e ne rappresenta il principale fattore di contaminazione. Esistono diversi ceppi di Bacillus cereus: tuttavia, ad oggi, non sono disponibili metodi in grado di distinguere tra ceppi virulenti e non-virulenti. Il suo isolamento nel corso di broncopolmoniti, batteriemie, setticemie, meningiti, infezioni dell'orecchio e delle vie urinarie, lo fa ritenere un patogeno di una certa rilevanza. In particolare, per il ruolo svolto in congiuntiviti acute, iridocicliti purulente, panoftalmie emorragiche, endoftalmiti post-traumatiche e metastatiche, anche a carattere fulminante, è considerato uno dei microrganismi più pericolosi per l'organo visivo. 
Considerato che il ritiro d'urgenza del farmaco in più paesi avvalora le tesi argomentative a sostegno della potenziale pericolosità dei vaccini, sia per i loro componenti antigenici che per i loro componenti tossicologici, può dire la Commissione quali misure intende adottare nel rispetto del principio di precauzione sancito dall'articolo 191 del TFUE, in modo da chiarire la posizione sul vaccino esavalente e può riferire sugli studi che evidenziano la pericolosità degli effetti a lungo termine dei vaccini? 
Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione
(21 dicembre 2012)
Il 5 ottobre 2012 la Commissione è stata informata del ritiro di alcuni lotti di Infanrix Hexa. Dal 2001 Infanrix Hexa è stato autorizzato dalla Commissione dal momento che il rapporto rischi/benefici del vaccino è stato considerato positivo per i pazienti. Nel fascicolo di autorizzazione alla commercializzazione il richiedente doveva indicare i risultati di un'ampia serie di prove cliniche al fine di dimostrare che i pazienti avevano sviluppato un'immunità nei confronti della malattia, comunicando inoltre tutti gli effetti collaterali negativi. 
Il ritiro volontario riguarda solo alcuni lotti dei vaccini Infanrix. Il provvedimento è stato adottato dalla società come misura cautelativa in seguito all'individuazione di un microorganismo (bacillus cereus) nell'ambiente di produzione durante la fabbricazione di alcuni lotti del vaccino. Una contaminazione dell'ambiente circostante non significa necessariamente la contaminazione del prodotto stesso. Tutte le prove analitiche (comprese le prove di sterilità) sulle provette erano conformi alle specifiche e non è stato osservato alcun aumento negli effetti collaterali negativi in rapporto all'utilizzazione di questi vaccini. I pazienti che hanno ricevuto dosi provenienti dai lotti interessati devono essere controllati nel quadro di una normale prassi post-immunizzazione. Tutti gli Stati membri, la Commissione e l'Agenzia europea per i medicinali sono stati informati seguendo le vie ordinarie. I difetti di qualità e i dati relativi alla sicurezza (effetti negativi collaterali) del prodotto sono esaminati dall'Agenzia europea per i medicinali. La Commissione continuerà a seguire le ricerche attualmente in corso e adotterà, se necessario, misure a livello regolamentare.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010235/12
to the Commission
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Urgent and precautionary recall of hexavalent vaccine: what action is being taken in implementation of the precautionary principle under Article 191 TFEU?
According to recent reports, the Slovakian State Institute for Drug Control has issued an urgent document (reference No 12/5541 — 389/2012/900) ordering the immediate withdrawal from sale of the drug Infanrix Hexa, the trade name of the aforementioned hexavalent vaccine. The official justification is that microbial contamination of the production environment was detected during quality control. The notice states that ‘the vaccine in question is not microbially contaminated but, in order to ensure quality standards are maintained, the registration body approves the recall of the drug Infanrix Hexa from pharmacies and healthcare providers’. The recall was ordered with the utmost urgency: class 1. According to the classification laid down by European standards (EMA/INS/GMP/459921/2010) ‘emergency class 1’ includes emergencies which are potentially life-threatening or which may be seriously harmful to health; it provides for the immediate and urgent implementation of the measure. At present, the Member States that have urgently withdrawn the Infanrix Hexa vaccine as a precaution are: Slovakia, Spain, Germany, Australia, France and Canada (as of mid-October: 20 countries). The official notes show that a minor Bacillus cereus contamination was detected in the laboratories in which this hexavalent vaccine is produced. Bacillus cereus isa beta haemolytic, Gram-positive, rod-shaped pathogen that produces toxins that cause food poisoning, which can be fatal. This bacterium is commonly present in soil and dust and often contaminates rice and pasta-based foodstuffs, meat and vegetables, dairy products, soups, sauces, and desserts that are not cooled rapidly and effectively after cooking and/or stored appropriately. The spores’ resistance makes them difficult to kill and is the main factor in contamination. There are several strains of Bacillus cereus. However, to date, there are no methods that can distinguish between virulent and non-virulent strains. Since the bacterium has been isolated in bronchopneumonia, bacteraemia, septicaemia, meningitis, and ear and urinary tract infections, it is considered a particularly significant pathogen. In particular, due to the role it plays in acute conjunctivitis, purulent iridocyclitis, haemorrhagic panophthalmitis, post-traumatic and metastatic endophthalmitis, including the fulminant variety, it is considered one of the most dangerous microorganisms to the eye. 
Considering that the emergency recall of the drug in several countries lends weight to theories that argue that vaccines are potentially dangerous, due to both their antigenic components and their toxicological components, can the Commission say what measures it will take in accordance with the precautionary principle laid down in Article 191 TFEU, so as to clarify its position on the hexavalent vaccine and can it comment on studies that demonstrate the danger of vaccines’ long-term effects? 
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(21 December 2012)
On 5 October 2012, the Commission was made aware of the recall of certain batches of Infanrix Hexa. Since 2001, Infanrix Hexa has been authorised by the Commission as the benefit/risk balance of the vaccine has been considered positive for patients. In the marketing authorisation dossier, the applicant had to show the results of extensive clinical trials to demonstrate that the patients have developed immunity against the relevant disease but also to report all adverse reactions. 
The voluntary recall concerns only some batches of the Infanrix vaccines. It was taken by the company as a precautionary measure following the detection of a microorganism (bacillus cereus) in the production environment during the manufacturing of some batches of the vaccine. A contamination in the surrounding environment does not necessarily mean a contamination of the product itself. All analytical tests (including sterility tests) on the vials were in compliance with the specification and no increase in adverse events following the use of these vaccines has been observed. Patients who have received doses from the affected batches should be monitored as per routine post-immunisation practice. All Member States, the Commission and the European Medicines Agency were alerted through the established mechanisms. The quality defect and the safety data (adverse reactions) of the product are being reviewed by the European Medicines Agency. The Commission will continue to follow-up the ongoing investigation and will take regulatory action, if necessary.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010236/12
alla Commissione
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Campagna di vaccinazione anti-influenzale a rischio in Italia: quali tutele per i cittadini
Secondo un recente studio presentato al Canadian Cardiovascular Congress di Toronto, il vaccino contro l'influenza dimezza il rischio di morte per infarto e ictus e costituisce un vantaggio sia per le categorie a rischio che per le persone sane. In Italia, le autorità hanno disposto il divieto immediato di acquistare e/o utilizzare alcuni vaccini antinfluenzali (Agrippal, Influpozzi sub unità e adiuvato, Fluad), fino a nuova comunicazione, a causa di possibili gravi effetti collaterali dovuti alla presenza di un quantitativo di aggregati proteici superiore alla norma. Inizialmente, sono stati ritirati dal commercio nazionale, a scopo precauzionale, solo alcuni lotti: lo stesso ministero dichiarava che non vi erano rischi per la salute e che, al contrario, il sistema di sorveglianza aveva svolto un eccellente lavoro di controllo della produzione dei vaccini. L'Italia necessita annualmente di 10-12 milioni di dosi: una delle principali aziende fornisce al Paese 6 milioni di tali dosi e le autorità hanno bloccato 2,3 milioni di vaccini, di cui 487 738 già distribuiti in farmacie e aziende sanitarie. Nel periodo da metà ottobre a metà dicembre, la campagna vaccinale si rivolge ad alcune categorie di soggetti a rischio ed ha il fine ultimo di prevenire forme gravi di influenza e di ridurre la mortalità prematura in gruppi a rischio. Una strategia così condotta ha, inoltre, portato negli anni a un rapporto favorevole tra costo-benefici e costo-efficacia. 
Considerando che la situazione caotica determinata dalla scarsità e dall'incoerenza delle informazioni a livello sanitario vincola i cittadini italiani a non poter prevenire in modo tempestivo eventuali malattie influenzali e li espone maggiormente ad un pericolo, anche di vita, può dire la Commissione se è a conoscenza della criticità venutasi a creare per milioni di cittadini italiani? In caso affermativo, quali misure intende adottare, dal momento che la campagna di vaccinazione antinfluenzale è seriamente a rischio e da più parti si teme che possa venir meno la fiducia dei cittadini nei confronti dello strumento vaccinale, fondamentale per le politiche della prevenzione, in particolare per le categorie a rischio? 
Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione
(15 gennaio 2013)
Per quanto concerne il problema specifico di certi vaccini per l'influenza stagionale, la Commissione europea rinvia l'onorevole deputato alla propria risposta all'interrogazione E-009691/2012 (609). 
Il Consiglio ha adottato nel 2009 una raccomandazione sulla vaccinazione contro l'influenza stagionale. La raccomandazione caldeggia un intervento a livello dell'Unione europea per mitigare l'impatto dell'influenza stagionale incoraggiando la vaccinazione tra i gruppi a rischio e gli operatori sanitari. Tutti gli Stati membri — Italia compresa — sono incoraggiati ad adottare e a implementare piani d'azione nazionali volti a migliorare la copertura della vaccinazione contro l'influenza stagionale. Nel primo semestre del 2013 la Commissione intende presentare al Consiglio una relazione interlocutoria sul modo in cui gli Stati membri attuano questa raccomandazione. La relazione finale è prevista per il 2015.
La definizione delle politiche sanitarie e l'organizzazione e la fornitura di servizi sanitari e di assistenza medica — comprese le vaccinazioni — rientrano però nelle responsabilità dei singoli Stati membri conformemente al trattato sul funzionamento dell'Unione europea.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010236/12
to the Commission
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Influenza vaccination campaign in jeopardy in Italy: what are the safeguards for citizens?
According to a recent study presented at the Canadian Cardiovascular Congress in Toronto, the influenza vaccine halves the risk of death due to heart attack and stroke and is beneficial for both vulnerable groups and healthy people. In Italy, the authorities have ordered an immediate ban on the purchase and/or use of certain influenza vaccines (Agrippal, subunit and adjuvanted Influpozzi, Fluad) until further notice, because of possible serious side effects due to the presence of a higher quantity of protein aggregates than normal. At first, only certain batches were withdrawn from sale nationwide as a precaution. The same Ministry stated that there were no risks to health and that, on the contrary, the monitoring system had worked very well in checking the production of vaccines. Each year, Italy needs 10-12 million doses: one of the major companies provides Italy with 6 million of those doses and the authorities have stopped 2.3 million vaccines, of which 487 738 have already been distributed to pharmacies and health authorities. Between mid-October and mid-December, the vaccine campaign targets certain vulnerable groups with the ultimate aim of preventing serious forms of influenza and reducing premature death in vulnerable groups. This strategy has also led to a favourable cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness ratio over the years. 
Considering that the chaotic situation caused by scarce and inconsistent health information means that Italian citizens cannot duly prevent influenza and increases their exposure to danger, which could be life-threatening, is the Commission aware of the problem that has occurred for millions of Italian citizens? If so, what measures will it take, given that the influenza vaccine campaign is seriously in jeopardy and it is widely feared that citizens might lose trust in the vaccine system, which is vital for prevention policies, particularly for vulnerable groups? 
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(15 January 2013)
As regards the specific problem of certain seasonal influenza vaccines, the European Commission would refer the Honourable Member to its reply to Question E-009691/2012 (610). 
The Council adopted a recommendation on seasonal influenza vaccination in 2009. The recommendation advocates action at the level of the European Union to mitigate the impact of seasonal influenza by encouraging vaccination among risk groups and healthcare workers. All Member States — including Italy — are encouraged to adopt and implement national action plans aimed at improving seasonal influenza vaccination coverage. The Commission intends to put forward to the Council an interim report on how Member States are implementing this recommendation in the first half of 2013. The final report is planned for 2015.
The definition of health policies and the organisation and delivery of health services and medical care — including vaccination — is, however, the responsibility of individual Member States according to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010237/12
alla Commissione
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Azione dell'UE sulla Psoriasi
Il 29 ottobre si è celebrata la Giornata mondiale della psoriasi. Questa giornata è dedicata ai pazienti affetti da psoriasi e artrite psoriasica ed è volta a sensibilizzare l'opinione pubblica sulla psoriasi, malattia infiammatoria cronica del sistema immunitario che interessa quasi il 3 % della popolazione mondiale e circa 14 milioni di persone in Europa.
La psoriasi è molto stigmatizzata e ha un forte impatto sul benessere psicofisico dei pazienti. Studi scientifici hanno anche calcolato l'impatto economico della psoriasi sulla società: il costo medio annuo della psoriasi dalla forma moderata a quella grave è compreso tra i 3 000 e i 9 000 euro per paziente.
Nonostante questo, la psoriasi ha scarsa priorità nei ruolini di marcia dell'assistenza sanitaria per l'UE e gli Stati membri. Di conseguenza, i pazienti affetti da psoriasi non possono ricevere le cure e l'assistenza che necessitano.






1.


Data la diffusione della psoriasi in Europa, può la Commissione spiegare perché il suo portale UE sulla salute non include un riferimento alla psoriasi nel glossario di 




«questioni sanitarie»?






2.


Intende la Commissione avviare o sostenere campagne o attività specificamente finalizzate ad accrescere la consapevolezza sulla scarsa attenzione a questa malattia negli Stati membri?










3.


Più in particolare, intende la Commissione adottare misure specifiche volte a migliorare gli standard di cura per le persone affette da psoriasi negli Stati membri?










4.


Infine, può la Commissione fornire informazioni sui finanziamenti disponibili a livello comunitario per svolgere attività di ricerca sulle cure mediche per la psoriasi?




Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione
(14 gennaio 2013)
Il portale europeo della sanità intende fornire un quadro dei fattori di rischio e dei determinanti sanitari in relazione alle malattie importanti e croniche e fa particolare riferimento ai grandi gruppi di malattie e alle malattie per le quali sono in atto politiche e attività europee specifiche. Esso non ha vocazione ad affrontare tutte le importanti questioni sanitarie né di elencare tutte le patologie importanti come, ad esempio, la psoriasi.
La Commissione non intende condurre campagne in merito al trattamento della psoriasi poiché l'organizzazione e l'erogazione dell'assistenza sanitaria rientrano nelle responsabilità degli Stati membri. Analogamente, la Commissione non prevede di adottare azioni specifiche per migliorare gli standard assistenziali all'indirizzo delle persone affette da psoriasi negli Stati membri.
La Commissione ha supportato la ricerca sulla psoriasi attraverso il Settimo programma quadro di ricerca e sviluppo tecnologico (FP7, 2007-2013 (611)) stanziando finora circa 19,1 milioni di euro per dieci progetti in quest'ambito. Le tematiche affrontate comprendono la genetica della psoriasi, la diagnosi precoce dell'artropatia psoriasica, i meccanismi che sottendono le malattie autoimmuni scatenanti nonché la deregolamentazione, la progettazione dei farmaci e la loro somministrazione per le patologie cutanee nonché le nuove strategie terapeutiche per il trattamento delle malattie autoimmuni.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010237/12
to the Commission
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: EU action on psoriasis
29 October was World Psoriasis Day. This day is dedicated to people with psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis and aims to raise awareness of psoriasis as a chronic inflammatory disease of the immune system that affects nearly 3% of the population worldwide, and approximately 14 million people in Europe.
Psoriasis is highly stigmatised and has a significant impact on the physical and psychological well-being of the people it affects. Academic studies have also calculated the economic impact of psoriasis on society, with the average annual cost of moderate to severe psoriasis found to range between EUR 3 000 and EUR 9 000 per patient.
Despite this, psoriasis has been a low priority on the EU and Member States’ healthcare agendas. As a consequence, people with psoriasis are prevented from receiving the care and treatment they require. 






1.


Given the prevalence of psoriasis in Europe, can the Commission explain why its EU health portal does not include a reference to psoriasis in the glossary of 




‘health topics’?






2.


Is the Commission planning to conduct or support campaigns or activities specifically aimed at raising awareness about the under-treatment of psoriasis in the Member States?










3.


More particularly, will the Commission take any particular measures to improve the standards of care for people affected by psoriasis in the Member States?










4.


Finally, can the Commission provide information on the funding available at EU level to carry out research on medical care for psoriasis?




Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)
The health portal is intended to provide an overview on risk factors and health determinants of major and chronic diseases and makes in particular reference to major disease groups and diseases to which specific European policies and activities are in place. It is not intended to address all important health issues, nor to list all the many important diseases such as psoriasis.
The Commission does not intend to conduct campaigns about the treatment of psoriasis, as the organisation and provision of healthcare falls under the responsibility of Member States. Likewise, the Commission is not planning to take specific actions to improve the standards of care for people affected by psoriasis in the Member States. 
The Commission has supported research on Psoriasis throughoutthe Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7, 2007-2013 (612)) with some EUR 19.1 million devoted to 10 projects this area so far. The areas addressed include the genetics of psoriasis, the early diagnosis of psoriatic arthritis, the mechanisms underlying autoimmune diseases triggering and deregulation, drug design and delivery for skin diseases as well as novel therapeutic strategies for the treatment of autoimmune diseases. 
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010238/12
alla Commissione
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Il concetto di non conformità igienico-sanitaria: quali prospettive di armonizzazione per il diritto penale alimentare?
Le modalità di identificazione di una non conformità alla legislazione igienico-sanitaria sono il thema decidendum di una recente sentenza della Corte di giustizia UE. Trattasi di un aspetto saliente per le attività di controllo ufficiale degli alimenti, atteso il frequente ricorso nelle disposizioni di diritto alimentare a condizioni quali «dove necessario», «se appropriato» e simili disposizioni elastiche. Con la sentenza del 6 ottobre 2011 la Corte di giustizia (Causa C-382/10) ha sancito la stretta correlazione tra i requisiti igienici, di cui anche all'allegato del regolamento (CE) n. 852/2004, e gli obblighi generali d'igiene dal medesimo regolamento. In una tale lettura la Corte richiama l'obbligo di adottare, applicare, mantenere, aggiornare le procedure basate sui principi dell’HACCP (articolo 5, regolamento (CE) n. 852/2004); in quanto, come detto, i requisiti igienici devono essere applicati e, se del caso, interpretati all’interno del «contesto» giuridico più generale, occorre — avverte la Corte — non privare di efficacia l’articolo 5 che responsabilizza l'operatore del settore alimentare. Ne consegue che, in una circostanza come quella oggetto della causa principale, dalla quale non emerge che un’effettiva contaminazione sia stata rilevata dalle autorità competenti, non si può concludere che gli operatori del settore alimentare interessati abbiano violato tale punto 3 sulla base della sola constatazione che un potenziale acquirente possa aver teoricamente toccato a mani nude gli alimenti in vendita o starnutito su questi ultimi, senza prendere in considerazione le misure che tali operatori hanno adottato conformemente all'articolo 5 del regolamento al fine di prevenire, eliminare o ridurre ad un livello accettabile il rischio che può presentare una contaminazione ai sensi dell'allegato II, capitolo IX, punto 3, di tale regolamento e senza contestare l'insufficienza delle misure adottate a tale proposito sulla base di tutti i dati pertinenti disponibili. 
Considerato che tale decisione assume importanza cruciale nelle attività di controllo ufficiale degli alimenti non solo in una prospettiva europea, chiedo alla Commissione quali misure di armonizzazione legislativa intende adottare al fine di valutare l'impatto che tale decisione ha nell’ambito del diritto penale alimentare nazionale, specie con riferimento alla responsabilità e alle sanzioni per il cattivo stato di conservazione?
Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione
(14 gennaio 2013)
La sentenza della Corte di giustizia nella causa C-382/10 è in effetti importante per il controllo ufficiale degli alimenti, soprattutto poiché fornisce orientamenti alle autorità nazionali competenti per l'identificazione dei casi di non conformità rispetto ai requisiti del regolamento (CE) n. 852/2004 (613). 
Tuttavia, nella sentenza della Corte non vi è nulla che sembri giustificare l'armonizzazione delle sanzioni penali per i casi di violazione di tali requisiti. In effetti, sebbene il fatto di interpretare l'allegato II, capo IX, paragrafo 3 del regolamento 852/2004 in modo tale che l'articolo 5 del regolamento 852/2004 non sia privo di efficacia, offra agli operatori commerciali una certa discrezionalità allorché si tratta di determinare l'identificazione degli eventuali rischi da prevenire, eliminare o ridurre a rischi accettabili (e le misure da adottare a tal fine), la Commissione non ritiene che ciò giustifichi di per sé l'armonizzazione delle sanzioni che devono essere applicate allorché si incontrano casi di non conformità. 
Questa interpretazione sembra corroborata dall'articolo 17, paragrafo 2 del regolamento 178/2002 (614) che fa obbligo agli Stati membri di stabilire le regole relative alle misure e alle sanzioni applicabili alle infrazioni della normativa sui mangimi e gli alimenti.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010238/12
to the Commission
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: The concept of non-compliance in terms of health and hygiene: what are the prospects of harmonisation of criminal law on food?
The ways of identifying non-compliance with health and hygiene legislation are the subject of a recent judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union. This is a key aspect for the official control of foodstuffs, considering the frequent reference in food law to terms such as ‘where necessary’, ‘if appropriate’ and similarly loose expressions. In its judgment of 6 October 2011, the Court of Justice (Case C-382/10) upheld the strict correlation between the hygiene requirements set out in the annex to Regulation (EC) No 852/2004, and the general hygiene obligations of the same regulation. In this reading, the Court refers to the obligation to adopt, apply, maintain and update procedures based on the HACCP principles (Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 852/2004). As such, as previously stated, the hygiene requirements must be applied and, if necessary, interpreted within a more general legal ‘context’. The Court finds that Article 5, which establishes the responsibility of food business operators, must not be deprived of effectiveness. It follows that, in a situation such as that in the main proceedings, where the competent authorities do not appear to have concluded that there was actual contamination, it cannot be concluded that food business operators have infringed the abovementioned paragraph 3 on the basis only of the finding that a potential purchaser could conceivably have touched the foodstuffs offered for sale by hand or sneezed on them, without considering the measures taken by those operators under Article 5 of the regulation in order to prevent, eliminate or reduce to acceptable levels the hazard which the contamination referred to in paragraph 3 of Chapter IX of Annex II to the regulation may present and without determining that the measures taken in that regard were insufficient in the light of all the available relevant data. 
Considering that this decision is crucially important for the official control of foodstuffs not only from an EU point of view, what legislative harmonisation measures will the Commission take to assess the impact of this decision in the field of national criminal law on food, particularly with regard to responsibilities and sanctions for poor storage conditions?
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)
The judgment of the European Court of Justice in Case C-382/10 is indeed important for the official control of foodstuffs especially since it provides guidance to national competent authorities for the identification of non-compliances with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 (615). 
Nonetheless, there is nothing in the judgment of the Court which appears to justify harmonising criminal sanctions for breaches of those requirements. In fact, although interpreting paragraph 3 of Chapter IX of Annex II of Regulation 852/2004 so that Article 5 of Regulation 852/2004 is not deprived of effectiveness provides business operators with discretion when it comes to determining the identification of any hazards that must be prevented, eliminated or reduced to acceptable levels (and the measures that should be taken thereof), the Commission does not believe that this per se justifies the harmonisation of the sanctions to be applied when non-compliances are detected.
This reading appears to be supported by Article 17(2) of Regulation 178/2002 (616) which requires Member States to lay down the rules on measures and penalties applicable to infringements of food and feed law.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010239/12
alla Commissione
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Misuratori di glicemia: verso una completa armonizzazione e unificazione dei parametri di sicurezza?
In Europa il numero di persone affette da diabete è in costante crescita e ne è previsto un aumento pari al 16,6 % entro il 2030, secondo i dati forniti dall'OMS. Questa malattia affligge il 10 % della popolazione europea e nel 90-95 % dei casi sono coinvolti adulti che soffrono del diabete di tipo 2; questo tipo di diabete riduce la speranza di vita di 5-10 anni e ogni anno in Europa i decessi imputabili a tale patologia sono 325 000. 
I dispositivi elettronici per la misurazione dell'emoglobina glicosilata e i farmaci di ultima generazione permettono di creare delle terapie a misura di ogni paziente, ponendo quest'ultimo e il suo stile di vita al centro della terapia. È proprio questa la migliore strategia da seguire secondo la Società europea di diabetologia (Easd), che propone nuove linee guida centrate sul paziente al fine di tutelarlo da potenziali effetti collaterali causati da trattamenti intensivi. In commercio si stanno diffondendo glucometri che permettono di registrare i valori della glicemia nonché di calcolare e indicare la dose di insulina da assumere; queste tecnologie possono fornire consigli elaborati per il paziente al fine di migliorare il controllo sulla patologia e, di riflesso, ridurre gli eventi ipoglicemici e ottimizzare la gestione del dosaggio dei farmaci. Tuttavia, una recente indagine condotta dal British Medical Journal evidenzia in Europa la mancanza di controlli adeguati in merito alla sicurezza di tali dispositivi medici; in particolare, si rilevano le lacune del quadro normativo di riferimento di cui alle direttive 93/42/CEE, 90/385/CEE e 98/79/CEE, che non sembra garantire un completa armonizzazione delle procedure di certificazione.
Posto che la recente Comunicazione della Commissione n. 2012/C 262/02 individua, fra gli altri, i requisiti per i sistemi auto-diagnostici di monitoraggio della glicemia nel trattamento del diabete mellito e che la certificazione ISO 15197:2003 presenta dei limiti evidenti in quanto:






—


 non fornisce una valutazione complessiva di tutti i possibili fattori che potrebbero influenzare le prestazioni,










—


 non riguarda la misurazione della concentrazione di glucosio al fine di diagnosticare il diabete mellito, 




può dire la Commissione se intende implementare le linee guida, uniformandole tra i diversi Stati membri, al fine di garantire al paziente parametri di sicurezza adatti alla messa in commercio di tali dispositivi medici? 
Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione
(4 gennaio 2013)
Il documento «Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centred approach. Position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)» (617) contiene raccomandazioni indirizzate ai medici per il trattamento del diabete di tipo 2. Conformemente all'articolo 168 del TFUE l'Unione europea non ha poteri per impartire istruzioni ai medici. Di conseguenza, la Commissione non può attuare le linee guida dell'EASD.
Detto documento non può inoltre diventare una norma armonizzata europea in forza della direttiva 98/79/CE relativa ai dispositivi medico-diagnostici in vitro
 (618) poiché il suo testo non fa riferimento a requisiti giuridici per quanto concerne i dispositivi medici.
Al di là di queste limitazioni, le linee guida potrebbero contribuire allo sviluppo di standard per i dispositivi di test del diabete. La norma ISO 15197:2003 stabilisce i requisiti dei dispositivi per test autodiagnostici. Questa norma è diventata una norma armonizzata («EN») in forza della direttiva summenzionata. Se l'EASD desidera che tale norma incorpori ulteriori requisiti di prestazioni, l'EASD può contattare ISO per il tramite dell'Organizzazione europea di normazione CEN o direttamente.
Inoltre, la proposta della Commissione per un regolamento relativo ai dispositivi medico-diagnostici in vitro rafforza i requisiti legali per l'immissione sul mercato di tali dispositivi e stabilisce requisiti più rigorosi per quanto concerne le istruzioni per l'uso dei dispositivi per test autodiagnostici. (619)

(English version)
Question for written answer E-010239/12
to the Commission
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Blood glucose meters: towards full standardisation and unification of safety parameters?
The number of people with diabetes in Europe continues to grow and an increase of 16.6% is predicted by 2030, according to data from the World Health Organisation. This disease affects 10% of the European population and 90-95% of cases involve adults with type 2 diabetes. This form of diabetes reduces life expectancy by 5‐10 years and 325 000 deaths are attributed to this disease in Europe every year. 
Electronic devices for measuring glycosylated haemoglobin and the latest-generation drugs make it possible to create treatments that are tailored to each patient, with the treatment focusing on the patient and their lifestyle. This is the best strategy to adopt according to the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), which is proposing new patient-focused guidelines in order to protect patients from potential side effects caused by intensive treatment. Glucometers are on sale that makes it possible to record blood glucose values and to calculate and indicate the dose of insulin to take. These technologies can give the patient detailed advice in order to improve their control over their disease and, as a result, reduce hypoglycaemic events and optimise how they manage drug doses. However, a recent survey conducted by the British Medical Journal shows that in Europe there is a lack of adequate safety checks for these medical devices. In particular, there are gaps in the reference legislative framework set out in Directives 93/42/EEC, 90/385/EEC and 98/79/EEC, which do not guarantee that certification procedures are completely harmonised.
Given that the recent Commission Communication No 2012/C 262/02 identifies, inter alia, the requirements for blood glucose monitoring systems for self-testing in managing diabetes mellitus and that ISO 15197:2003 certification has clear limitations since:






—


it does not provide a comprehensive assessment of all possible factors that could affect performance,










—


it does not concern measurement of glucose concentration in order to diagnose diabetes mellitus,




can the Commission say whether it intends to implement the guidelines and standardise them among the Member States, in order to guarantee patients the proper safety parameters for the sale of these medical devices? 
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(4 January 2013)
The document ‘Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centred approach. Position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)’ (620) contains recommendations to physicians for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. In accordance with Article 168 TFEU, the European Union is not empowered to give instructions to physicians. Accordingly, the European Commission cannot implement the EASD guidelines.
In addition, this document cannot become a European standard harmonised under Directive 98/79/EC on in vitro diagnostic medical devices (621) as its content does not refer to legal requirements for medical devices.
Regardless of these limitations, the guidelines could contribute to the development of standards for diabetes testing devices. Standard ISO 15197:2003 sets up requirements for self-testing devices. This standard has become a (‘EN’) Harmonised Standard under the abovementioned Directive. If EASD wishes this standard to incorporate additional performance requirements, EASD may contact ISO via the European Standardisation Organisation CEN or directly.
In addition, the Commission proposal for a regulation on in vitro diagnostic medical devices reinforces the legal requirements for placing on the market of such devices and establishes stricter requirements with regard to the instructions for use of devices for self-testing (622).
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010240/12
alla Commissione
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: Prevenzione del mielomeningocele: nuove prospettive per la terapia combinata di vitamine B9 e B12?
Il mielomeningocele è una grave malformazione del tubo neurale che interessa il midollo spinale e tutte le terminazioni nervose ad esso collegate: può essere l'origine di difetti congeniti alla nascita, come idrocefalo e spina bifida. La comunità scientifica ritiene, da tempo, che tali difetti siano prevenibili attraverso l'assunzione, entro le prime 12 settimane di gravidanza, di acido folico (vitamina B9). 
Un recente studio condotto presso il Trinity College di Dublino dimostra che i medici raccomandano alle donne in gravidanza di assumere acido folico in dose di 400 mcg al giorno, ma è possibile ridurre il rischio di difetti al tubo neurale se si associa l'assunzione di 2,5 mcg di vitamina B12: la vitamina B12 è essenziale per consentire all'organismo di metabolizzare l'acido folico. Nonostante gli specialisti raccomandino di assumere acido folico prima del concepimento o durante le prime 12 settimane di gravidanza, difetti del tubo neurale si manifestano mediamente in una gravidanza su mille. Con la sola assunzione di acido folico nei tempi previsti, tuttavia, si potrebbe prevenire il rischio nel 72 % dei casi. La combinazione di queste due vitamine è pertanto utile ed efficace anche per prevenire altri possibili difetti che possono coinvolgere sia la colonna vertebrale, sia il sistema nervoso centrale e, per questo motivo, un'assunzione combinata può aumentare significativamente le potenzialità di prevenzione. 
Alla luce di tale studio e degli effetti benefici apportati dall'assunzione combinata di vitamine B9 e B12 per prevenire l'insorgere di mielomeningocele, può dire la Commissione se intende attuare campagne di promozione e di sensibilizzazione mirate alla prevenzione delle malformazioni del tubo neurale? Può dire, altresì, quali misure intende adottare per incentivare la ricerca medica in questo settore e garantire maggiori informazioni ai futuri genitori al fine di prevenire l'insorgere di tali patologie disabilitanti?
Risposta di Tonio Borg a nome della Commissione
(14 gennaio 2013)
Le malformazioni del tubo neurale sono coperte dall'attività sulle malattie rare del programma Salute dell'UE, segnatamente dal progetto EUROCAT (Sorveglianza delle anomalie congenite in Europa) (623) che fornisce informazioni epidemiologiche sulle anomalie congenite in Europa a partire da un insieme di dati comuni.
Nel 2007 il progetto EUROCAT ha prodotto una relazione su «Prevention of Neural Tube Defects by Periconceptional Folic Acid Supplementation in Europe» (Prevenzione delle malformazioni del tubo neurale attraverso l'integrazione periconcezionale di acido folico in Europa) (624). Nel 2009 l'Autorità europea per la sicurezza alimentare (EFSA) ha pubblicato una relazione del gruppo di lavoro dell'EFSA per la cooperazione scientifica intitolata «Analysis of Risks and Benefits of Fortification of Food with Folic Acid» (Analisi dei rischi e dei vantaggi legati all'integrazione degli alimenti con acido folico) (625). Tale relazione è giunta alla conclusione che, sebbene tutti i paesi europei suggeriscano che le donne che possono diventare incinte integrino la loro alimentazione con una dose di 400µg/giorno di acido folico, l'efficacia di questo consiglio non è stata valutata in tutti i paesi. La relazione constata inoltre che tutta una serie di alimenti sono integrati volontariamente mediante acido folico a livelli variabili nella maggior parte dei paesi europei.
È previsto che il comitato di esperti dell'Unione europea sulle malattie rare (626) organizzi uno scambio di pareri e di buone pratiche su tale questione nell'ambito del suo mandato.
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010240/12
to the Commission
Oreste Rossi (EFD)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Myelomeningocele prevention: new prospects for vitamin B9 and B12 combination therapy?
Myelomeningocele is a serious neural tube malformation that affects the spinal cord and all the nerve endings connected to it. It can cause congenital birth defects, such as hydrocephalus and spina bifida. The scientific community has long believed that these defects can be prevented by taking folic acid (vitamin B9) within the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. 
A recent study conducted at Trinity College Dublin shows that doctors recommend that pregnant women take folic acid at a dose of 400 mcg per day, but the risk of neural tube defects can be reduced if taken in combination with 2.5 mcg of vitamin B12. Vitamin B12 is essential to enable the body to metabolise folic acid. Although specialists recommend taking folic acid before conception or during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, neural tube defects occur, on average, in one in every 1 000 pregnancies. Taking folic acid alone at the recommended times, however, could prevent the risk in 72% of cases. The combination of these two vitamins is therefore useful and effective also for preventing other possible defects that can involve both the spinal column and the central nervous system and, for that reason, taking both in combination can significantly increase the prevention potential. 
In view of this study and the beneficial effects of taking vitamins B9 and B12 in combination to prevent myelomeningocele, will the Commission conduct promotion and awareness-raising campaigns on the prevention of neural tube malformations? Can it also say what measures it will take to encourage medical research in this area and to guarantee more information for future parents in order to prevent the onset of these debilitating conditions?
Answer given by Mr Borg on behalf of the Commission
(14 January 2013)
Neural Tube Defects are covered by the EU Health Programme activity on rare diseases, particularly by the project EUROCAT (Surveillance of Congenital anomalies in Europe) (627) providing the epidemiological information on congenital anomalies in Europe based on a common dataset. 
In 2007, the EUROCAT project produced a report on ‘Prevention of Neural Tube Defects by Periconceptional Folic Acid Supplementation in Europe’ (628). In 2009 the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published a report by the EFSA Scientific Cooperation Working Group on ‘Analysis of Risks and Benefits of Fortification of Food with Folic Acid’ (629). This report concludes that, although all European countries suggest that women who might become pregnant supplement their diet with 400µg/day of folic acid, the efficacy of this advice has not been evaluated in all countries. This report also observes that a range of foods are voluntarily fortified with folic acid at variable levels in most European countries. 
It is planned that the EU Committee of Experts on Rare Diseases (630) will organise an exchange of views and best practices about this issue during its mandate.
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung P-010242/12
an die Kommission (Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin)
Jürgen Klute (GUE/NGL)
(9. November 2012)

Betrifft: VP/HR — Kurdischer Hungerstreik






1.


Hat die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin Kenntnis von dem Hungerstreik, in den 700 kurdische Gefangene am 12. September 2012 getreten sind?










2.


Hat die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin Kenntnis von den Berichten des Menschenrechtsvereins (HRA; türkisch: İnsan Hakları Derneği İHD), nach denen die Hungerstreikenden geschlagen, isoliert und nicht mit Vitamin B1, Salz und auch nicht Zuckerwasser versorgt wurden?










3.


Kann die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin Berichte bestätigen, dass das türkische Justizministerium (das für die Haftanstalten zuständig ist) Ärzten den Zugang zu den Hungerstreikenden verwehrt hat? Würde die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin dieses Verhalten als Verstoß gegen internationales Recht bewerten?










4.


Welchen Standpunkt vertritt die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin zu der Forderung der Hungerstreikenden, dass die Gerichtsverfahren in kurdischer Sprache durchgeführt werden müssen? Welchen Standpunkt vertritt die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin zu der Forderung der Hungerstreikenden, Anspruch auf Bildung in kurdischer Sprache zu haben?










5.


Ist die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin der Meinung, dass der Hungerstreik nun eine kritische Phase erreicht hat und so rasch wie möglich beendet werden sollte? Hat die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin die Absicht, Kontakt zur türkischen Regierung aufzunehmen, um sie nachdrücklich aufzufordern, sich um eine rasche Beendigung der Situation zu bemühen, so dass internationale Menschenrechte respektiert werden?




Gemeinsame Antwort von Herrn Füle im Namen der Kommission
(20. Dezember 2012)
Die Europäische Kommission ist über den Hungerstreik kurdischer Häftlinge und Untersuchungshäftlinge in der Türkei informiert. Sowohl die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin als auch der für Erweiterung und Europäische Nachbarschaftspolitik zuständige Kommissar verfolgen die Entwicklung der Situation genau und haben die Angelegenheit kürzlich auf ihrem Treffen mit Außenminister Davutoğlu in Brüssel erörtert. Die Kommission ist sehr erleichtert, dass der Hungerstreik beendet wurde.
Die Kommission sieht nun der Annahme und Durchführung der von der türkischen Regierung angekündigten Maßnahmen erwartungsvoll entgegen. Dazu gehört u. a. das Recht, vor Gericht andere Sprachen als Türkisch zu verwenden. Die Kommission weist darauf hin, dass die EU die Türkei im Kampf gegen den Terrorismus nachdrücklich unterstützt, betont jedoch gleichzeitig, dass eine Lösung der Kurdenfrage in einem demokratischen Rahmen unter möglichst umfassender Beteiligung aller demokratischen Kräfte angestrebt und auch in die laufenden Arbeiten für eine neue demokratische Verfassung eingebunden werden muss. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord P-010241/12
aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter / Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)
Cornelis de Jong (GUE/NGL)
(9 november 2012)

Betreft: VP/HR — Koerdische hongerstaking






1.


Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger ervan op de hoogte dat 700 Koerdische gedetineerden in Turkse gevangenissen op 12 september 2012 in hongerstaking zijn gegaan? 










2.


Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger op de hoogte van meldingen van de Turkse mensenrechtenorganisatie İnsan Hakları Derneği (İHD) dat er hongerstakers zijn geslagen, in isolatie zijn opgesloten en dat hun voedingstoffen zoals vitamine B1, zout en suikerwater zijn geweigerd?










3.


Kan de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger berichten bevestigen dat het Turkse ministerie van justitie, dat verantwoordelijk is voor de gevangenissen in het land, dokters de toegang heeft geweigerd tot de hongerstakers? Is de vicevoorzitter/ hoge vertegenwoordiger van mening dat een dergelijk beleid strijdig is met het internationale recht?










4.


Wat is het standpunt van de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger over de eis van de hongerstakers om in het Koerdisch te worden berecht? Wat is het standpunt van de vicevoorzitter/ hoge vertegenwoordiger over de eis van de hongerstakers om onderwijs in het Koerdisch te kunnen volgen?










5.


Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger ook van mening dat de hongerstaking nu in een kritieke fase is beland en zo spoedig mogelijk moet worden beëindigd? Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger bereid er bij de Turkse regering op aan te dringen aan deze situatie een spoedig einde te maken met inachtneming van de internationale mensenrechten?




Antwoord van de heer Füle namens de Commissie
(20 december 2012)
De Commissie is op de hoogte van de recente hongerstaking in Turkije van Koerdische gevangenen en gevangenen in voorarrest. Zij heeft de situatie nauwlettend gevolgd. De hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter en de commissaris voor Uitbreiding en het Europees nabuurschapsbeleid hebben de kwestie besproken tijdens hun recente vergadering in Brussel met de minister van Buitenlandse Zaken Davutoğlu. De Commissie is zeer verheugd dat er een einde is gekomen aan de hongerstaking.
De Commissie is nu in afwachting van de goedkeuring en uitvoering van de nieuwe maatregelen die de Turkse regering heeft aangekondigd, zoals het recht om in de rechtbank een andere taal dan het Turks te gebruiken. Ze herinnert eraan dat de EU Turkije volledig steunt in zijn strijd tegen het  terrorisme. Tezelfdertijd benadrukt ze hoe belangrijk het is om de Koerdische kwestie aan te pakken langs democratische weg, met een zo groot mogelijke bijdrage van alle democratische krachten, alsook in het kader van de lopende werkzaamheden aan een nieuwe democratische grondwet.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010241/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Cornelis de Jong (GUE/NGL)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Kurdish hunger strike






1.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of the hunger strike started by 700 Kurdish inmates of Turkish prisons on 12 September 2012?










2.


Is the Vice-President /High Representative aware of reports by the Turkish human rights association İnsan Hakları Derneği (İHD) that hunger strikers have been beaten, isolated and withheld nutrients such as vitamin B1, salt and sugar water?










3.


Can the Vice-President/High Representative confirm reports that the Turkish Ministry of Justice, which is responsible for the country’s prison facilities, has denied doctors access to the hunger strikers? Would the Vice-President/High Representative describe such a policy as contrary to international law?










4.


What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative as regards the hunger strikers demand to be tried in Kurdish? What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative as regards their claim to the right to receive education in Kurdish?










5.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative of the opinion that the hunger strike is now in a critical phase that should be ended as quickly as possible? Would the Vice-President/High Representative be willing to approach the Turkish Government in order to urge it to seek a quick end to the situation in a manner that respects international human rights?




Question for written answer P-010242/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Jürgen Klute (GUE/NGL)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Kurdish hunger strike






1.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of the hunger strike started by 700 Kurdish inmates of Turkish prisons on 12 September 2012?










2.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative aware of reports by the Turkish human rights association İnsan Hakları Derneği (İHD) that hunger strikers have been beaten, isolated and withheld nutrients such as vitamin B1, salt and sugar water?










3.


Can the Vice-President/High Representative confirm reports that the Turkish Ministry of Justice, which is responsible for the country’s prison facilities, has denied doctors access to the hunger strikers? Would the Vice-President/High Representative describe such a policy as contrary to international law?










4.


What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative as regards the hunger strikers’ demand to be tried in Kurdish? What is the position of the Vice-President/High Representative as regards their claim to the right to receive education in Kurdish?










5.


Is the Vice-President/High Representative of the opinion that the hunger strike is now in a critical phase that should be ended as quickly as possible? Would the Vice-President/High Representative be willing to approach the Turkish Government in order to urge it to seek a quick end to the situation in a manner that respects international human rights?




Joint answer given by Mr Füle on behalf of the Commission
(20 December 2012)
The Commission is aware of the recent hunger strike by Kurdish prisoners and remand prisoners in Turkey and followed the situation closely. Both the VP/HR and the Commissioner responsible for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy discussed the issue at their recent meeting with Foreign Minister Davutoglu in Brussels. The Commission very much welcomes the end of the hunger strike.
The Commission now looks forward to the adoption and implementation of the new measures announced by the Turkish Government such as the right to use languages other than Turkish in court. It recalls the EU's strong support for Turkey in its fight against terrorism. At the same time, it underlines the importance of addressing the Kurdish issue in the democratic arena, with the widest possible contribution of all democratic forces, including in the framework of the ongoing work on a new democratic constitution.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010243/12
to the Commission
George Lyon (ALDE)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Scottish Government and Commission legal advice
If the First Minister of Scotland, Alex Salmond, or a Scottish Government Minister were to request formal legal advice from the Commission on the legal and practical implications of Scotland’s status within the EU if Scotland votes to secede from the UK, as is the Scottish Government’s policy, would the Commission be willing to offer comprehensive advice on this issue?
Answer given by Mr Barroso on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)
In its answer to Written Question E-8133/2012 (631), the Commission referred to a request from a Member State represented in accordance with Article 7 (2) of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης P-010244/12
προς την Επιτροπή
Marietta Giannakou (PPE)
(9 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: Παραβίαση ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων στο Θιβέτ
Στις 8 Νοεμβρίου 2012, παραμονή της έναρξης του συνεδρίου του Κομμουνιστικού Κόμματος της Κίνας που όρισε τον Σι Γινπίνγκ ως τον επόμενο πρόεδρο της χώρας, πέντε θιβετιανοί αυτοπυρπολήθηκαν σε απομακρυσμένες περιοχές της Κίνας, ζητώντας την επιστροφή του Δαλάι Λάμα στο Θιβέτ και την προστασία των θεμελιωδών τους δικαιωμάτων από παραβιάσεις των κινεζικών αρχών. Μεταξύ τους, τρεις έφηβοι μοναχοί, ηλικίας 15 και 16 ετών. Πρόκειται για τον μεγαλύτερο αριθμό ανθρώπων που αυτοπυρπολήθηκαν σε μία ημέρα και είναι εμφανής ο συμβολικός χαρακτήρας των περιστατικών αυτών, που θέλουν να στείλουν ένα ισχυρό μήνυμα στη νέα κινέζικη ηγεσία. 
Ο αριθμός των θιβετιανών που έχουν αυτοπυρποληθεί από τον Μάρτιο του 2011, ανέρχεται πλέον σε 68 και ακόμα πιο ανησυχητικό είναι το γεγονός πως όλο και πιο νέα άτομα επιλέγουν αυτή τη μορφή διαμαρτυρίας απέναντι στις παραβιάσεις θεμελιωδών ελευθεριών τους.
Η ΕΕ είναι ο πιο σημαντικός εμπορικός εταίρος της Κίνας και η ρήτρα ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων στις εμπορικές συμφωνίες της ΕΕ έχει πάντα εξέχοντα ρόλο. Επίσης, υπάρχει ένας συνεχής ανοιχτός διάλογος μεταξύ ΕΕ και Κίνας (τελευταία συνεδρίαση στις 30 Μαΐου 2012) για το θέμα των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, ενώ παράλληλα παραμένει σε ισχύ το εμπάργκο όπλων της ΕΕ προς την Κίνα. Παρόλα αυτά, η στέρηση θεμελιωδών ελευθεριών από τους θιβετιανούς συνεχίζεται, με αποτέλεσμα τα τραγικά αυτά γεγονότα.
Στο πλαίσιο αυτό και υπό το φως του διαλόγου της ΕΕ με την Κίνα για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, ερωτάται η Επιτροπή:






—


είναι ενήμερη για την τροπή των πραγμάτων; 










—


προτίθεται, πέραν των συνηθισμένων θετικών παρατηρήσεων, ιδίως τώρα που λόγω αλλαγών στην ηγεσία, θα υπάρξουν νέες επαφές και προγραμματικές δηλώσεις μεταξύ Κίνας και ΕΕ, να θέσει πιο άμεσα και επιτακτικά το θέμα στις αρχές της χώρας;




Απάντηση της Ύπατης Εκπροσώπου/Αντιπροέδρου Ashton εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(7 Δεκεμβρίου 2012)
Η ΕΕ εξέφρασε τις ανησυχίες της για την επιδείνωση της κατάστασης στο Θιβέτ που εκδηλώθηκε με κύμα αυτοπυρπολήσεων και συγκρούσεων μεταξύ της αστυνομίας και του τοπικού πληθυσμού από τις αρχές του 2012.
Από το 2011, αναφέρθηκαν σχεδόν 80 τέτοιες περιπτώσεις. Οι περισσότερες παρατηρήθηκαν στην επαρχία Σιτσουάν, αλλά υπήρξαν περιστατικά και σε άλλες περιοχές που κατοικούνται από Θιβετιανούς, όπου οι αυξανόμενοι περιορισμοί των θρησκευτικών δραστηριοτήτων φαίνεται να οδήγησαν σε όξυνση της δυσαρέσκειας και σε νέες διαμαρτυρίες των Θιβετιανών.
Αφότου η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος/Αντιπρόεδρος απευθύνθηκε στο Ευρωπαϊκό Κοινοβούλιο στις 12 Ιουνίου 2012, η κατάσταση στο Θιβέτ αποτέλεσε αντικείμενο συζήτησης κατά την 15η σύνοδο κορυφής ΕΕ-Κίνας. Τέλος, κατά το τελευταίο σεμινάριο ΕΕ-Κίνας για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, που πραγματοποιήθηκε στο Galway (Ιρλανδία) στις 29-31 Οκτωβρίου 2012, συζητήθηκε επίσης η βίαιη μετατόπιση της θιβετιανών βοσκών.
Επί του παρόντος, η ΕΕ προσπαθεί να καθορίσει την ημερομηνία για τον επόμενο διάλογο για τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα με την Κίνα.
(English version)
Question for written answer P-010244/12
to the Commission
Marietta Giannakou (PPE)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: Human rights violations in Tibet
On 8 November 2012, the eve of the opening of the Chinese Communist Party congress which was to appoint Xi Jinping as the next President of the country, five Tibetans, demanding the return of the Dalai Lama to Tibet and the protection of their fundamental rights from violations by the Chinese authorities, committed self-immolation in remote areas of China. They included three young monks, between 15 and 16 years of age. This is the largest number of people to commit self-immolation in a single day, and the symbolic character of these incidents, which are intended as a strong message to the new Chinese leadership, is clear.
The number of Tibetans who have committed self-immolation since March 2011 is now 68, and even more worrying is the fact that those who choose this form of protest against violations of their fundamental freedoms are getting younger and younger.
The EU is China's most important trading partner, and the human rights clause always has a prominent role in EU trade agreements. Furthermore, there is an ongoing open dialogue between the EU and China (the most recent meeting took place on 30 May 2012) on the issue of human rights, while the EU arms embargo continues to apply to China. However, Tibetans are still being deprived of their fundamental freedoms, resulting in these tragic events.
In this context and in the light of the EU's human rights dialogue with China, will the Commission say:






—


Is it aware of this turn of events?










—


Does it intend to go beyond the usual positive comments and raise this issue more directly and urgently with the Chinese authorities, especially now that new contacts will be formed and programmatic statements exchanged between China and the EU owing to changes in the Chinese leadership?




Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton on behalf of the Commission
(7 December 2012)
The EU has expressed concern over the deterioration of the situation in Tibet, as illustrated by the wave of self immolations and by clashes between the police and the local population since the beginning of 2012.
There have been nearly 80 cases since 2011. The cases have been concentrated in Sichuan province but have also taken place in other Tibetan-populated areas where increasing restrictions on religious activities seem to have given rise to a surge of frustration and new protests among Tibetans.
Since the HR/VP spoke to the European Parliament on 12 June 2012, the situation in Tibet was raised during the 15th EU-China summit. Finally, during the last EU-China Human Rights Seminar, which took place in Galway (Ireland) on 29-31 October 2012, the forceful displacement of Tibetan herders was also discussed.
The EU is currently in the process of fixing a date for the next Human Rights Dialogue with China.
(Versión española)
Pregunta con solicitud de respuesta escrita E-010245/12
a la Comisión (Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) y Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 de noviembre de 2012)

Asunto: VP/HR — violencia en El Aaiún (Sáhara Occidental ocupado). Represión de manifestantes saharauis y expulsión de observadores españoles y noruegos
En 2010, miles de saharauis decidieron responder a las fuerzas de ocupación marroquíes creando el campamento de Gdeim Izik a las afueras de El Aaiún para pedir una mejora de sus condiciones de vida y un referéndum legítimo sobre su autodeterminación. El 8 de noviembre de 2010, el ejército marroquí decidió contraatacar, desmantelando el campamento e instaurando la violencia. Dos años después de estos acontecimientos, veintidós presos políticos saharauis siguen en la cárcel de Salé y se ha aplazado en varias ocasiones su juicio militar.
Estos días, Christopher Ross, enviado de las Naciones Unidas, ha visitado el Sáhara Occidental por primera vez (incluidos los territorios ocupados y los campamentos de refugiados de Tinduf así como las zonas liberadas). El 1 de noviembre de 2012, la policía marroquí hizo uso de la violencia para reprimir manifestaciones pacíficas en El Aaiún, Dajla y Smara. Varios manifestantes fueron detenidos y decenas resultados heridos. Además, Aminatu Haidar, conocida defensora de los derechos humanos, fue maltratada y acosada.
El 7 de noviembre de 2012, las fuerzas marroquíes expulsaron por la fuerza a dieciocho observadores internacionales españoles y cuatro noruegos del territorio ocupado de El Aaiún. A los ciudadanos españoles se les denegó el acceso de asistencia consular. Los observadores internacionales estaban intentando evaluar el deterioro de los derechos humanos.
Durante el diálogo UE-Marruecos establecido por el Acuerdo de Asociación entre las dos partes, que ha incluido una reciente visita a Marruecos, ¿ha pedido la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante información a Marruecos sobre la violencia sufrida por el pueblo saharaui que la policía marroquí y otros han infligido con impunidad en los territorios ocupados del Sáhara Occidental?
¿Condena la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante estos actos de violencia contra el pueblo saharaui y la expulsión por la fuerza de los observadores internacionales? A la vista de estos actos, ¿considera la Vicepresidenta/Alta Representante que Marruecos está vulnerando flagrantemente el artículo 2 del Acuerdo de Asociación, que obliga a ambas partes a respetar en todo momento los principios democráticos básicos y los derechos humanos fundamentales en su política interior y exterior?
Respuesta de la Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta Sra. Ashton  en nombre de la Comisión 
(8 de enero de 2013)
La Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta está siguiendo de cerca la situación en el Sáhara Occidental y la cuestión de los 22 presos saharauis actualmente detenidos en la prisión de Salé. Los incidentes registrados en El Aaiún son lamentables. La Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta reafirma su pleno apoyo a los esfuerzos del Secretario General de las Naciones Unidas, elogia el trabajo de su Enviado Personal, el Embajador Christopher Ross, e insta a todas las partes a evitar la violencia.
Los derechos humanos son abordados con regularidad en las reuniones de los organismos conjuntos creados en virtud del Acuerdo de Asociación UE/Marruecos. La Alta Representante y Vicepresidenta considera que, en general, Marruecos avanza hacia un mayor cumplimiento de los principios relativos a los derechos humanos, aunque es necesario realizar mejoras adicionales. El SEAE planteó la cuestión de los 22 presos en las reuniones del diálogo político y en la última reunión del Subcomité UE/Marruecos «derechos humanos, democracia y gobernanza» (Rabat, 16/17 de octubre de 2012). Las relaciones UE-Marruecos han progresado mucho en estos últimos años y han contribuido a un proceso de reformas en ese país. 
(Deutsche Fassung)
Anfrage zur schriftlichen Beantwortung E-010245/12
an die Kommission (Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) und Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9. November 2012)

Betrifft: VP/HR — Gewalt in Laayoune (besetzte Westsahara): Unterdrückung sahaurischer Demonstranten und Ausweisung der spanischen und norwegischen Beobachter
2010 beschlossen Tausende Saharauis, aus Protest gegen die marokkanische Besatzungsmacht das Zeltlager Gdeim Izik in der Nähe der Stadt Laayoune zu errichten, um eine Verbesserung ihrer Lebensbedingungen und die Abhaltung eines legitimen Referendums über ihre Selbstbestimmung zu fordern. Am 8. November 2010 beschloss die marokkanische Armee, zum Gegenangriff überzugehen, räumte das Lager und verübte Gewalt. Zwei Jahre nach diesen Vorkommnissen befinden sich 22 saharauische politische Gefangene immer noch im Gefängnis von Sale, und ihr Verfahren vor einem Militärgericht wurde mehrere Male vertagt. 
Vor kurzem besuchte der UN-Beauftragte Christopher Ross zum ersten Mal die Westsahara (auch die besetzten Gebiete und die Flüchtlingslager in Tinduf sowie die befreiten Gebiete). Am 1. November 2012 übte die marokkanische Polizei Gewalt aus, um die friedlichen Demonstrationen in Laayoune, Dakhla und Smara niederzuschlagen. Mehrere Demonstranten wurden verhaftet und Dutzende verwundet. Der bekannte Menschenrechtsverteidiger Aminatou Haidar wurde geschlagen und schikaniert. 
Am 7. November 2012 wiesen die marokkanischen Streitkräfte 18 spanische und 4 norwegische internationale Beobachter gewaltsam aus dem besetzten Laayoune aus. Den spanischen Bürgern wurde der Zugang zu konsularem Beistand verweigert. Diese internationalen Beobachter versuchten, die sich verschlechternde Menschenrechtslage zu beurteilen. 
Hat die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin Marokko im Laufe des mit dem Assoziierungsabkommen zwischen den beiden Parteien eingeführten Dialogs zwischen der EU und Marokko, zu dem auch ein vor kurzem unternommene Reise nach Marokko gehört, um Auskunft ersucht in Bezug auf die Gewalt, die das saharauische Volk erleiden muss, und die straffrei von der marokkanischen Polizei und anderen in den besetzten Gebieten der Westsahara verübt wird?
Verurteilt die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin diese Gewalt gegen das saharauische Volk und die Ausweisung der internationalen Beobachter? Ist die Vizepräsidentin/Hohe Vertreterin vor diesem Hintergrund der Ansicht, dass Marokko auf eklatante Weise gegen Artikel 2 des Assoziierungsabkommens verstößt, laut dem beide Parteien sowohl in der Innen‐ als auch in der Außenpolitik stets die demokratischen Grundsätze und der Menschenrechte achten sollen? 
Antwort von Frau Ashton — Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin im Namen der Kommission
(8. Januar 2013)
Die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin verfolgt die Geschehnisse in der Westsahara und die Lage der 22 saharauischen Gefangenen im Gefängnis von Salé mit großer Aufmerksamkeit. Die Zwischenfälle in Laayoune sind bedauerlich. Die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin bekräftigt erneut ihre volle Unterstützung für die Bemühungen des UN-Generalsekretärs, würdigt die Arbeit seines Persönlichen Gesandten, des Botschafters Christopher Ross, und ruft alle Parteien auf, keine Gewalt anzuwenden.
Die Menschenrechte werden anlässlich der Treffen im Rahmen der gemeinsamen Gremien, die durch das Assoziierungsabkommen zwischen der EU und Marokko geschaffen wurden, regelmäßig thematisiert. Die Hohe Vertreterin/Vizepräsidentin ist der Auffassung, dass Marokko insgesamt Fortschritte bei der Achtung der Menschenrechte erzielt, jedoch weitere Verbesserungen erforderlich sind. Der EAD hat das Thema der 22 Gefangenen bei Treffen im Rahmen des politischen Dialogs sowie anlässlich des letzten Treffens des Unterausschusses EU/Marokko für Menschenrechte, Demokratie und Staatsführung (Rabat, 16.-17. Oktober 2012) zur Sprache gebracht. Die Beziehungen zwischen der EU und Marokko haben sich in den vergangenen Jahren deutlich verbessert und zu einem Reformprozess in dem Land beigetragen. 
(Ελληνική έκδοση)
Ερώτηση με αίτημα γραπτής απάντησης E-010245/12
προς την Επιτροπή (Αντιπρόεδρος/Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) και Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 Νοεμβρίου 2012)

Θέμα: VP/HR — Βία στο El Aaiún (κατεχόμενη Δυτική Σαχάρα): κατασταλτικές ενέργειες εις βάρος διαδηλωτών Σαχραουί και απέλαση Ισπανών και Νορβηγών παρατηρητών
Το 2010, χιλιάδες Σαχραουί αποφάσισαν να αντιδράσουν στις μαροκινές κατοχικές δυνάμεις, ιδρύοντας τον καταυλισμό Gdeim Izik στα περίχωρα του El Aaiún για να ζητήσουν βελτίωση των συνθηκών διαβίωσής τους και τη διενέργεια νόμιμου δημοψηφίσματος για την αυτοδιάθεση. Στις 8 Νοεμβρίου ο μαροκινός στρατός αποφάσισε να αντεπιτεθεί, καταστρέφοντας τον καταυλισμό και σκορπίζοντας τη βία. Δύο χρόνια μετά από αυτά τα γεγονότα, 22 πολιτικοί κρατούμενοι Σαχραουί εξακολουθούν να βρίσκονται στη φυλακή Sale και η δίκη τους ενώπιον στρατοδικείου έχει αναβληθεί επανειλημμένα. 
Ο απεσταλμένος των Ηνωμένων Εθνών Christopher Ross επισκέφτηκε πρόσφατα για πρώτη φορά τη Δυτική Σαχάρα (συμπεριλαμβανομένων των κατεχόμενων εδαφών και των προσφυγικών καταυλισμών στο Tindouf καθώς και των απελευθερωμένων περιοχών). Την 1η Νοεμβρίου, η μαροκινή αστυνομία χρησιμοποίησε βία για να καταστείλει ειρηνικές διαδηλώσεις στις περιοχές El Aaiún, Dakhla και Smara. Πολυάριθμοι διαδηλωτές συνελήφθησαν και δεκάδες τραυματίστηκαν. Η διακεκριμένη υπερασπίστρια των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων Aminatou Haidar ξυλοκοπήθηκε και παρενοχλήθηκε. 
Στις 7 Νοεμβρίου 2012, οι μαροκινές δυνάμεις απέλασαν με τη βία 18 Ισπανούς και 4 Νορβηγούς διεθνείς παρατηρητές από το κατεχόμενο El Aaiún. Στους Ισπανούς πολίτες δεν επιτράπηκε η πρόσβαση σε προξενική συνδρομή. Οι εν λόγω διεθνείς παρατηρητές προσπαθούσαν να αξιολογήσουν την επιδεινούμενη κατάσταση των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων. 
Στο πλαίσιο του διαλόγου μεταξύ ΕΕ και Μαρόκου, που έχει καθιερωθεί με τη συμφωνία σύνδεσης μεταξύ των δύο μερών και που συμπεριλαμβάνει μια πρόσφατη επίσκεψη στο Μαρόκο, έχει ζητήσει η Αντιπρόεδρος/Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος πληροφορίες από την κυβέρνηση της χώρας σχετικά με τη βία που ασκούν ατιμώρητοι εις βάρος του λαού των Σαχραουί η μαροκινή αστυνομία και οι μαροκινοί πολίτες στα κατεχόμενα εδάφη της Δυτικής Σαχάρας; 
Καταδικάζει η Αντιπρόεδρος/Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος αυτές τις πράξεις βίας εναντίον του λαού των Σαχραουί και την αναγκαστική απέλαση των διεθνών παρατηρητών; Υπό το φως αυτών των πράξεων, πιστεύει η Αντιπρόεδρος/Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος ότι το Μαρόκο παραβιάζει κατάφωρα το άρθρο 2 της συμφωνίας σύνδεσης, το οποίο απαιτεί από αμφότερα τα μέρη να σέβονται ανελλιπώς τις βασικές δημοκρατικές αρχές και τα θεμελιώδη ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα τόσο στις εσωτερικές όσο και στις εξωτερικές υποθέσεις τους;
Απάντηση της Ύπατης εκπροσώπου/Αντιπροέδρου κ. Ashton εξ ονόματος της Επιτροπής
(8 Ιανουαρίου 2013)
Η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος/Αντιπρόεδρος παρακολουθεί εκ του σύνεγγυς την κατάσταση στη Δυτική Σαχάρα και το ζήτημα των 22 κρατούμενων Σαχραουί που βρίσκονται σε φυλακή στο Salé. Οιαδήποτε γεγονότα έλαβαν χώρα στο Laayoune είναι λυπηρά. Εξάλλου, επιβεβαιώνει την πλήρη στήριξή της στις προσπάθειες του Γενικού Γραμματέα του ΟΗΕ, επιδοκιμάζει το έργο του προσωπικού του απεσταλμένου, πρέσβη Christopher Ross, και καλεί όλα τα μέρη να απέχουν από εκδηλώσεις βίας.
Τα ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα εξετάζονται τακτικά στις συνεδριάσεις των μικτών φορέων που έχουν συσταθεί δυνάμει της συμφωνίας σύνδεσης ΕΕ-Μαρόκου. Η Ύπατη Εκπρόσωπος/Αντιπρόεδρος εκτιμά ότι σε γενικές γραμμές το Μαρόκο πραγματοποιεί βήματα προς μια μεγαλύτερη συμμόρφωση με τις αρχές των ανθρωπίνων δικαιωμάτων, παρόλο που απαιτούνται περαιτέρω βελτιώσεις. Η ΕΥΕΔ ήγειρε το ζήτημα των 22 φυλακισμένων κατά τις συναντήσεις πολιτικού διαλόγου και κατά την τελευταία συνεδρίαση της υποεπιτροπής ΕΕ-Μαρόκου «Ανθρώπινα δικαιώματα, Δημοκρατία και Διακυβέρνηση» (Ραμπάτ, 16/17 Oκτωβρίου 2012). Οι σχέσεις ΕΕ-Μαρόκου παρουσίασαν σημαντική πρόοδο κατά τα τελευταία έτη, γεγονός που συνέβαλε στη διαδικασία μεταρρυθμίσεων στην εν λόγω χώρα.
(Version française)
Question avec demande de réponse écrite E-010245/12
à la Commission (Vice-Présidente/Haute Représentante)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) et Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 novembre 2012)

Objet: VP/HR — Violence à Laâyoune (territoires occupés du Sahara occidental): répression des manifestants sahraouis et expulsion des observateurs espagnols et norvégiens
En 2010, des milliers de Sahraouis ont décidé de répondre aux forces d'occupation marocaines par la création du camp de Gdeim Izik, à la périphérie de Laâyoune, afin de demander une amélioration de leurs conditions de vie et un référendum légitime sur l'auto‐détermination. Le 8 novembre 2010, l'armée marocaine a décidé de contre‐attaquer en démantelant le camp et en semant la violence. Deux ans après ces événements, 22 prisonniers politiques sahraouis sont toujours détenus dans la prison de Salé et leur procès devant un tribunal militaire a été repoussé à plusieurs reprises. 
L'envoyé des Nations unies, Christopher Ross, s'est récemment rendu au Sahara occidental pour la première fois (y compris dans les territoires occupés et le camp de réfugiés de Tindouf ainsi que dans les zones libérées). Le 1er novembre 2012, la police marocaine a eu recours à la violence pour dissiper des manifestations pacifiques à Laâyoune, Dakhla et Smara. Plusieurs manifestants ont été arrêtés et des douzaines blessés. La célèbre activiste des Droits de l'homme, Aminatou Haidar, a été battue et harcelée. 
Le 7 novembre 2012, les forces marocaines ont expulsé par la force 18 observateurs internationaux de nationalité espagnole et 4 de nationalité norvégienne de Laâyoune, ville occupée. Les citoyens espagnols se sont vus privés d'accès à l'assistance consulaire. Ces observateurs internationaux essayaient d'évaluer la détérioration de la situation des Droits de l'homme. 
Dans le cadre du dialogue UE-Maroc établi par l'accord d'association entre les deux parties, qui a donné lieu à une récente visite au Maroc, la Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante a‐t‐elle demandé des informations au Maroc concernant la violence subie par les Sahraouis et perpétrée en toute impunité par la police marocaine et d'autres dans les territoires occupés du Sahara occidental?
La Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante condamne‐t‐elle ces actes de violence à l'encontre des Sahraouis et l'expulsion par la force des observateurs internationaux? Compte tenu de ces actes, la Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante estime‐t‐elle que le Maroc viole de toute évidence l'article 2 de l'accord d'association, qui demande aux deux parties de respecter les principes démocratiques de base et les Droits de l'homme fondamentaux aussi bien dans leurs affaires intérieures que dans leurs affaires extérieures?
Réponse donnée par Mme Ashton, Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante au nom de la Commission
(8 janvier 2013)
La Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante suit avec attention la situation au Sahara occidental et celle des 22 prisonniers sahraouis actuellement détenus à Salé. Tous les incidents de Laâyoune sont regrettables. Elle réaffirme son plein soutien aux efforts du secrétaire général de l'ONU, salue le travail de l'envoyé personnel de celui‐ci, M. Christopher Ross, et appelle l'ensemble des parties à s'abstenir de toute violence.
Les Droits de l'homme sont régulièrement abordés lors des réunions des organes mixtes établis par l'accord d'association UE-Maroc. La Vice-présidente/Haute Représentante considère que, dans l'ensemble, le Maroc progresse dans le respect des principes des Droits de l'homme, bien que des améliorations supplémentaires soient nécessaires. Le SEAE a évoqué la situation des 22 prisonniers sahraouis lors des réunions de dialogue politique et au cours de la dernière réunion du sous-comité UE-Maroc «Droits de l'homme, démocratie et gouvernance» (Rabat, 16-17 octobre 2012). Les relations entre l'UE et le Maroc ont considérablement progressé ces dernières années et ont contribué à un processus de réforme dans le pays.
(Versione italiana)
Interrogazione con richiesta di risposta scritta E-010245/12
alla Commissione (Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) e Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 novembre 2012)

Oggetto: VP/HR — Violenza a Laayoune (Sahara occidentale occupato): repressione dei dimostranti saharawi ed espulsione di osservatori spagnoli e norvegesi
Nel 2010, migliaia di saharawi hanno deciso di rispondere alla forza di occupazione marocchina installando il campo Gdeim Izik alla periferia di Laayoune, al fine di chiedere un miglioramento delle loro condizioni di vita e un legittimo referendum sull'autodeterminazione. L'8 novembre 2010 l'esercito marocchino decideva di controattaccare smantellando il campo e perpetrando violenze. A due anni da codesti eventi, 22 prigionieri politici saharawi sono ancora nella prigione di Sale e il loro processo davanti a un tribunale militare è stato più volte rinviato.
L'inviato ONU, Christopher Ross, ha di recente visitato per la prima volta il Sahara occidentale (compresi i territori occupati, i campi profughi di Tindouf, e le aree liberate). L'1 novembre 2012 la polizia marocchina ha usato la violenza per reprimere le manifestazioni pacifiche a Laayoune, Smara e Dakla. Diversi manifestanti sono stati arrestati e decine feriti. Il noto difensore dei diritti umani, Aminatou Haidar, è stato picchiato e molestato.
Il 7 novembre 2012 le forze marocchine hanno espulso da Laayoune con la forza, 18 osservatori internazionali spagnoli e 4 norvegesi. Ai cittadini spagnoli è stato negato l'accesso all'assistenza consolare. Gli osservatori internazionali stavano cercando di valutare il deterioramento della situazione dei diritti umani.
Nel corso del dialogo UE-Marocco, istituito dall'accordo di associazione tra le due parti, che comprende una recente visita in Marocco, la Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante ha chiesto al Marocco informazioni sulla violenza subita dal popolo saharawi, perpetrata impunemente dalla polizia marocchina e altri nei territori occupati del Sahara occidentale?
La Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante condanna codesti atti di violenza contro il popolo saharawi e l'espulsione con la forza di osservatori internazionali? Alla luce di questi atti, la Vicepresidente/Alto Rappresentante è convinta che il Marocco stia palesemente violando l'articolo 2 dell'accordo di associazione, che chiede a entrambe le parti di rispettare continuamente i principi democratici e i diritti umani fondamentali nei loro affari sia interni che esterni? 
Risposta dell’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente Catherine Ashton a nome della Commissione
(8 gennaio 2013)
L’Alta Rappresentante/Vicepresidente sta seguendo attentamente la situazione nel Sahara occidentale e la questione dei 22 prigionieri saharawi attualmente detenuti a Sale. Tutti gli episodi di violenza verificatisi a Laayoune sono deprecabili. L’AR/VP ribadisce il suo pieno sostegno agli sforzi compiuti dal Segretario generale delle Nazioni Unite, elogia le azioni svolte dal suo inviato personale, l’ambasciatore Christopher Ross, e invita tutte le parti ad astenersi dalla violenza.
Nelle riunioni degli organismi comuni istituiti dall’accordo di associazione UE/Marocco si parla regolarmente di diritti umani. L’AR/VP ritiene che nel complesso il Marocco stia progredendo in direzione di un maggior rispetto dei diritti umani, anche se sono necessari ulteriori miglioramenti. Il SEAE ha sollevato il problema dei 22 prigionieri nelle riunioni dedicate al dialogo politico e durante l’ultima riunione del sottocomitato «Diritti umani, democratizzazione e governance» (Rabat, 16-17 ottobre 2012). Le relazioni tra Unione europea e Marocco hanno registrato notevoli progressi negli ultimi anni e hanno contribuito al processo di riforma in corso nel paese. 
(Nederlandse versie)
Vraag met verzoek om schriftelijk antwoord E-010245/12
aan de Commissie (Vicevoorzitter / Hoge Vertegenwoordiger)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) en Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 november 2012)

Betreft: VP/HR — Geweld in Al Ajoen (de bezette westelijke Sahara): onderdrukking van Saharawi-demonstranten en de uitzetting van Spaanse en Noorse waarnemers
In 2010 besloten duizenden Saharawi als respons op de Marokkaanse bezetting het kamp Gdeim Izik op te zetten in de buitenwijken van Al Ajoen en daarmee op te roepen tot de verbetering van hun leefomstandigheden en een wettig referendum over zelfbeschikking. Op 8 november 2010 zette het Marokkaanse leger de tegenaanval in, waarbij ze het kamp met geweld ontmantelden. Twee jaar na deze gebeurtenissen zitten 22 Saharawi politiek gevangenen nog steeds in de gevangenis van Salé en is hun rechtszaak voor een militaire rechtbank al verscheidene keren uitgesteld. 
VN-gezant Christopher Ross heeft onlangs de Westelijke Sahara voor het eerst bezocht (waaronder de bezette gebieden, de vluchtelingenkampen in Tindouf en de bevrijde zones). Op 1 november 2012 heeft de Marokkaanse politie de vreedzame demonstraties in Al Ajoen, Dakhla en Smara met geweld neergeslagen. Diverse demonstranten werden gearresteerd en tientallen mensen zijn gewond geraakt. De vooraanstaande mensenrechtenactivist Aminatou Haidar werd geslagen en geïntimideerd. 
Op 7 november 2012 zetten de Marokkaanse strijdtroepen 18 Spaanse en 4 Noorse internationale waarnemers met geweld uit bezet Al Ajoen. De Spaanse burgers werd.d. toegang tot consulaire bijstand ontzegd. Deze internationale waarnemers probeerden de verslechterende mensenrechtensituatie te beoordelen. 
Heeft de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger gedurende de dialoog tussen de EU en Marokko, die was ingesteld door de associatieovereenkomst tussen de twee partijen en die een recent bezoek aan Marokko omvat, Marokko om informatie verzocht over het geweld dat de Saharawi hebben ondergaan en waarvoor geen straffen worden opgelegd door de Marokkaanse politie en anderen in de bezette gebieden van de Westelijke Sahara?
Veroordeelt de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger deze onlusten tegen de Saharawi en de gewelddadige verdrijving van internationale waarnemers? Is de vicevoorzitter/hoge vertegenwoordiger tegen de achtergrond van deze onlusten ook niet van mening dat Marokko zich onmiskenbaar schuldig maakt aan de schending van artikel 2 van de associatieovereenkomst, waarin staat dat beide partijen de democratische grondbeginselen en fundamentele mensenrechten in binnen‐ en buitenlandse aangelegenheden permanent moeten eerbiedigen?
Antwoord van hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter Ashton  namens de Commissie 
(8 januari 2013)
De hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter volgt nauwlettend de situatie in de Westelijke Sahara en de kwestie van de 22 Sahrawi-gevangenen die momenteel worden vastgehouden in de gevangenis van Salé. De incidenten in Al Ajoen zijn betreurenswaardig. Zij bevestigt dat zij de secretaris-generaal van de VN volledig steunt, prijst het werk van zijn persoonlijke gezant Christopher Ross en dringt er bij alle partijen op aan om zich te onthouden van geweld.
De mensenrechten worden vaak besproken tijdens de vergaderingen van de gemeenschappelijke organen die werden opgericht in het kader van de associatieovereenkomst tussen de EU en Marokko. De hoge vertegenwoordiger/vicevoorzitter is van mening dat Marokko in het algemeen vooruitgang maakt wat betreft de naleving van de mensenrechtenbeginselen, hoewel verdere verbetering nodig is. De EDEO heeft de kwestie van de 22 gevangenen  ter sprake gebracht tijdens bijeenkomsten in het kader van de politieke dialoog en tijdens de laatste vergadering van het subcomité mensenrechten, democratie en bestuur. De relaties tussen de EU en Marokko zijn de voorbije jaren sterk vooruitgegaan en hebben bijgedragen tot een hervormingsproces in Marokko.
(Versão portuguesa)
Pergunta com pedido de resposta escrita E-010245/12
à Comissão (Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) e Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 de novembro de 2012)

Assunto: VP/HR — Violência em Laayoune (Sara Ocidental ocupado): repressão de manifestantes sarauís e expulsão de observadores espanhóis e noruegueses
Em 2010, milhares de sarauís decidiram responder à força de ocupação marroquina através da criação do campo de Gdeim Izik, nos arredores de Laayoune, a fim de reivindicarem uma melhoria das suas condições de vida e a realização de um verdadeiro referendo sobre a autodeterminação. Em 8 de novembro de 2010, o exército marroquino decidiu contra-atacar, desmantelando o campo e espalhando a violência. Dois anos após a ocorrência destes eventos, ainda há 22 presos políticos sarauís encarcerados na prisão de Sale, tendo o seu julgamento em tribunal militar sido objeto de vários adiamentos.
O enviado da ONU, Christopher Ross, visitou recentemente o Sara Ocidental pela primeira vez (incluindo os territórios ocupados e os campos de refugiados de Tindouf, bem como as áreas libertadas). Em 1 de novembro de 2012, a polícia marroquina recorreu à violência para reprimir manifestações pacíficas em Laayoune, Dakhla e Smara. Vários manifestantes foram detidos e registaram-se dezenas de feridos. O grande defensor dos Direitos Humanos Aminatou Haidar foi espancado e assediado.
Em 7 de novembro de 2012, as forças marroquinas expulsaram pela força da localidade ocupada de Laayoune 18 observadores internacionais espanhóis e quatro noruegueses. Aos cidadãos espanhóis foi negado o acesso a assistência consular. Estes observadores internacionais estavam a tentar avaliar o agravamento da situação dos Direitos Humanos.
No decurso do diálogo UE-Marrocos definido no quadro do Acordo de Associação entre ambas as partes, o qual incluiu uma visita recente a Marrocos, terá a Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante solicitado informações ao lado marroquino sobre a violência sofrida pelo povo sarauí, perpetrada com total impunidade pela polícia marroquina e outras entidades nos territórios ocupados do Sara Ocidental?
Condena a Vice-Presidente/Alta Representante estes atos de violência contra o povo sarauí e a expulsão pela força dos observadores internacionais? À luz destas ações, não considera a Vice‐Presidente/Alta Representante que Marrocos violou de forma grosseira o artigo 2.° do Acordo de Associação, o qual requer que ambas as partes observem sistematicamente os princípios democráticos de base e os mais fundamentais Direitos Humanos, tanto interna, como externamente?
Resposta dada pela Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente Catherine Ashton  em nome da Comissão 
(8 de janeiro de 2013)
A Alta Representante/Vice-Presidente está a acompanhar atentamente a situação no Sara Ocidental e a questão dos 22 prisioneiros sarauís atualmente detidos na prisão de Salé. Todos os incidentes que tiveram lugar em Laayoune são lamentáveis. A AR/VP reitera o seu pleno apoio aos esforços do Secretário-Geral das Nações Unidas, louva o trabalho do seu emissário pessoal, o Embaixador Christopher Ross, e exorta todas as partes a não recorrerem à violência.
Os direitos humanos são regularmente abordados nas reuniões dos organismos conjuntos instituídos ao abrigo do Acordo de Associação UE-Marrocos. A AR/VP considera que, de um modo geral, Marrocos está a evoluir positivamente no sentido de um maior respeito pelos princípios dos direitos humanos, embora sejam necessárias mais melhorias. O SEAE abordou, efetivamente, a questão dos 22 prisioneiros nas reuniões de diálogo político e durante a última reunião do subcomité UE-Marrocos «direitos humanos, democracia e governação» (Rabat, 16/17 de outubro de 2012). As relações UE-Marrocos registaram progressos significativos nos últimos anos e contribuíram para o processo de reforma naquele país. 
(Slovenska različica)
Vprašanje za pisni odgovor E-010245/12
za Komisijo (VP/HR)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) in Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9. november 2012)

Zadeva: (VP/HR) – Nasilje v El Aaiúnu (zasedena Zahodna Sahara): zatiranje saharskih protestnikov in izgon španskih in norveških opazovalcev
Leta 2010 se je več tisoč Saharcev odločilo, da se bo zoperstavilo maroškim zasedbenim silam in je v predmestju El Aaiúna postavilo taborišče, kjer je pozivalo k izboljšanju življenjskih razmer in legitimnemu referendumu o samoodločbi. Maroška vojska je 8. novembra 2010 izvedla protinapad, v katerem je razrušila taborišče in sejala nasilje. Dve leti po teh dogodkih je 22 saharskih političnih zapornikov še vedno zaprtih v zaporu Salé, njihovo sojenje pred vojaškim sodiščem pa je bilo že večkrat preloženo. 
Odposlanec Združenih narodov Christopher Ross je nedavno prvič obiskal Zahodno Saharo (tudi zasedena ozemlja in begunska taborišča v Tindoufu ter osvobojena ozemlja). Maroška policija je 1. novembra 2012 nasilno zatrla mirne proteste v El Aaiúnu, Dakhli in Semari. Več protestnikov je bilo aretiranih in na ducate ranjenih. Ugledno borko za človekove pravice Aminatu Hajdar pa so pretepli in nadlegovali. 
Maroške sile so 7. novembra 2012 na silo izgnale osemnajst španskih in štiri norveške mednarodne opazovalce iz zasedenega El Aaiúna. Španskim državljanom je bil zavrnjen dostop do konzularne pomoči. Ti mednarodni opazovalci so skušali oceniti čedalje slabše razmere na področju človekovih pravic. 
Ali je visoka predstavnica Unije za zunanje zadeve in varnostno politiko/podpredsednica Komisije pri poteku dialoga med EU in Marokom, ki je bil vzpostavljen s pridružitvenim sporazumom med obema stranema in v okviru katerega je potekal nedavni obisk Maroka, od te države zahtevala informacije o nasilju nad saharskim prebivalstvom, ki so ga na zasedenih ozemljih Zahodne Sahare nekaznovano zagrešili maroška policija in drugi?
Ali obsoja storjena nasilna dejanja proti saharskemu prebivalstvu in nasilen izgon mednarodnih opazovalcev? Ali ob teh dejanjih meni, da Maroko očitno krši člen 2 pridružitvenega sporazuma, ki določa, da morata obe strani dosledno spoštovati osnovna demokratična načela in temeljne človekove pravice tako v notranjih kot zunanjih zadevah?
Odgovor visoke predstavnice in podpredsednice Komisije Catherine Ashton v imenu Komisije 
(8. januar 2013)
Visoka predstavnica in podpredsednica Komisije pozorno spremlja dogajanje v Zahodni Sahari in vprašanje 22 zahodnosaharskih zapornikov, ki so trenutno priprti v zaporu Salé. Vsi incidenti, ki so se zgodili v Laayounu, so obžalovanja vredni. Visoka predstavnica in podpredsednica Komisije ponovno zagotavlja svojo polno podporo prizadevanjem generalnega sekretarja ZN, izreka pohvalo delu njegovega osebnega odposlanca, veleposlanika Christopherja Rossa, in poziva vse strani, naj se vzdržijo nasilja.
V okviru sej skupnih teles, ustanovljenih na podlagi pridružitvenega sporazuma med EU in Marokom, se človekove pravice redno obravnavajo. Visoka predstavnica in podpredsednica Komisije meni, da Maroko na splošno napreduje v smeri večjega spoštovanja načel o človekovih pravicah, čeprav so potrebne nadaljnje izboljšave. ESZD je vprašanje 22 zapornikov obravnaval na srečanjih v okviru političnih dialogov in na zadnji seji pododbora EU-Maroko za človekove pravice, demokratizacijo in upravljanje (Rabat, 16. in 17. oktobra 2012). Odnosi med EU in Marokom so se v zadnjih letih bistveno izboljšali in so prispevali k procesu reforme v tej državi.
(Svensk version)
Frågor för skriftligt besvarande E-010245/12
till kommissionen (Vice-ordföranden / Höga representanten)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) och Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 november 2012)

Angående: VP/HR – Våld i El-Aaiún (ockuperade Västsahara): förtryck av sahrawiska demonstranter och utvisning av spanska och norska observatörer
År 2010 beslutade sig tusentals sahrawier för att svara på den marockanska ockupationen genom att upprätta Gdeim Izik-lägret i utkanten av El-Aaiún som ett sätt att kräva förbättrade livsvillkor och en berättigad folkomröstning om självbestämmande. Den 8 november 2010 valde den marockanska armén att slå tillbaka och upplösa lägret med våld. Två år senare befinner sig fortfarande 22 sahrawiska politiska fångar i Sale-fängelset och deras rättegång i en militärdomstol har skjutits upp vid ett flertal tillfällen. 
FN:s sändebud Christopher Ross besökte nyligen Västsahara för första gången (ett besök som inkluderade de ockuperade territorierna, flyktinglägren i Tindouf och de befriade områdena). Den 1 november 2012 tog den marockanska polisen till våld för att slå ner fredliga demonstrationer i El-Aaiún, Dakhla och Smara. Många demonstranter arresterades och tiotals skadades. Den kända människorättsaktivisten Aminatou Haidar blev slagen och trakasserad. 
Den 7 november 2012 använde de marockanska styrkorna våld för att utvisa arton spanska och fyra norska internationella observatörer från det ockuperade El-Aaiún. De spanska medborgarna förvägrades konsulärt bistånd. Dessa internationella observatörer försökte bedöma den allt sämre människorättssituationen. 
Genom associeringsavtalet mellan EU och Marocko upprättades en dialog mellan parterna och kommissionens vice ordförande/unionens höga representant besökte nyligen Marocko. Vi skulle därför nu vilja ställa följande frågor: Har kommissionens vice ordförande/unionens höga representant, inom ramen för denna dialog eller detta besök, begärt information från Marocko om det våld sahrawifolket utsätts för av den marockanska polisen och andra i de ockuperade territorierna i Västsahara, och som förövarna åtnjuter straffrihet för?
Fördömer kommissionens vice ordförande/unionens höga representant våldet mot det sahrawiska folket och användandet av våld för att utvisa internationella observatörer? Anser kommissionens vice ordförande/unionens höga representant att Marocko i samband med dessa händelser begår ett uppenbart brott mot artikel 2 i associeringsavtalet, enligt vilken båda parter ständigt ska respektera grundläggande demokratiska principer och mänskliga rättigheter i både sin inrikes‐ och utrikespolitik? 
Svar från den höga representanten/vice ordföranden Catherine Ashton  på kommissionens vägnar
(8 januari 2013)
Den höga representanten/vice ordföranden följer noggrant situationen i Västsahara och frågan om de 22 västsahariska fångar som för närvarande sitter fängslade i Salé. Alla incidenter som har ägt rum i Laayoune är beklagliga. Catherine Ashton bekräftar sitt fulla stöd för FN:s generalsekreterares insatser, lovordar det arbete som utförs av hans personlige sändebud ambassadör Christopher Ross och uppmanar alla parter att avstå från våld.
Mänskliga rättigheter diskuteras regelbundet vid mötena i de gemensamma organ som inrättats genom associeringsavtalet mellan EU och Marocko. Den höga representanten/vice ordföranden anser att Marocko överlag gör framsteg i riktning mot en ökad respekt för de mänskliga rättigheterna, även om det krävs ytterligare förbättringar. Europeiska utrikestjänsten har tagit upp frågan om de 22 fångarna vid möten inom ramen för den politiska dialogen och vid det senaste mötet i underkommittén ”Mänskliga rättigheter, demokrati och samhällsstyrning” till associeringskommittén EU‐Marocko (Rabat, den 16‐17 oktober 2012). Betydande framsteg har gjorts i förbindelserna mellan EU och Marocko under senare år, vilket har bidragit till en reformprocess i landet. 
(English version)
Question for written answer E-010245/12
to the Commission (Vice-President/High Representative)
Willy Meyer (GUE/NGL), João Ferreira (GUE/NGL), Inês Cristina Zuber (GUE/NGL), Pino Arlacchi (S&D), Bart Staes (Verts/ALE), Helmut Scholz (GUE/NGL), Mikael Gustafsson (GUE/NGL), Patrick Le Hyaric (GUE/NGL), Marisa Matias (GUE/NGL), Alda Sousa (GUE/NGL), Nikolaos Chountis (GUE/NGL), Sabine Lösing (GUE/NGL), Paul Murphy (GUE/NGL), Ivo Vajgl (ALDE), Ana Miranda (Verts/ALE), Raül Romeva i Rueda (Verts/ALE), Jill Evans (Verts/ALE), Norbert Neuser (S&D), Nicole Kiil-Nielsen (Verts/ALE), Andres Perello Rodriguez (S&D), Antonio Masip Hidalgo (S&D), Rui Tavares (Verts/ALE), Åsa Westlund (S&D), Michèle Rivasi (Verts/ALE), Ana Gomes (S&D), Marco Scurria (PPE) and Jean Lambert (Verts/ALE)
(9 November 2012)

Subject: VP/HR — Violence in Laayoune (occupied Western Sahara): repression of Sahrawi demonstrators and expulsion of Spanish and Norwegian observers
In 2010, thousands of Sahrawis decided to respond to the Moroccan occupation force by setting up the Gdeim Izik camp on the outskirts of Laayoune in order to call for an improvement in their living conditions and a legitimate referendum on self-determination. On 8 November 2010 the Moroccan army decided to counter-attack, dismantling the camp and wreaking violence. Two years after these events, 22 Sahrawi political prisoners are still in Sale Prison and their trial before a military court has been postponed several times. 
UN envoy Christopher Ross recently visited Western Sahara for the first time (including the occupied territories and the refugee camps in Tindouf as well as the liberated areas). On 1 November 2012 the Moroccan police used violence to suppress peaceful demonstrations in Laayoune, Dakhla and Smara. Several protesters were arrested and dozens wounded. Prominent human rights defender Aminatou Haidar was beaten and harassed. 
On 7 November 2012 the Moroccan forces expelled 18 Spanish and 4 Norwegian international observers from occupied Laayoune by force. The Spanish citizens were denied access to consular assistance. These international observers were trying to assess the deteriorating human rights situation. 
In the course of the EU-Morocco dialogue established by the association agreement between the two parties, which includes a recent visit to Morocco, has the Vice-President/High Representative requested information from Morocco concerning the violence suffered by the Sahrawi people, which is being perpetrated with impunity by the Moroccan police and others in the occupied territories of Western Sahara?
Does the Vice-President/High Representative condemn these acts of violence against the Sahrawi people and the expulsion by force of international observers? In light of these acts, does the Vice-President/High Representative believe that Morocco is blatantly violating Article 2 of the association agreement, which requires both parties continually to respect basic democratic principles and fundamental human rights in both their domestic and external affairs?
Answer given by High Representative/Vice-President Ashton  on behalf of the Commission 
(8 January 2013)
The HR/VP is following closely the situation in Western Sahara and the issue of the 22 Sahrawi prisoners currently detained in prison in Salé. Any incidents that have taken place in Laayoune are regrettable. She reaffirms her full support for the UN Secretary-General’s efforts, commends the work of his Personal Envoy Ambassador Christopher Ross and calls on all parties to restrain from violence.
Human rights are regularly addressed in the meetings of the joint bodies established under the EU/Morocco Association Agreement. The HR/VP considers that overall Morocco is making progress towards more compliance with human rights principles, although further improvements are necessary. The EEAS did raise the questions of the 22 prisoners in political dialogue meetings and during the last meeting of the EU/Morocco Sub-committee ‘Human Rights, Democracy and Governance’ (Rabat, 16/17 October 2012). EU-Morocco relations have made significant progress in recent years and have contributed to a process of reform in that country. 
(Wersja polska)
Pytanie wymagające odpowiedzi pisemnej P-010246/12
do Komisji
Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D)
(12 listopada 2012 r.)

Przedmiot: W sprawie trwałego zabezpieczenia stopnia wodnego na rzece Wiśle we Włocławku
W związku z moją pracą w Komisji Transportu i Turystyki oraz w stałej Podkomisji ds. Bezpieczeństwa i Obrony interesuję się sytuacją związaną ze stopniem wodnym na Wiśle we Włocławku. Stopień ten pierwotnie miał być jednym z elementów kaskady dolnej Wisły, nie przewidywano by mógł on funkcjonować samodzielnie. Niestety, w Polsce na Wiśle poniżej Włocławka nie powstały inwestycje, które odciążyłyby ten stopień wodny. W związku z tym coraz szybciej następuje degradacja stopnia wodnego we Włocławku. Zagraża to bezpieczeństwu życia i zdrowia kilkuset tysięcy mieszkańców woj. kujawsko-pomorskiego. Proszę zatem o udzielenie odpowiedzi na dwa podstawowe pytania: 







W jakim terminie zostanie zabezpieczony w sposób trwały stopień wodny we Włocławku, by zlikwidować narastające zagrożenie dla mieszkańców tego regionu?











Czy w projekcie budżetu Unii Europejskiej na lata 2014-2020 przewiduje się środki na trwałe zabezpieczenie stopnia wodnego we Włocławku?




Odpowiedź udzielona przez komisarza Johannesa Hahna w imieniu Komisji
(13 grudnia 2012 r.)






1.


Komisja zdaje sobie sprawę z dużego znaczenia projektów w dziedzinie zabezpieczenia przeciwpowodziowego w Polsce. W przypadku Włocławka środki zapobiegawcze są wspierane w ramach programu 




„Infrastruktura i Środowisko” oraz programu województwa kujawsko-pomorskiego.
Uzyskanie zadowalających wyników w zakresie zabezpieczenia przeciwpowodziowego wymaga ogólnego planowania w całym dorzeczu Wisły, za co odpowiedzialne są władze Polski. Potrzebna jest również uzupełniająca interwencja ze strony programów zarówno krajowych, jak i regionalnych, na co Komisja niejednokrotnie zwracała uwagę władzom Polski. 
Przeprowadzono już pewne działania w rejonie Włocławka, polegające na naprawie wałów rzeki Zgłowiączki koło Starego Brześcia. Według informacji pochodzących od władz regionalnych żadne środki przeznaczone na zabezpieczenie przeciwpowodziowe w ich programie nie zostaną utracone. W ramach programu „Infrastruktura i Środowisko” planowano wsparcie dla stopnia wodnego w pobliżu Włocławka, który pozwoli na poprawę stanu stopnia wodnego. Władze krajowe poinformowały Komisję o konieczności rewizji zakresu programu, co spowodowało opóźnienie zawarcia umowy z beneficjentem. Pozostałe projekty otrzymujące wsparcie w ramach tego samego programu są obecnie realizowane w ramach projektów „Kompleksowe zabezpieczenie przeciwpowodziowe Żuław – Etap I”.






2.


Dyskusje dotyczące wsparcia dla Polski w ramach polityki spójności w latach 2014-2020 są dopiero w początkowej fazie i zbyt wcześnie jest na spekulacje co do tego, które projekty otrzymają finansowanie w przyszłości. 




(English version)
Question for written answer P-010246/12
to the Commission
Janusz Władysław Zemke (S&D)
(12 November 2012)

Subject: Securing the Włocławek stage of fall on the Vistula River on a long-term basis
In connection with my work on the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the Subcommittee on Security and Defence, I take an interest in the situation of the Włocławek stage of fall on the Vistula River. The stage of fall was originally supposed to form part of the Lower Vistula Cascade, and it was not intended to be able to function independently. However, investment projects that would relieve the burden on this stage of fall have not been carried out on the Vistula downstream of Włocławek, and this is accelerating the deterioration of the stage of fall in Włocławek. This poses a risk to the lives and health of several hundred thousand residents of Kujawsko‐Pomorskie Province.
In this connection, would the Commission please answer the following questions: 







Within what timeframe will the Włocławek stage of fall be secured on a long‐term basisin order to eliminate the growing threat to the province’s residents?











Does the Multiannual Financial Framework 2014‐2020 envisage funding for thelong‐term securing of the Włocławek stage of fall?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(13 December 2012)






1.


The Commission is aware of the importance of flood prevention projects in Poland. In the case of Włocławek, risk prevention measures are supported through the 




‘Infrastructure and Environment’ and Kujawsko-Pomorskie programmes.
Achieving satisfactory results in flood prevention requires an overall planning in the whole Vistula river basin, for which the Polish authorities are responsible. A complementary intervention from both national and regional programmes is also necessary, which has been repeatedly indicated by the Commission to the Polish authorities. 
Some actions have already been completed in the area of Wloclawek, by repairing the dikes in the river Zgłowiaczka near Stary Brześć. According to the regional authorities, no funds allocated to flood prevention measure in their programme will be lost. The ‘Infrastructure and Environment’ programme has planned to support a water step near Wloclawek, which will improve the stage of fall. National authorities informed the Commission that the project's scope had to be reviewed, which has delayed the signature of the contract with the beneficiary. Other projects supported by the same programme are currently being implemented in the framework of the ‘Comprehensive Flood Prevention for Zuławy — phase I’ projects.






2.


Discussions on cohesion policy support in Poland in 2014-2020 are just beginning and it is too early to speculate on which projects will receive funding in future. 




(Versiunea în limba română)
Întrebarea cu solicitare de răspuns scris P-010247/12
adresată Comisiei
Victor Boştinaru (S&D)
(12 noiembrie 2012)

Subiect: Procedura de presuspendare și corecțiile financiare aplicate în cazul a patru programe operaționale în România
Comisia a notificat autoritățile române cu privire la măsurile luate pentru procedura de presuspendare și corecțiile financiare aplicate în cazul a patru programe operaționale sprijinite de fondurile structurale și de coeziune.
Acestea reprezintă măsuri fără precedent, atât în ceea ce privește amploarea lor, cât și sumele la care se ridică fondurile UE afectate. Pentru a înțelege mai bine cauzele și condițiile care au dus la adoptarea acestora de Comisie, am dori să obținem clarificări cu privire la următoarele puncte:







Care este perioada la care se referă auditul și care sunt remarcile Comisiei pe care se întemeiază decizia sa?











Autoritățile române au fost notificate, în una sau în mai multe dintre etape, cu privire la deficiențele identificate de Comisie și la posibilele consecințe ale acestora?











Li s-au transmis autorităților române recomandări cu privire la modalitățile de remediere a deficiențelor identificate? Care au fost termenele limită prevăzute, dacă au existat?











Dacă răspunsul la punctul 2 este afirmativ, care au fost autoritățile române notificate? 











Dacă răspunsul la punctul 3 este afirmativ, cum au reacționat autoritățile române notificate? Au fost puse în aplicare recomandările prezentate de Comisie?




Răspuns dat de dl Hahn în numele Comisiei
(10 decembrie 2012)






1.


La 6 august 2012 și la 25 octombrie 2012, Comisia a informat autoritățile române cu privire la o eventuală suspendare a plăților pentru programul Dezvoltarea Resurselor Umane și pentru cea mai mare parte a programului pentru Transport, a programului Regional și a programului Creșterea Competitivității Economice. Acest lucru a survenit ca urmare a deficiențelor identificate în materie de selecție a operațiunilor, orientări pentru beneficiari, verificări de gestiune, achiziții publice, buna gestiune financiară și în materie de prevenire și detectare a fraudei și a conflictelor de interese. Această etapă este urmarea diverselor audituri efectuate de Comisie și de autoritatea de audit din România, între noiembrie 2010 și iulie 2012. 










2. și 4.


Rapoartele de audit ale Comisiei, consecințele posibile ale deficiențelor sistemice identificate și acțiunile concrete care urmează să fie luate au fost comunicate guvernului României și tuturor ministerelor și autorităților responsabile în mai multe etape, începând cu 28 iulie 2011. 










3.


Măsurile corective care urmau să fie luate au fost comunicate României în fiecare etapă a procesului și s-au bazat pe angajamentele anterioare asumate de România. Măsurile au ca scop prevenirea reapariției deficiențelor și pot face obiectul unei verificări de către Comisie. Verificările autorității de audit din România sunt, de asemenea, importante în această privință. Termenele stabilite au variat în funcție de program. 










5.


În condițiile în care, în ciuda faptului că România și-a îmbunătățit anumite aspecte ale sistemelor sale ca răspuns la scrisorile anterioare ale Comisiei, situația generală este în continuare nesatisfăcătoare. Acest lucru explică notificarea eventualei suspendări a plăților.




(English version)
Question for written answer P-010247/12
to the Commission
Victor Boştinaru (S&D)
(12 November 2012)

Subject: Pre-suspension and financial corrections concerning four operational programmes in Romania
The Commission has notified the Romanian authorities about measures related to pre-suspension and financial corrections concerning four operational programmes supported by the Structural and Cohesion Funds.
These are unprecedented measures, both in terms of their magnitude and of the amounts of EU funds affected. In order to better understand the causes and conditions which have led to their adoption by the Commission, could the following points be clarified?






1.


What is the period concerned by the audit and the remarks of the Commission which constitute the basis for its decision?










2.


Were the Romanian authorities notified, at one or more stages, of the deficiencies identified by the Commission and of the possible consequences?










3.


Were the Romanian authorities given recommendations on how to address the deficiencies identified? What were the deadlines given, if any?










4.


If the answer to point 2 is positive, which were the Romanian authorities notified?










5.


If the answer to point 3 is positive, how did the notified Romanian authorities react? Were the recommendations made by the Commission implemented?




Answer given by Mr Hahn on behalf of the Commission
(10 December 2012)






1.


On 6 August 2012 and 25 October 2012, the Commission informed the Romanian authorities of a possible suspension of payments for the Human Resources Development Programme and the greater part of the Transport, Regional and Increase of Economic Competitiveness programmes. This was as a result of deficiencies identified in the areas of selection of operations, guidance to beneficiaries, management verifications, public procurement, sound financial management, and the prevention and detection of fraud and conflicts of interest. This step follows various audits performed by the Commission and the Romanian audit authority between November 2010 and July 2012. 










2 and 4.


The Commission's audit reports, the possible consequences of the systemic deficiencies identified and the concrete actions to be taken have been communicated to the Romanian government and all responsible ministries and authorities at several stages starting from 28 July 2011. 










3.


The corrective measures to be taken have been communicated to Romania at each stage of the process and build on previous commitments taken by Romania. The measures are to prevent the recurrence of the deficiencies and may be subject to verification by the Commission. The Romanian audit authority verifications are also important in this regard. The deadlines set varied from programme to programme. 










5.


While Romania has improved some aspects of their systems in response to previous Commission letters, the overall situation is still unsatisfactory. This explains the notification of possible suspension of payments. 






(1)  El Informe de evaluación de la Comisión de 21 de mayo de 2012 está compuesto por la Comunicación Un primer paso para la aplicación del marco de la UE, COM(2012)226 y el Documento de trabajo de los servicios de la Comisión adjunto a ella, SWD (2012)133.

(2)  Comunicado de prensa de 22 de agosto de 2012 de la Oficina del Primer Ministro, http://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/communiques/08.22_cp_-_communique_du_premier_ministre.pdf

(3)  Una breve resumen de estos elementos se presentó en el documento de trabajo de los servicios de la Comisión, SWD (2012) 133 de 21 de mayo de 2012.

(4)  La relazione di valutazione della Commissione del 21 maggio 2012 si compone della comunicazione «Strategie nazionali di integrazione dei Rom: un primo passo nell’attuazione del Quadro dell’UE» (COM(2012)226) e del relativo documento di lavoro dei servizi della Commissione (SWD(2012)133).

(5)  Comunicato stampa del 22 agosto 2012 dall’ufficio del primo ministro: http://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/communiques/08.22_cp_-_communique_du_premier_ministre.pdf

(6)  Nel documento di lavoro dei servizi della Commissione SWD(2012)133 del 21 maggio 2012 si presenta una sintesi di tali elementi.

(7)  Het beoordelingsrapport van de Commissie van 21 mei 2012 bestaat uit de mededeling betreffende de eerste stap van de uitvoering van het EU-kader COM(2012)226 en het begeleidende werkdocument van de diensten van de Commissie SWD(2012)133.

(8)  Persbericht van 22 augustus 2012 van het kabinet van de premier, http://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/communiques/08.22_cp_-_communique_du_premier_ministre.pdf

(9)  Een beknopte samenvatting van deze elementen werd voorgesteld in het werkdocument van de diensten van de Commissie SWD(2012)133 van 21 mei 2012.

(10)  Raportul de evaluare al Comisiei din 21 mai 2012 este compus din Comunicarea privind o primă etapă în punerea în aplicare a cadrului UE [COM (2012) 226] și documentul de lucru al serviciilor Comisiei SWD (2012) 133.

(11)  Comunicat de presă din 22 august 2012 din partea Cabinetului prim-ministrului francez, http://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/communiques/08.22_cp_-_communique_du_premier_ministre.pdf

(12)  Un rezumat al acestor elemente a fost prezentat în documentul de lucru al serviciilor Comisiei SWD (2012) 133 din 21 mai 2012.

(13)  Kommissionens bedömning av den 21 maj 2012, som utgörs av meddelandet Nationella strategier för integreringen av romer: ett första steg i genomförandet av EU-ramen (KOM(2012) 226) och det arbetsdokument från kommissionens avdelningar (SWD(2012) 133) som åtföljer meddelandet.

(14)  Pressmeddelande av den 22 augusti 2012 från premiärministerns kansli:
http://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/communiques/08.22_cp_-_communique_du_premier_ministre.pdf.

(15)  En kort sammanfattning av resultatet av kommissionens bedömning finns i det ovan nämnda arbetsdokumentet av den 21 maj 2012 från kommissionens avdelningar (SWD(2012) 133).

(16)  The Commission's assessment report of 21st May 2012 is made of the communication on a first step in the implementation of the EU Framework Com(2012)226 and the accompanying staff working document SWD (2012)133.

(17)  Press release of 22 August 2012 from the Prime Minister's office, http://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/communiques/08.22_cp_-_communique_du_premier_ministre.pdf

(18)  A succinct summary of these elements was presented in the Commission Staff Working Document SWD(2012)133of 21st May 2012.

(19)  COM(2012)7 def. del 17 gennaio 2012.

(20)  COM(2012) 7 final of 17 January 2012.

(21)  http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sip/index_en.htm

(22)  www.saferinternet.org.

(23)  http://www.saferinternet.org/web/guest/safer-internet-day.

(24)  COM(212)196 της 2.05.2012.

(25)  http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sip/self_reg/index_en.htm

(26)  http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sip/index_en.htm

(27)  www.saferInternet.org.

(28)  http://www.saferInternet.org/web/guest/safer-Internet-day.

(29)  COM(212) 196 of 2.05.2012.

(30)  http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/sip/self_reg/index_en.htm

(31)  http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/2947079/turkije-wil-eu-lidmaatschap-of-niets.html

(32)  http://www.nu.nl/buitenland/2947079/turkije-wil-eu-lidmaatschap-of-niets.html

(33)  http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2800/Europese-Unie/article/detail/3337398/2012/10/25/Europese-Unie-moet-zich-verder-uitbreiden.dhtml.

(34)  http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2800/Europese-Unie/article/detail/3337398/2012/10/25/Europese-Unie-moet-zich-verder-uitbreiden.dhtml.

(35)  http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?206573/Panama-trading-in-unreported-bluefin-tuna.

(36)  http://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?206573/Panama-trading-in-unreported-bluefin-tuna.

(37)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/04473_sv.pdf

(38)  EUT C 303, 14.12.2007, s. 17.

(39)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/04473_en.pdf

(40)  OJ 2007 C 303, 17.

(41)  Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv 2011/93/EU av den 13 december 2011 om bekämpande av sexuella övergrepp mot barn, sexuell exploatering av barn och barnpornografi, och om ersättande av rådets rambeslut 2004/68/RIF, EUT L 335, 17.12.2011, s. 1 (i frågan benämnd 2011/92/EU).

(42)  Directive 2011/93/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 (referenced as 2011/92/EU).

(43)  Pressemitteilung IP/12/1252.

(44)   Press release IP/12/1252.

(45)  http://www.es.iairgroup.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=240950&p=irol-meeting.

(46)  http://www.multiserviciosaeroportuarios.com/.

(47)  http://investors.vueling.com/media/7935/financial_statements_2011.pdf

(48)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=ES.

(49)  http://www.es.iairgroup.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=240950&p=irol-meeting.

(50)  http://www.multiserviciosaeroportuarios.com/.

(51)  http://investors.vueling.com/media/7935/financial_statements_2011.pdf

(52)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/application/home.do?language=EN.

(53)  http://www.lavanguardia.com/economia/20121003/54352219840/gobierno-ejecuto-catalunya-35-presupuestado-frente-111-madrid.html

(54)  http://www.lavanguardia.com/economia/20121003/54352219840/gobierno-ejecuto-catalunya-35-presupuestado-frente-111-madrid.html

(55)  http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20121003/54352219840/ajustes-presupuestos-generales-del-estado-35.html

(56)  http://www.lavanguardia.com/politica/20121003/54352219840/ajustes-presupuestos-generales-del-estado-35.html

(57)  Dok.14470/07 vom 29. Oktober 2007.

(58)







3166.


Tagung des Rates (Auswärtige Angelegenheiten) vom 14. Mai 2012 in Brüssel, Schlussfolgerungen des Rates zum Thema 





(59)







3154.


Tagung des Rates (Auswärtige Angelegenheiten/Handel) vom 16. März 2012 in Brüssel, Schlussfolgerungen des Rates zum 





(60)  Doc.14470/07 of 29 October 2007.

(61)  3166th Foreign Affairs Council meeting, Brussels, 14 May 2012, Council conclusions ‘Increasing the Impact of EU Development Policy: an Agenda for Change’.

(62)  3154th Foreign Affairs (Trade) Council meeting, Brussels, 16 March 2012. Council conclusions on ‘EU’s approach to trade, growth and development in the next decade’.

(63)  Dok. 13273/12.

(64)  Dok. 15898/12.

(65)  Dok. 10834/1/11 REV1.

(66)  13273/12.

(67)  15898/12.

(68)  10834/1/11 REV1.

(69)  Στατιστικές της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης για το εισόδημα και τις συνθήκες διαβίωσης.

(70)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/health/public_health/data_public_health/database.

(71)  Επιτροπή Κοινωνικής Προστασίας.

(72)  Μνημόνιο Συμφωνίας.

(73)  Πρόγραμμα Οικονομικής Προσαρμογής.

(74)  Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης.

(75)  European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions.

(76)  http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/health/public_health/data_public_health/database.

(77)  Social Protection Committee.

(78)  Memorandum of Understanding.

(79)  Economic Adjustment Programme.

(80)  European Regional Development Fund.

(81)  http://areny-noguera.blogspot.be/2012/10/red-eléctrica-de-españa-inicia-los.html

(82)  http://www.radiohuesca.com/movil/noticia/476484/cornudella-acoge-una-reunión-para-conocer-los-detalles-de-la-línea-foradada--la-pobla.

(83)  DO L 199 de 30.7.1999.

(84)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/documents/risk_rd03_en.pdf

(85)  DO L 26 de 28.1.2012, pp.1-16 (versión codificada de la Directiva 85/337/CEE relativa a la evaluación de las repercusiones de determinados proyectos públicos y privados sobre el medio ambiente, en su versión modificada).

(86)   http://areny-noguera.blogspot.be/2012/10/red-eléctrica-de-españa-inicia-los.html

(87)  http://www.radiohuesca.com/movil/noticia/476484/cornudella-acoge-una-reunión-para-conocer-los‐ detalles-de-la-línea-foradada--la-pobla.

(88)  OJ L 199, 30.07.1999.

(89)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/ph_risk/documents/risk_rd03_en.pdf

(90)  OJ L 26, 28.01.2012, p.1-16 (codified version of Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, as amended).

(91)  Vom November/Dezember 2010.

(92)  Verordnung (EG) Nr. 1466/97 des Rates.

(93)  Siehe unter: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/country_focus/index_de.htm

(94)  Conducted in November/December 2010.

(95)  Council regulation 1466/97.

(96)  Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/country_focus/index_en.htm

(97)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2012/pdf/ecp476_en.pdf

(98)  Siehe Beschluss C(2008)6866 der Kommission.

(99)  Zur Methode für die Berechnung der Produktionslücke siehe: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2010/pdf/ecp420_en.pdf

(100)  Zu der von der OECD entwickelten Methode zu Haushaltselastizitäten siehe: http://www.oecd.org/tax/publicfinanceandfiscalpolicy/1880834.pdf und http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/measuring-cyclically-adjusted-budget-balances-for-oecd-countries_787626008442.

(101)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/public_finances_emu/index_en.htm

(102)  So wird beispielsweise die Kohärenz zwischen Handelsprognosen in einem iterativen Prozess gewährleistet, um Diskrepanzen zwischen Angaben zu weltweiten Ausfuhren und Einfuhren auf ein akzeptables Maß zu reduzieren. Szenarioanalysen werden mithilfe des QUEST-III-Modells zentral durchgeführt. Bei QUEST handelt es sich um ein dem neuesten Stand der Wirtschaftsforschung entsprechendes dynamisches stochastisches Gleichgewichtsmodell (DSGE-Modell), das zur Analyse der Wirtschaft in der EU und im EU-Währungsgebiet insgesamt eingesetzt wird, wobei auch Modellversionen für bestimmte Länder verwendet werden. Zu neuen Entwicklungen bei QUEST-III-Modellen siehe European Economy Research Letter, Band 3, Ausgabe 1, Mai 2009, abrufbar unter: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication15099_en.pdf

(103)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2012/pdf/ecp476_en.pdf

(104)  See Commission decision C(2008)6866.

(105)  For the method for calculating output gaps see http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2010/pdf/ecp420_en.pdf

(106)  For the method on budgetary elasticities developed by the OECD see http://www.oecd.org/tax/publicfinanceandfiscalpolicy/1880834.pdf and http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/measuring-cyclically-adjusted-budget-balances-for-oecd-countries_787626008442.

(107)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/public_finances_emu/index_en.htm

(108)  For example, the mutual consistency of trade forecasts is ensured in an iterative process to reduce any discrepancy between global exports and global imports to an acceptable level. Scenario analysis with the QUEST III model is carried out centrally. QUEST is a Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium Model, at the frontier of economic research, which is mostly used for analysing the EU and euro area economy as a whole, although model versions for specific countries are also used. Please see New developments in QUEST III models in European Economy Research Letter volume 3, Issue 1, May 2009 http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/publication15099_en.pdf

(109)   Council Directive 2000/29/EC.

(110)  ‘A renewed commitment to a barrier-free Europe’, COM(2010) 0636 final.

(111)  SEC(2010)1324 final.

(112)  http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/accessibility/index_en.htm

(113)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/disabilities/award/index_en.htm

(114)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/fr/parliamentary-questions.html;jsessionid=D1DF6C3BD73E40DF53528D94A366163E.node2?tabType=wq#sidesForm.

(115)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/fr/parliamentary-questions.html;jsessionid=D1DF6C3BD73E40DF53528D94A366163E.node2?tabType=wq#sidesForm.

(116)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009.

(117)  ABl. L 147 vom 31.5.2001.

(118)  ABl. L 300 vom 14.11.2009.

(119)  OJ L 147, 31.05.2001.

(120)  OJ L 300, 14.11.2009.

(121)  http://www.gsis.gr/TAX_ADMINISTRATION_MONITOR_OCT_2012_GR.xls

(122)  http://www.gsis.gr/TAX_ADMINISTRATION_MONITOR_OCT_2012_GR.xls

(123)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(124)  See Art 339 of the TFEU and Art 17 of the Staff Regulations.

(125)  IMF WEO October 2012, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/02/pdf/text.pdf

(126)  Fiscal report-April 2012, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fm/2012/01/pdf/fm1201.pdf

(127)  IMF WP/12/190 «Successful Austerity in the United States, Europe and Japan», p.23, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12190.pdf

(128)  European Commission, European Economy, Economic Papers 460|July 2012, «Fiscal multipliers and public debt dynamics in consolidations», http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2012/pdf/ecp460_en.pdf

(129)  «Comparing the critical multipliers given in Table 3 with the results of literature referred to in Section 2 indicates that Greece is the only country where short-run debt increases could be observed even in normal times and if consolidation is balanced».

(130)  http://www.capital.gr/related_files/economyandmarkets-fiscal%20multipliers.pdf

(131)  http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/11/the-imf-and-the-gop/ http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/09/deleveraging-shocks-and-the-multiplier-sort-of-wonkish/.

(132)  http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2012/10/09/1199151/its-austerity-multiplier-failure/.

(133)  http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ann-pettifor/imf-austerity-_b_2004700.html

(134)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2012/pdf/ee-2012-7_en.pdf, p41,box 1,5.

(135)  Ο επικεφαλής οικονομολόγος του ΔΝΤ δήλωσε ότι «το να συνδεθεί η υστέρηση της Ελλάδας με τον σχεδιασμό του προγράμματος συνιστά θεμελιωδώς εσφαλμένη ανάγνωση του τι έχει προηγηθεί και του ερευνητικού έργου του ΔΝΤ σχετικά με τους δημοσιονομικούς πολλαπλασιαστές. Τα προβλήματα της Ελλάδας προέρχονται ουσιαστικά από τις υπερβολές που σημειώθηκαν κατά το παρελθόν. Όσον αφορά το δημοσιονομικό πολλαπλασιαστή, είναι ένας μόνον από τους πολλούς δυνητικούς παράγοντες που επηρέασαν τις οικονομικές επιδόσεις και, στην περίπτωση της Ελλάδας, ο αντίκτυπός του επισκιάστηκε από άλλους απρόβλεπτους παράγοντες».

(136)  IMF WEO October 2012, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2012/02/pdf/text.pdf

(137)  Fiscal report-April 2012, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fm/2012/01/pdf/fm1201.pdf

(138)  IMF WP/12/190 ‘Successful Austerity in the United States, Europe and Japan’, p.23, http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2012/wp12190.pdf

(139)  European Commission, European Economy, Economic Papers 460|July 2012, ‘Fiscal multipliers and public debt dynamics in consolidations’, http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2012/pdf/ecp460_en.pdf

(140)  ‘Comparing the critical multipliers given in Table 3 with the results of literature referred to in Section 2 indicates that Greece is the only country where short-run debt increases could be observed even in normal times and if consolidation is balanced’.

(141)  http://www.capital.gr/related_files/economyandmarkets-fiscal%20multipliers.pdf

(142)  http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/11/the-imf-and-the-gop/, http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/09/deleveraging-shocks-and-the-multiplier-sort-of-wonkish.

(143)  http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2012/10/09/1199151/its-austerity-multiplier-failure/.

(144)  http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ann-pettifor/imf-austerity-_b_2004700.html

(145)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2012/pdf/ee-2012-7_en.pdf, p41,box 1,5.

(146)  The IMF Chief Economist stated that ‘to associate Greece's underperformance with programme design represents a fundamental misreading of the historical record and of the IMF's research on fiscal multipliers. The problems Greece is facing come fundamentally from past excesses. Regarding the fiscal multiplier, it is only one of many potential influences on economic outcomes, and in the case of Greece, its impact was dwarfed by other unanticipated factors’.

(147)  Die Luftfahrtaußenpolitik der EU — Bewältigung der künftigen Herausforderungen — (KOM(2012)556 endg.).

(148)  The EU's External Aviation Policy — Addressing Future Challenges — (COM(2012) 556 final).

(149)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1005/2008 to prevent, deter and eliminate illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing (the IUU Regulation) OJ L 286/1.

(150)  Comma inserito dall'articolo 34, comma 3, del decreto legge italiano 22 giugno 2012, n. 83 convertito, con modificazioni, dalla legge di conversione del 7 agosto 2012, n. 134.

(151)  Definiti e disciplinati nell’utilizzo e nel trattamento dai regolamenti (CE) n. 1069/2009 e (UE) n. 142/2011.

(152)  Ai sensi degli articoli 5 della direttiva 2008/98/CE e 184-bis del decreto legislativo italiano 152/2006.

(153)  Sempre ai sensi dei regolamenti (CE) n. 1069/2009 e (UE) n. 142/2011.

(154)  Articolo 20 del regolamento (CE) n.1069/2009.

(155)  GU L 312 del 22.11.2008, pag. 1.

(156)  GU L 300 del 14.11.2009, pag. 1.

(157)  GU L 54 del 26.2.2011, pag. 1.

(158)  As introduced by Article 34(3) of Italian Legislative Decree No 83 of 22 June 2012, converted, with amendments, by Conversion Act No 134 of 7 August 2012.

(159)  The use of which is defined in, and governed by, Regulations (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EU) No 142/2011.

(160)  Within the meaning of Article 5 of Directive 2008/98/EC and 184a of Italian Legislative Decree No 152/2006.

(161)  Again within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 and (EU) 142/2011.

(162)  Article 20 of Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009.

(163)  OJ L 312, 22.11.2008, p.1.

(164)  OJ L 300, 14.11.2009, p. 1.

(165)  OJ L 54, 26.2.2011, p. 1.

(166)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/pdf/ocp94_en.pdf

(167)  http://eurozone.europa.eu/media/864723/eg_statement_greece_13_12_12.pdf.

(168)  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/ecofin/133857.pdf.

(169)   http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/pdf/ocp94_en.pdf

(170)   http://eurozone.europa.eu/media/864723/eg_statement_greece_13_12_12.pdf

(171)   http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/en/ecofin/133857.pdf

(172)  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/review_air_policy.htm

(173)  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/air/review_air_policy.htm

(174)  ECFIN(2012) — Securities Transaction Taxes: Macroeconomic Implications in a General-Equilibrium Model (economic paper by Rafal Raciborski, Julia Lendvai, Lukas Vogel) at http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2012/ecp450_en.htm

(175)  Texts adopted, P7_TA(2011)0408.

(176)  OJ L 223, 26.8.2009, p.31.

(177)  OJ L 403, 30.12.2006, p.18.

(178)  Το μνημόνιο για τιμές, αγορές, εισιτήρια και κλειστά επαγγέλματα — Αύξηση 25% σε αστικές συγκοινωνίες, τρένα — Βενζίνη στα σουπερμάρκετ, Το Βήμα, 23.10.2012.

(179)  25% πιο ακριβά τα εισιτήρια παρότι η προηγούμενη αύξηση οδηγεί τα Μέσα Μεταφοράς σε μείωση εσόδων 33,6%, Έθνος, 26.10.2012.

(180)  ΟΑΣΑ ΑΕ: Οργανισμός Αστικών Συγκοινωνιών Αθηνών.

(181)  ΣΤΑ.ΣΥ: επίγεια και υπόγεια μέσα σταθερής τροχιάς (αστικοί σιδηρόδρομοι, τροχιόδρομοι και λοιπά μέσα σταθερής τροχιάς), τρόλεϋ (ΗΣΑΠ), Μετρό (ΑΜΕΛ), ΤΡΑΜ.

(182)  Ο.ΣΥ: θερμικά λεωφορεία, ηλεκτροκίνητα λεωφορεία — τρόλεϋ και λοιπά μέσα οδικής μεταφοράς, Ε.ΘΕ.Λ, Η.Λ.Π.Α.Π.

(183)  Ενδιάμεσες Συνοπτικές Οικονομικές Καταστάσεις για την περίοδο από 1 Ιανουαρίου έως 30 Ιουνίου 2012, ΟΑΣΑ, σελίδα 19.

(184)  Αύξηση 9,9% στις πωλήσεις εισιτηρίων του ΟΑΣΑ τον Οκτώβριο, http://metaforespress.gr, 1.11.2012.

(185)  Κωστής Χατζηδάκης: «Θα χτυπήσουμε την εισιτηριοδιαφυγή για να μην αυξήσουμε την τιμή των εισιτηρίων», iefimerida, 28.8.2012.

(186)  Memorandum on prices, markets, tickets and closed professions — 25% increase in urban transport and trains — Supermarket petrol, Vima, 23 October 2012.

(187)  Fares to rise by 25% despite 33.6% loss in revenue following previous increase, Ethnos, 26 October 2012.

(188)  ΟΑSΑ SΑ: Organismos Astikon Sygkoinonion Athinon SA.

(189)  STA.SY: overground and underground guided rail transport (urban railways, tramways and other guided transport systems, trolley buses (HSAP), metro (AMEL), trams.

(190)  O.SY: CNG buses, electric buses/trolley buses and other road transport, E.THE.L., H.L.P.A.P.

(191)  Interim summary financial statements for the period from 1 January to 30 June 2012, OASA, p. 19.

(192)  9.9% increase in OASA ticket sales in October, http://metaforespress.gr, 1 November 2012.

(193)  Kostis Hatzidakis: ‘If we hit fare dodgers, we will not need to increase fares’, iefimerida, 28 August 2012.

(194)  OJ L 145/43 of 31. 5.2001.

(195)  OJ L 18, 21.1.1997.

(196)  All considerations in public procurement, including social considerations, must in particular be linked to the subject matter of the contract/ to the tasks necessary for the performance of the contract and comply with the Treaty principles (transparency, equal treatment etc.) and with other relevant EC law. For further details, see the sections on ‘award criteria’ and ‘contract performance clauses’ in Buying social: A Guide to taking account of social considerations in public procurement (European Union, 2010), at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/publicprocurement/other_aspects/index_en.htm#social.

(197)  Directive 96/71/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 1996 concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services, OJ L 18, 21.1.1997, p.1.

(198)  Treaty on European Union, Article 17.

(199)  http://www.gmsafoodproject.eu/.

(200)  http://pure.au.dk/portal/en/projects/gmo-risk-assessment-and-communication-of-evidence(4f70b540-e08d-4abe-8d8e-2173e52396d1).html

(201)  http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2756.htm

(202)  http://www.gmsafoodproject.eu/.

(203)  http://pure.au.dk/portal/en/projects/gmo-risk-assessment-and-communication-of-evidence(4f70b540-e08d-4abe-8d8e-2173e52396d1).html

(204)  http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/2756.htm

(205)   Förslag till Europaparlamentets och rådets förordning om skydd för enskilda personer med avseende på behandling av personuppgifter och om det fria flödet av sådana uppgifter (allmän uppgiftsskyddsförordning) (KOM/2012/11 slutlig).

(206)   Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv 95/46/EG av den 24 oktober 1995 om skydd för enskilda personer med avseende på behandling av personuppgifter och om det fria flödet av sådana uppgifter (EGT L 281, 23.11.1995, s. 31).

(207)   Förslag till Europaparlamentets och rådets direktiv om skydd för enskilda personer med avseende på behöriga myndigheters behandling av personuppgifter för att förebygga, utreda, avslöja eller lagföra brott eller verkställa straffrättsliga påföljder, och det fria flödet av sådana uppgifter (KOM/2012/10 slutlig).

(208)   Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24.10.1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, OJ L 281 of 23.11.1995, p. 31.

(209)   Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of data by competent authorities for the purposes of prevention, investigation, detection or prosecution of criminal offences or the execution of criminal penalties, and the free movement of such data; COM/2012/0010 final.

(210)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/it/parliamentary-questions.html

(211)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(212)  Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EF) nr. 726/2004 af 31. marts 2004 om fastlæggelse af fællesskabsprocedurer for godkendelse og overvågning af human‐ og veterinærmedicinske lægemidler og om oprettelse af et europæisk lægemiddelagentur (EUT L 136 af 30.4.2004) og Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2001/83/EF af 6. november 2001 om oprettelse af en fællesskabskodeks for humanmedicinske lægemidler (EFT L 311 af 28.11.2001).

(213)  EF-Domstolen, Sag C-221/10 P, præmis 96.

(214)  Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) nr. 1235/2010 om ændring, for så vidt angår overvågning af humanmedicinske lægemidler, af forordning (EF) nr. 726/2004 (EUT L 348 af 31.12.2010, s. 10) og Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2010/84/EU om ændring, for så vidt angår lægemiddelovervågning, af direktiv 2001/83/EF (EUT L 384 af 31.12.2010, s. 74).

(215)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/pharmacovigilance/2012_11_28_pc_paes.pdf

(216)  http://laegemiddelstyrelsen.dk/en/topics/authorisation-and-supervision/licensing-of-medicines/news/withdrawal-of-older-medicines-in-denmark.

(217)  Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 laying down Community procedures for the authorisation and supervision of medicinal products for human and veterinary use and establishing a European Medicines Agency (OJ L 136, 30.4.2004) and Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ L 311, 28.11.2001).

(218)  European Court of Justice, C-221/10P, para. 96.

(219)  Regulation (EU) No 1235/2010 amending Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 as regards pharmacovigilance of medicinal products for human use (OJ L 348, 31.12.2010, p. 10) and Directive 2010/84/EU amending and Directive 2001/83/EC as regards pharmacovigilance of medicinal products for human use (OJ L 348, 31.12.2010, p. 74).

(220)  http://ec.europa.eu/health/files/pharmacovigilance/2012_11_28_pc_paes.pdf

(221)  http://laegemiddelstyrelsen.dk/en/topics/authorisation-and-supervision/licensing-of-medicines/news/withdrawal-of-older-medicines-in-denmark.

(222)  Βλ. http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/assistance_eu_ms/greek_loan_facility/index_en.htm.

(223)  Όπως περιγράφονται στο «Μνημόνιο συνεννόησης για τους ειδικούς όρους της οικονομικής πολιτικής».

(224)  See http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/assistance_eu_ms/greek_loan_facility/index_en.htm

(225)  As described in the memorandum of understanding on Specific Economic Policy Conditionality.

(226)  Council Directive 2000/29/EC.

(227)  Sales data from GE Lighting Ltd., Osram GmbH, Philips Lighting B.V., Narva, Verbatim GmbH, Toshiba, and Havells Sylvania (including subsidiaries, majority owned companies, second brands, and customer brands). Other relevant manufacturers or distributors outside the European Lamp Companies Federation like IKEA (the No 1 European supplier of CFLs) are missing.

(228)  WEEE recycling data from DG Eurostat.
	 http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/product_details/dataset?p_product_code=ENV_WASELEE.

(229)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(230)  Impact Assessment C(2009) 1907 final,.
	 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/efficiency/ecodesign/doc/legislation/sec_2009_327_impact_assesment_en.pdf

(231)  OJ L 76, 24.3.2009, pp. 3-16.

(232)  COM(2012) 722 final, de 6 de diciembre de  2012.

(233)   COM(2012) 722 final of 6 December 2012.

(234)  In case of persons having multiple nationalities, only the first nationality given is taken into account.

(235)  Staff ‘in activity’ does not include seconded staff members and those on leave on personal grounds.

(236)  Applicable by analogy to contract agents based on Article 119 of the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants.

(237)  http://www.standaard.be/krant/tekst/index.aspx?oDay=7&oMonth=11&oYear=2012&articleid=DMF20121106_00359926.

(238)  http://www.standaard.be/krant/tekst/index.aspx?oDay=7&oMonth=11&oYear=2012&articleid=DMF20121106_00359926.

(239)  Mozione per la tutela del Pantano Leone, Campobello di Mazara (TP), XI Convegno Italiano di Ornitologia, 26-30 settembre 2011, Castello Pasquini Castiglioncello (LI).

(240)  Esempio di bracconieri nell'area di Mazara del Vallo: «Campobello, bracconieri nell'area protetta del Pantano Leone. Uccisa anche una cicogna bianca inanellata in Svizzera», versione on-line de «Trapani 24ore», disp. su: http://www.mazaraonline.it/?p=45452; ovvero su «Campobello, cacciatori nella riserva del Pantano Leone», Versione on-line de «Il Giornale di Sicilia», disp. su: http://www.gds.it/gds/edizioni-locali/trapani/dettaglio/articolo/gdsid/219257/.

(241)  «Mazara del Vallo. I fanghi del Porto canale sono pericolosi, il Comune non puo lasciarli nella Colmata», quotidiano Mazara on-line da fonte Quotidiano di Sicilia — Alessandro Accardo Palumbo, disp. su: http://www.mazaraonline.it/?p=45476.

(242)  Disponibili nella mappa interattiva Natura 2000: http://natura2000.eea.europa.eu.

(243)  GU L 206 del 22.7.1992.

(244)  Motion for the protection of the Leone marshland, Campobello di Mazara (Trapani), XI Italian Ornithology Convention, 26-30 September 2011, Castello Pasquini Castiglioncello (Livorno).

(245)  Example of poaching in the Mazara del Vallo area: ‘Campobello, bracconieri nell'area protetta del Pantano Leone. Uccisa anche una cicogna bianca inanellata in Svizzera’ (‘Campobello, poachers in the protected area of the Leone marshland. White swan ringed in Switzerland killed’), online version of Trapani 24ore, available at: http://www.mazaraonline.it/?p=45452; or ‘Campobello, cacciatori nella riserva del Pantano Leone’ (‘Campobello, hunters in the Leone marshland reserve’), online version of Il Giornale di Sicilia, available at: http://www.gds.it/gds/edizioni-locali/trapani/dettaglio/articolo/gdsid/219257/.

(246)  ‘Mazara del Vallo. I fanghi del Porto canale sono pericolosi, il Comune non-puo lasciarli nella Colmata’ (‘Mazara del Vallo. Hazardous canal port mud; the municipality cannot leave it on the bank’), Mazara online, source: Quotidiano di Sicilia — Alessandro Accardo Palumbo, available at: http://www.mazaraonline.it/?p=45476.

(247)   Available on Natura 2000 Map Viewer at http://natura2000.eea.europa.eu .

(248)   OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(249)  «Strategia europea sulla disabilità 2010-2020: un rinnovato impegno per un'Europa senza barriere», COM(2010)636 definitivo.

(250)  SEC(2010)1324 definitivo.

(251)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/document/index_en.htm#h2-5.

(252)  Il gruppo ad alto livello è composto da esperti degli Stati membri su questioni relative alla disabilità e da parti interessate, in particolare le organizzazioni rappresentative delle persone con disabilità e i fornitori di servizi.

(253)  ‘A renewed commitment to a barrier-free Europe’, COM(2010) 0636 final.

(254)  SEC(2010) 1324 final.

(255)  The HLG comprises Member State experts on disability matters and stakeholders, in particular organisations of persons with disabilities and service providers.

(256)  http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/document/index_en.htm#h2-5.

(257)  http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/german-spy-agency-says-cyprus-bailout-would-help-russian-oligarchs-a-865291.html

(258)  http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/moneyval/Evaluations/round4/CYP4_MER_MONEYVAL(2011)02_en.pdf

(259)  http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/german-spy-agency-says-cyprus-bailout-would-help-russian-oligarchs-a-865291.html

(260)  http://www.coe.int/t/dghl/monitoring/moneyval/Evaluations/round4/CYP4_MER_MONEYVAL(2011)02_en.pdf

(261)  Intellectual Property Rights.

(262)  Intellectual Property.

(263)  World Intellectual Property Organisation.

(264)  Comunicado de imprensa IP/12/800.

(265)  COM(2009) 10033 final.

(266)  Press release IP/12/800.

(267)  C(2009) 10033 final.

(268)  Council Directive 2000/29/EC of 8 May 2000 on protective measures against the introduction into the Community of organisms harmful to plants or plant products and against their spread within the Community (OJ L 169, 10.7.2000).

(269)  http://www.multilinks-project.eu/.

(270)  http://www.enilnet.eu.

(271)  http://www.oec.fr/modules.php?name=Sections&sop=viewarticle&artid=152.

(272)  http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=de&pubId=6480&type=2&furtherPubs=no.

(273)  http://europa.eu/ey2012/ey2012main.jsp?langId=de&catId=970&newsId=1636&furtherNews=yes.

(274)  Die Unterlagen und der Abschlussbericht zur Konferenz können in Kürze unter http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/adult_de.htm abgerufen werden.

(275)  http://www.multilinks-project.eu/.

(276)  http://www.enilnet.eu.

(277)  http://www.oec.fr/modules.php?name=Sections&sop=viewarticle&artid=152.

(278)  http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=738&langId=en&pubId=6480&type=2&furtherPubs=no.

(279)  http://europa.eu/ey2012/ey2012main.jsp?langId=en&catId=970&newsId=1636&furtherNews=yes.

(280)  The background documents and the final report of the conference will be published shortly on http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-policy/adult_en.htm

(281)  Directive 2005/36/EC on recognition of professional qualifications, OJ L 255 of 30.9.2005.

(282)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB/home.jsp

(283)  COM(1999)706 definitivo.

(284)  COM(1999) 706 final.

(285)  E-4100/2012, E-370/12 ed E-3673/2012.

(286)  COM(2012)596 def.

(287)  Direttiva 2005/29/CE.

(288)  Direttiva 2005/60/CE.

(289)  E-4100/2012, E-370/12 and E-3673/2012.

(290)  COM(2012) 596 final.

(291)  Directive 2005/29/EC.

(292)  Directive 2005/60/EC.

(293)   Richtlinie 2009/147/EG des Europäischen Parlaments und des Rates vom 30. November 2009 über die Erhaltung der wildlebenden Vogelarten, zur Kodifizierung der Richtlinie 79/409/EWG, ABl. L 20 vom 26.1.2010.

(294)   Richtlinie 92/43/EWG des Rates vom 21. Mai 1992 zur Erhaltung der natürlichen Lebensräume sowie der wildlebenden Tiere und Pflanzen, ABl. L 206 vom 22.7.1992.

(295)   Council Directive 2009/147/EC of the Parliament and of the Council on the conservation of wild birds, codifying Directive 79/409/EEC, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010.

(296)   Council Directive 92/43/EC of 21 May 1992, on the protection of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora, OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.

(297)  La Decisión marco 2008/913/JAI obliga a todos los Estados miembros de la UE a sancionar la incitación pública intencionada a la violencia o al odio contra grupos o personas en función de su raza, color, religión, ascendencia u origen étnico o nacional, y a garantizar que una motivación racista y xenófoba de cualquier otro delito se considere una circunstancia agravante o se tenga en cuenta a la hora de determinar las sanciones (véase: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/racism-xenophobia/framework-decision/index_en.htm).

(298)  Para más información sobre las actividades de la Comisión en este ámbito, véase el sitio web de la Dirección General de Justicia en la siguiente dirección: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/racism-xenophobia/index_en.htm

(299)  Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA obliges all EU Member States to penalise the intentional public incitement to violence or hatred against groups or individuals defined by reference to their race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin, and to ensure that a racist and xenophobic motivation of any other offence is taken into consideration as an aggravating circumstance or in the determination of the penalties (see: http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/racism-xenophobia/framework-decision/index_en.htm).

(300)  For further information about the Commission's activities in this field, please see the website of the Directorate-General Justice at http://ec.europa.eu/justice/fundamental-rights/racism-xenophobia/index_en.htm

(301)  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ecofin/133857.pdf

(302)  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ecofin/133857.pdf

(303)  COM(2011) 681 final.

(304)  COM(2011) 681 final.

(305)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(306)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(307)  COM(2012)164 τελικό.

(308)  COM(2012) 164 final.

(309)  KOM(2011)142.

(310)  COM(2011) 142.

(311)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(312)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_es.htm

(313)  Reglamento (CE) n° 810/2009.

(314)  Dokument P7_TA(2011)0239.

(315)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_cs.htm

(316)  Nařízení (ES) č. 810/2009.

(317)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_da.htm

(318)  Forordning (EF) nr. 810/2009.

(319)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(320)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_de.htm

(321)  Verordnung (EG) Nr. 810/2009.

(322)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(323)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_fr.htm

(324)  Règlement CE n°810/2009.

(325)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(326)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_en.htm

(327)  Regolamento (CE) n. 810/2009.

(328)  Elfogadott szövegek, P7_TA(2011)0239.

(329)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_hu.htm

(330)  A 810/2009/EK rendelet.

(331)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(332)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_nl.htm

(333)  Verordening (EG) Nr. 810/2009.

(334)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(335)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_ro.htm

(336)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(337)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_en.htm

(338)  Asetus (EY) N:o 810/2009.

(339)  P7_TA(2011)0239.

(340)  http://eeas.europa.eu/index_en.htm

(341)  Regulation EC (No) 810/2009.

(342)  JO L 291 du 9.11.2010.

(343)  JO L 76 du 6.4.1970.

(344)   OJ L 291, 9.11.2010.

(345)   OJ L 76, 6.4.1970

(346)  http://www.boeckler.de/imk_5269.htm?produkt=HBS-005355&chunk=1&jahr=.

(347)  Europäisches Semester, finanzieller Beistand im Rahmen des EFSM, Erlass von Beschlüssen auf der Grundlage von Artikel 136 AEUV für Mitgliedstaaten des Euroraums.

(348)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/eu_economic_situation/pdf/2010-12-07-council_imp_decision_en.pdf

(349)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/assistance_eu_ms/ireland/index_en.htm

(350)  http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/assistance_eu_ms/greek_loan_facility/index_en.htm

(351)  Durchführungsbeschluss 2011/344/EU des Rates. Das EAP kann unter folgender Internetadresse abgerufen werden: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/op124_en.htm

(352)  http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/de/12/st11/st11272.de12.pdf

(353)  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/nd/idr2012_slovenia_en.pdf

(354)  http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/de/12/st11/st11273.de12.pdf

(355)  http://www.boeckler.de/imk_5269.htm?produkt=HBS-005355&chunk=1&jahr=.

(356)   European Semester, EFSM assistance, decisions adopted on the basis of Article 136 TFEU for euro area Member States.

(357)   http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/articles/eu_economic_situation/pdf/2010-12-07-council_imp_decision_en.pdf .

(358)   http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/assistance_eu_ms/ireland/index_en.htm .

(359)   http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/assistance_eu_ms/greek_loan_facility/index_en.htm .

(360)   Council Implementing Decision 2011/344/EU. The EAP can be found at:http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2012/op124_en.htm .

(361)   http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/12/st11/st11272.en12.pdf .

(362)   http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/nd/idr2012_slovenia_en.pdf .

(363)   http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/12/st11/st11273.en12.pdf .

(364)  http://ec.europa.eu/avservices.

(365)  Judgment of 1 March 2011 in Case C-236/09, OJ C 130 of 30.4.2011, p. 4.

(366)  OJ C 115/123.

(367)  Siehe u. a. die Berichte der Niederlande: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestanden/documenten-en-publicaties/rapporten/2012/04/05/longer-and-heavier-vehicles-in-practice/longer-and-heavier-vehicles-in-practice.pdf

(368)  See for instance reports from the Netherlands: http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/bestanden/documenten-en-publicaties/rapporten/2012/04/05/longer-and-heavier-vehicles-in-practice/longer-and-heavier-vehicles-in-practice.pdf

(369)  OJ L190/1 18.7.2002.

(370)  The last of which was published in 2011 — COM(2011) 175 of 11.04.2011.

(371)  Proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio che istituisce il Codice doganale dell'Unione (rifusione), COM(2012) 64 final: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0064:FIN:IT:PDF.

(372)  Regolamento (UE) n. 995/2010 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 20 ottobre 2010, che stabilisce gli obblighi degli operatori che commercializzano legno e prodotti da esso derivati. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:295:0023:0034:IT:PDF. Direttiva 2009/142/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 30 novembre 2009, in materia di apparecchi a gas. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:330:0010:0027:IT:PDF.

(373)  Regolamento (UE) n. 1007/2011 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 27 settembre 2011, relativo alle denominazioni delle fibre tessili e all'etichettatura e al contrassegno della composizione fibrosa dei prodotti tessili e che abroga la direttiva 73/44/CEE del Consiglio e le direttive del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio 96/73/CE e 2008/121/CE. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:272:0001:0064:IT:pdf. Direttiva 97/23/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 29 maggio 1997 per il ravvicinamento delle legislazioni degli Stati membri in materia di attrezzature a pressione.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1997L0023:20031120:IT:PDF.

(374)  Comunicazione della Commissione al Parlamento europeo, al Consiglio, al Comitato economico e sociale europeo e al Comitato delle regioni. Programma di lavoro della Commissione per il 2013. COM(2012) 629 final http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0629:FIN:IT:PDF.

(375)  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the Union Customs Code (Recast), COM(2012) 64 final (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0064:FIN:EN:PDF).

(376)  Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:295:0023:0034:EN:PDF. Directive 2009/142/EC of the European parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 relating to appliances burning gaseous fuels (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:330:0010:0027:EN:PDF).

(377)  Regulation (EU) No 1007/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2011 on textile fibre names and related labelling and marking of the fibre composition of textile products and repealing Council Directive 73/44/EEC and Directives 96/73/EC and 2008/121/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:272:0001:0064:EN:pdf. Directive 97/23/EC of the European parliament and of the Council of 29 May 1997 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States concerning pressure equipment (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CONSLEG:1997L0023:20031120:EN:PDF).

(378)  Communication from the Commission to the European parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Commission Work Programme 2013. COM(2012) 629 final (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0629:FIN:EN:PDF).

(379)   COM(2012) 596 final.

(380)   SWD(2012) 345 final (en anglais).

(381)  http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/docs/gambling/doc_121023_onlinegambling_summaryofanswers_en.pdf (en anglais).

(382)   COM(2012) 596 final.

(383)   SWD(2012) 345 final.

(384)   http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/docs/gambling/doc_121023_onlinegambling_summaryofanswers_en.pdf

(385)  OJ L 334, 17.12.2010.

(386)  Cfr fatti riportati da www.geapress.it e www.nelcuore.org.

(387)  Progetto del Parco Regionale di Gallipoli Cognato Piccole Dolomiti Lucane in collaborazione con l'università' di Alicante (Spagna).

(388)  Cfr interrogazione E-001190/2012 del 9 febbraio 2012.

(389)  http://www.associazionecona.it/articoli/89-ibis-eremita-colpiti-a-fucilate.html

(390)  Raccomandazione sull’uccisione, la cattura e il commercio illegali degli uccelli selvatici — T-PVS(2011)22E, http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/nature/bern/institutions/standingcommittee_122011_en.asp.

(391)  GU L 20 del 26.1.2010.

(392)  See reports on www.geapress.it and www.nelcuore.org.

(393)  Project at the Gallipoli Cognato Piccole Dolomiti Lucane Regional Park in cooperation with the University of Alicante (Spain).

(394)  See Question EP-001190/2012 of 9 February 2012.

(395)  http://www.associazionecona.it/articoli/89-ibis-eremita-colpiti-a-fucilate.html

(396)  Recommendation on the Illegal Killing, Trapping and Trade of Wild Birds — T-PVS(2011)22E, http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/cultureheritage/nature/bern/institutions/standingcommittee_122011_en.asp.

(397)  OJ L 20, 26.1.2010.

(398)   http://ec.europa.eu/transport/facts-fundings/tenders/work-programme/doc/2012/2012-3704-decision-financing_en.pdf

(399)   http://ec.europa.eu/transport/facts-fundings/tenders/work-programme/doc/2012/2012-3704-decision-financing_en.pdf

(400)  Ir-Regolament ta’ Implimentazzjoni tal-Kummissjoni (UE) Nru 872/2012 tal-1 ta’ Ottubru 2012 li jadotta l-lista ta’ sustanzi aromatizzanti stipulati bir-Regolament (KE) Nru 2232/96 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill, li jintroduċiha fl-Anness I tar-Regolament (KE) Nru 1334/2008 tal-Parlament Ewropew u tal-Kunsill u jħassar ir-Regolament tal-Kummissjoni (KE) Nru 1565/2000 u d-Deċiżjoni tal-Kummissjoni 1999/217/KE, ĠU L 267, 2.10.2012, p. 1.

(401)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 872/2012 of 1 October 2012adopting the list of flavouring substances provided for by Regulation (EC) No 2232/96 of the European Parliament and of the Council, introducing it in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1334/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Commission Regulation (EC) No 1565/2000 and Commission Decision 1999/217/EC, OJ L 267, 2.10.2012, p.1.

(402)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(403)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(404)  Balcani Orientali.

(405)  Previo accordo del Consiglio europeo e sulla base delle relazioni tecniche della Commissione in merito all'attuale monitoraggio dell'acquis communautaire.

(406)  Small Business Act.

(407)  Western Balkans.

(408)  They are subject to agreement of the European Council and based on the Commission's technical reports on the current ‘screening’ of the acquis communautaire.

(409)  Small Business Act.

(410)  UNHCR = Úrad vysokého komisára Organizácie Spojených národov pre utečencov.

(411)  IRC = International Rescue Committee.

(412)  DRC = Danish Refugee Council.

(413)  UNHCR = United Nations Refugee Agency.

(414)  IRC = International Rescue Committee.

(415)  DRC = Danish Refugee Council.

(416)  Smernica 2010/64/EÚ z 20. októbra 2010, Ú. v. EÚ L 280, 26.10.2010, s. 1.

(417)  Smernica 2012/13/EÚ z 22. mája 2012, Ú. v. EÚ L 142, 1.6.2012, s. 1.

(418)  COM(2011) 326 final.

(419)  Directive 2010/64/EU of 20 October 2010, OJ L 280, 26.10.2010, p.1.

(420)  Directive 2012/13/EU of 22 May 2012, OJ L 142, 1.6.2012, p.1.

(421)  COM(2011) 326 final.

(422)  http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2012/11/06/in-nederland-geboren-moslims-vaker-naar-moskee.

(423)  Zie het RELIGARE-onderzoeksproject: „Religieuze diversiteit en seculiere modellen in Europa: innovatieve aanpak van wetgeving en beleid” met steun van het 7de kaderprogramma voor onderzoek, http://www.religareproject.eu.

(424)  Zie het DIRECT-project: met steun van het Europees Integratiefonds, http://www.iom.fi/index.php?option=com_content content content content & view=article article article article & id=95:direct-main-page page page page & catid=39:integration integration integration integration & Itemid=146.

(425)  Zie bijvoorbeeld „De Europese modules voor integratie van migranten” (http://ec.europa.eu/ewsi/en/resources/detail.cfm?ID_ITEMS=25494.), blz. 81-88.

(426)  Zie: artikel 9 van het Wereldwijde Handvest van het geweten.

(427)  Zie het CHALLENGE-onderzoeksproject: „Het veranderende landschap van de Europese vrijheid en veiligheid”, met steun van het 6de kaderprogramma voor onderzoek, http://www.libertysecurity.org/index.html, en J. Cesari, „Moslims in het westen na 11 september”, Routledge 2010.

(428)  http://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2012/11/06/in-nederland-geboren-moslims-vaker-naar-moskee.

(429)  See the research project RELIGARE: ‘Religious diversity and secular models in Europe: innovative approaches to law and policy’ co-funded by 7th Research Framework Programme, http://www.religareproject.eu.

(430)  See project DIRECT: co-funded by the European Integration Fund, http://www.iom.fi/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=95:direct-main-page&catid=39:integration&Itemid=146.

(431)  See for example the ‘The European modules on migrant integration’ (http://ec.europa.eu/ewsi/en/resources/detail.cfm?ID_ITEMS=25494), pp. 81-88.

(432)  See: Article 9 of the Global Charter of Conscience.

(433)  See research project Challenge: ‘The Changing Landscape of European Liberty and Security’, co-funded by 6th Research Framework Programme, http://www.libertysecurity.org/index.html, and J. Cesari, ‘Muslims in the West after 9/11’, Routledge 2010.

(434)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(435)  http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/financing_for_development/accountability_report_2012_en.htm

(436)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(437)  http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/what/development-policies/financing_for_development/accountability_report_2012_en.htm

(438)  KOM(2007) 392 v konečnom znení.

(439)  COM(2012) 669 final.

(440)  http://ec.europa.eu/education/school-education/teacher_en.htm

(441)  COM(2007) 392 final.

(442)  COM(2012) 669 final.

(443)  http://ec.europa.eu/education/school-education/teacher_en.htm

(444)  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/making-it-happen/annual-growth-surveys/index_en.htm

(445)  KOM(2010) 78 v konečnom znení.

(446)  KOM(2010) 491 v konečnom znení.

(447)  COM(2012) 614 final.

(448)  COM(2012) 615 final.

(449)  http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/making-it-happen/annual-growth-surveys/index_en.htm

(450)  COM(2010) 78 final.

(451)  COM(2010) 491 final.

(452)  COM(2012) 614 final.

(453)  COM(2012) 615 final.

(454)  Dostupné tu: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/biofuels/doc/biofuels/swd_2012_0343_ia_en.pdf

(455)  Available here: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/biofuels/doc/biofuels/swd_2012_0343_ia_en.pdf

(456)  COM (2012) 727-728-729 z 5. decembra 2012.

(457)  SWD (2012) 409 final z 5. decembra 2012.

(458)  C(2012)8548 z 26. novembra 2012.

(459)  COM(2012) 727-728-729 of 5 December 2012.

(460)  SWD(2012) 409 final of 5 December 2012.

(461)  C(2012) 8548 of 26 November 2012.

(462)  Stratégia EÚ na roky 2012 – 2016 zameraná na odstránenie obchodovania s ľuďmi, COM(2012) 286 final.

(463)  Smernica Európskeho parlamentu a Rady 2011/36/EÚ o prevencii obchodovania s ľuďmi a boji proti nemu a o ochrane obetí obchodovania, ktorou sa nahrádza rámcové rozhodnutie Rady 2002/629/SVV.

(464)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(465)  The EU Strategy towards the Eradication of Trafficking in Human Beings 2012‐2016 COM(2012) 286 final.

(466)  Directive 2011/36/EU on preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims, and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/629/JHA.

(467)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(468)  COM(2012) 226.

(469)  Medziministerský obežník NOR INTK 1233053C z 26. augusta 2012.

(470)  COM(2012)226.

(471)  Circulaire interministérielle NOR INTK 1233053C of 26th August 2012.

(472)  Nariadenie 343/2003, ktorým sa ustanovujú kritériá a mechanizmy na určenie členského štátu zodpovedného za posúdenie žiadosti o medzinárodnú ochranu podanej štátnym príslušníkom tretej krajiny alebo osobou bez štátnej príslušnosti v jednom z členských štátov.

(473)  Regulation 343/2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person.

(474)  Dohovor o ochrane ľudských práv a dôstojnosti človeka s ohľadom na uplatňovanie biológie a medicíny: Dohovor o ľudských právach a biomedicíne. http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/164.htm

(475)  Smernica 2004/23/ES ustanovujúca normy kvality a bezpečnosti pri darovaní, odoberaní, testovaní, spracovávaní, konzervovaní, skladovaní a distribúcii ľudských tkanív a buniek, Ú. v. EÚ L 2004 102/48; smernica 2006/17/ES, pokiaľ ide o určité technické požiadavky na darcovstvo, odber a testovanie ľudských tkanív a buniek, Ú. v. EÚ L 2006 38/40 a smernica 2006/86/ES, pokiaľ ide o požiadavky na spätné sledovanie, o oznamovanie závažných nežiaducich reakcií a udalostí a o určité technické požiadavky na kódovanie, spracovanie, konzervovanie, skladovanie a distribúciu ľudských tkanív a buniek, Ú. v. EÚ L 2006 294/32.

(476)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2012-0320+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN.

(477)  Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine; http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/164.htm

(478)  Directive 2004/23/EC on setting standards of quality and safety for the donation, procurement, testing, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells, OJ 2004 L 102/48; Directive 2006/17/EC as regards certain technical requirements for the donation, procurement and testing of human tissues and cells, OJ 2006 L 38/40 and Directive 2006/86/EC as regards traceability requirements, notification of serious adverse reactions and events and certain technical requirements for the coding, processing, preservation, storage and distribution of human tissues and cells, OJ 2006 L 294/32.

(479)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P7-TA-2012-0320+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN.

(480)  Ú. v. ES L 82, 22.3.2001, s. 1.

(481)   OJ L 82, 22.03.2001, p.1-4.

(482)  Podniky kolektívneho investovania do prevoditeľných cenných papierov, smernica 2009/65/ES, Ú. v. EÚ L 302, 17.11.2009, s. 32.

(483)  Smernica 2011/61/ES o správcoch alternatívnych investičných fondov, Ú. v. EÚ L 174, 1.7.2011, s. 1.

(484)  http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/investment/docs/social_investment/act_en.pdf

(485)  Európsky fond sociálneho podnikania.

(486)  Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities, Directive 2009/65/EC, OJ L 302, 17.11.2009. p.32.

(487)  Directive 2011/61/EC on Alternative Investment Fund Managers, OJ L 174, 1.7.2011. p.1.

(488)  European Social Entrepreneurships Funds.

(489)  http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/investment/docs/social_investment/act_en.pdf

(490)  Si vedano le cause C-28/09 (http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=it&num=C-28/09) e C-320/03 (http://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?language=it&num=C-320/03).

(491)  In base ai dati contenuti nei seguenti articoli del Tiroler Tageszeitung: «Gurgiser sieht Fahrverbot aufgeweicht, Land beruhigt» del 22 settembre 2012 (http://www.tt.com/Tirol/5448217-2/gurgiser-sieht-fahrverbot-aufgeweicht-land-beruhigt.csp) e «Tiroler Wirtschaft kritisiert strengeres Nachtfahrverbot» del 26 ottobre 2010 (http://www.tt.com/%C3 %9Cberblick/Chronik/ChronikTirol/5614329-6/tiroler-wirtschaft-kritisiert-strengeres-lkw-nachtfahrverbot.csp).

(492)  Direttiva 2008/50/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 21 maggio 2008, relativa alla qualità dell'aria ambiente e per un'aria più pulita in Europa; GU L 152 dell'11.6.2008, pagg. 1-44.

(493)  See cases C-28/09 (http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?language=en&num=C-28/09) 
and C-320/03 (http://curia.europa.eu/juris/documents.jsf?num=C-320/03).

(494)  Based on figures reported in the following articles of Tiroler Tageszeitung: ‘Gurgiser sieht Fahrverbot aufgeweicht, Land beruhigt’ of 22 September 2012
(http://www.tt.com/Tirol/5448217-2/gurgiser-sieht-fahrverbot-aufgeweicht-land-beruhigt.csp) 
and ‘Tiroler Wirtschaft kritisiert strengeres Nachtfahrverbot’ of 26 October 2010
(http://www.tt.com/%C3%9Cberblick/Chronik/ChronikTirol/5614329-6/tiroler-wirtschaft-kritisiert-strengeres-lkw-nachtfahrverbot.csp).

(495)  Directive 2008/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2008 on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe; OJ L 152 of 11.6.2008, p. 1-44.

(496)  ‘Report on the Functioning of the Transnational Arrangements on the Free Movement of Workers from Bulgaria and Romania’ (COM(2011) 729 final of 11 November 2011).

(497)  See EU Employment and Social Situation Quarterly Review, June 2012, p. 40.

(498)  Employment and social developments in Europe, 2011, Chapter 5, p.276.

(499)  Regulation (EU) No 492/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2011 on freedom of movement for workers within the Union, OJ L 141, 27.5.2011, p. 1.

(500)  COM(2012) 729 of 5 December 2012.

(501)  COM(2011) 416 final.

(502)  Direttiva 2008/96/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 19 novembre 2008, sulla gestione della sicurezza delle infrastrutture stradali, GU L 319 del 29.11.2008, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32008L0096:IT:NOT

(503)  Proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo ai controlli tecnici su strada dei veicoli commerciali circolanti nell’Unione e che abroga la direttiva 2000/30/CE e proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo ai controlli tecnici periodici dei veicoli a motore e dei loro rimorchi e recante abrogazione della direttiva 2009/40/CE, http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-555_it.htm

(504)  Direttiva 2006/126/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio concernente la patente di guida, GU L 403 del 30.12.2006.

(505)  Directive 2008/96/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 November 2008 on road infrastructure safety management, OJ L 319, 29.11.2008, http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32008L0096:EN:NOT

(506)  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles circulating in the Union and repealing Directive 2000/30/EC and Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on periodic roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers and repealing Directive 2009/40/EC.http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-12-555_en.htm

(507)  Directive 2006/126/EC of the European parliament and of the Council on driving licences, OJ L 403, 30.12.2006.

(508)  COM(2012) 380 final.

(509)  COM(2012)380 final.

(510)  OJ L 30, 31.1.2009, p. 16‐99.

(511)   Disponible en anglais à l'adresse suivante:.
	 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/biofuels/doc/biofuels/swd_2012_0343_ia_en.pdf

(512)   La figure 3 présente les résultats fournis par les modèles suivants (nom du modèle ou organisme chargé de la modélisation): Okoinstitut, Economerica, E4tech, PBL, JRC, IFPRI, LCFS, RFS2, Plevin, Searchinger, Tyner, Hertel JRC-Aglink et IIASA.

(513)   Intitulée Model limitations and uncertainties.

(514)   Intitulée Results from estimating indirect land-use change with models.

(515)   Available here: http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/biofuels/doc/biofuels/swd_2012_0343_ia_en.pdf

(516)   Results from the following models are included in figure 3 (name of model or organisation doing the modelling): Okoinstitut, Economerica, E4tech, PBL, JRC, IFPRI, LCFS, RFS2, Plevin, Searchinger, Tyner, Hertel JRC-Aglink and IIASA).

(517)   Model limitations and uncertainties.

(518)   Results from estimating indirect land-use change with models.

(519)  http://ec.europa.eu/world/enp/pdf/action_plans/israel_enp_ap_final_en.pdf

(520)  http://ec.europa.eu/world/enp/pdf/action_plans/israel_enp_ap_final_en.pdf

(521)  Reglamento (CE) n° 2271/96 del Consejo, de 22 de noviembre de 1996, relativo a la protección contra los efectos de la aplicación extraterritorial de la legislación adoptada por un tercer país, y contra las acciones basadas en ella o derivadas de ella, DO L 309, 29.11.1996.

(522)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2271/96 of 22 November 1996 protecting against the effects of the extra-territorial application of legislation adopted by a third country, and actions based thereon or resulting therefrom, OJ L 309, 29.11.1996.

(523)  DO L 312 de 27.11.2009, p. 44.

(524)  DO L 193 de 20.7.2002, p. 33.

(525)  OJ L312/44, 27.11.2009.

(526)  OJ L193/33, 20.7.2002.

(527)  COM(2012) 626.

(528)  Decisión 2002/358/CE del Consejo, de 25 de abril de 2002, relativa a la aprobación, en nombre de la Comunidad Europea, del Protocolo de Kyoto de la Convención Marco de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Cambio Climático y al cumplimiento conjunto de los compromisos contraídos con arreglo al mismo.

(529)  DO L 145 de 31.5.2001.

(530)  COM(2012) 626.

(531)  Council Decision 2002/358/EC of 25 April 2002 concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and the joint fulfilment of commitments thereunder.

(532)  OJ L 145, 31.5.2001.

(533)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/QP-WEB.

(534)  Versiones consolidadas del Tratado de la Unión Europea y del Tratado de Funcionamiento de la Unión Europea, Diario Oficial C 83 de 30.3.2010.

(535)  Konsoliderede udgaver af traktaten om Den Europæiske Union og traktaten om Den Europæiske Unions funktionsmåde, EUT C 83 af 30.3.2010.

(536)  Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Official Journal C 83 of 30.3.2010.

(537)  vedasi video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY69WKkBGgM&feature=youtu.be.

(538)  Direttiva 2009/147/CE del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 30 novembre 2009, concernente la conservazione degli uccelli selvatici, GU L 20 del 26.1.2010.

(539)  GU L 61 del 3.3.1997.

(540)  Regolamento (CE) n. 865/2006 della Commissione, del 4 maggio 2006, recante modalità di applicazione del regolamento (CE) n. 338/97 del Consiglio relativo alla protezione di specie della flora e della fauna selvatiche mediante il controllo del loro commercio, GU L 166 del 19.6.2006.

(541)  The video is available on YouTube at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY69WKkBGgM&feature=youtu.be.

(542)  Directive 2009/147/EC of Parliament and of the Council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds, OJ L 20, 26.1.2010.

(543)  OJ L 61, 3.3.1997.

(544)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 865/2006 of 4 May 2006 laying down detailed rules concerning the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 338/97 on the protection of species of wild fauna and flora by regulating trade therein, OJ L 166, 19.6.2006.

(545)  Os quadros foram elaborados com base em informações provenientes do Fórum Internacional dos Transportes.

(546)  Os dados foram fornecidos por cada Estado-Membro através do portal do sistema TENtec da Comissão.

(547)  the tables were compiled with information from the International Transport Forum.

(548)  the data was provided by each Member State via the Commission's TENtec private portal.

(549)  Nomeadamente, a Diretiva 2009/29/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 23 de abril de 2009, que altera a Diretiva 2003/87/CE a fim de melhorar e alargar o regime comunitário de comércio de licenças de emissão de gases com efeito de estufa, JO L 140 de 5.6.2009; a Decisão n.° 406/2009/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 23 de abril de 2009, relativa aos esforços a realizar pelos Estados-Membros para redução das suas emissões de gases com efeito de estufa a fim de respeitar os compromissos de redução das emissões de gases com efeito de estufa da Comunidade até 2020, JO L 140 de 5.6.2009; a Diretiva 2009/28/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 23 de abril de 2009, relativa à promoção da utilização de energia proveniente de fontes renováveis que altera e subsequentemente revoga as Diretivas 2001/77/CE e 2003/30/CE, JO L 140 de 5.6.2009; e a Diretiva 2012/27/UE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 25 de outubro de 2012, relativa à eficiência energética, que altera as Diretivas 2009/125/CE e 2010/30/UE e revoga as Diretivas 2004/8/CE e 2006/32/CE, JO L 315 de 14.11.2012.

(550)  COM(2012) 494 e COM(2012) 271.

(551)  «Reforçar a indústria europeia em prol do crescimento e da recuperação económica», COM(2012) 582.

(552)  Notably Directive 2009/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading scheme of the Community, OJ L 140, 5.6.2009; Decision No 406/2009/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the effort of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Community’s greenhouse gas emission reduction commitments up to 2020, OJ L 140, 5.6.2009; Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC, OJ L 140, 5.6.2009; Directive 2012/27/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on energy efficiency, amending Directives 2009/125/EC and 2010/30/EU and repealing Directives 2004/8/EC and 2006/32/EC, OJ L 315, 14.11.2012.

(553)  COM(2012) 494 and COM(2012) 271.

(554)  ‘A Stronger European Industry for Growth and Economic Recovery’, COM(2012) 582.

(555)  2009-2011.

(556)  Para mais informações sobre a implementação da iniciativa Calypso, consulte: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/calypso/index_en.htm

(557)  Programa para o Espírito Empresarial e a Inovação http://ec.europa.eu/cip/documents/work-programmes/index_en.htm

(558)  O projeto irá juntar os prestadores de EFP e de formação, especialistas ligados ao setor e organismos envolvidos nos sistemas de educação e formação de nove Estados-Membros.

(559)  Estas secções deverão tornar-se operacionais entre meados de 2013 e meados de 2014 e permitirão uma melhor adequação da procura e oferta de emprego e uma melhoria consequente da mobilidade dos trabalhadores.

(560)  QFP.

(561)  COSME.

(562)  http://ec.europa.eu/cip/files/cosme/com_2011_0834_proposition_de_reglement_pt.pdf

(563)  Por exemplo: o Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER), o Fundo Europeu Agrícola de Desenvolvimento Rural (Feader), o Fundo Europeu dos Assuntos Marítimos e da Pesca, etc.

(564)  2009-2011.

(565)  For more information on the implementation of the CALYPSO initiative: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/tourism/calypso/index_en.htm

(566)  Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme http://ec.europa.eu/cip/documents/work-programmes/index_en.htm

(567)  The project will bring together vocational and training providers, sector specific expertise and bodies involved in education and training systems from nine Member States.

(568)  These sections should become operational between mid-2013 and mid-2014 and will allow to better match job demand and offer and subsequently improve mobility of workers.

(569)  MFF.

(570)  COSME.

(571)  http://ec.europa.eu/cip/files/cosme/com_2011_0834_proposition_de_reglement_en.pdf

(572)  As for example: the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Agriculture and Rural Development Fund (EARDF), the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund, etc.

(573)  Nomeadamente têxtil, do vestuário, de artigos de couro e do mobiliário.

(574)  Notably textiles, clothing, leather and furniture.

(575)  Boletim Informativo do QREN No 17.

(576)  Boletim Informativo do QREN No 17.

(577)  AIE, «Energy Prices & Taxes», 3.° trimestre de 2012, p. 327.

(578)  IEA's ‘Energy Prices & Taxes’, 3rd quarter 2012, p. 327.

(579)  COM(2012) 582.

(580)  COM(2012) 582.

(581)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(582)  Anexo V do QREN.

(583)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(584)  Annex V of the NSRF.

(585)  http://www.es.iairgroup.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=240950&p=irol-meeting.

(586)  http://www.elconfidencial.com/economia/2012/11/07/iag-lanzara-una-opa-de-exclusion-sobre-vueling-para-fusionarla-con-iberia-express---108809/.

(587)  http://www.guialowcost.es/ryanair-vueling-unicas-crecen-pasajeros/.

(588)  http://www.larazon.es/noticia/9302-la-fusion-iberia-british-registra-perdidas-de-231-millones-en-el-primer-semestre.

(589)  DO L 24 de 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(590)  Decisión de la Comisión de 9 de enero de 2009 en el asunto COMP/M.5364 — Iberia/Vueling/Clickair.

(591)  Comunicado de prensa IP/12/1277.

(592)  http://www.es.iairgroup.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=240950&p=irol-meeting.

(593)  http://www.elconfidencial.com/economia/2012/11/07/iag-lanzara-una-opa-de-exclusion-sobre-vueling-para-fusionarla-con-iberia-express---108809/.

(594)  http://www.guialowcost.es/ryanair-vueling-unicas-crecen-pasajeros/.

(595)  http://www.larazon.es/noticia/9302-la-fusion-iberia-british-registra-perdidas-de-231-millones-en-el-primer-semestre.

(596)  OJ L 24, 29.01.2004, p. 1.

(597)  Commission's decision of 9 January 2009 in case COMP/M.5364 — IBERIA / VUELING / CLICKAIR.

(598)  Press release IP/12/1277.

(599)  Food Use for Social Innovation by Optimising waste prevention Strategies [utilisation des aliments, innovation sociale et optimisation des stratégies de prévention du gaspillage] — Le projet est présent sur Facebook (EU FUSIONS) et Twitter (@EU_FUSIONS) — Septième programme-cadre pour la recherche et le développement.

(600)  Food Use for Social Innovation by Optimising waste prevention Strategies — to be followed on Facebook (EU FUSIONS) and Twitter (@EU_FUSIONS) — Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Development.

(601)  A se vedea, de asemenea: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/capital/faqs_en.htm, întrebarea 16.

(602)  See also: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/capital/faqs_en.htm, q16.

(603)  Siebtes Rahmenprogramm für Forschung und technologische Entwicklung (RP7, 2007-2013) http://ec.europa.eu/research/fp7/index_en.cfm.

(604)  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/urban/thematic_strategy.htm

(605)  http://ec.europa.eu/environment/europeangreencapital/index_en.html

(606)  http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/citiesoftomorrow/citiesoftomorrow_final.pdf

(607)  Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technological Development (FP7, 2007-2013) http://ec.europa.eu/research/fp7/index_en.cfm.

(608)  Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION establishing the Specific Programme Implementing Horizon 2020 — The framework Programme for Research and Innovation (2014-2020), COM(2011)811, 30/11/2011.

(609)   http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(610)   http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html

(611)  http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html

(612)  http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html

(613)  GU L 139 del 30.04.2004, pag. 1.

(614)  GU L 31 dell'1.2.2002.

(615)  OJ L 139/1, 30.4.2004.

(616)  OJ L 31, 1.2.200.

(617)  http://87.234.226.93/easd_intranet/easdwebfiles/statements/EASD_ADA%20position%20statement.pdf

(618)  GU L 331 del 7.12.1998, pag. 1.

(619)  Proposta di regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio relativo ai dispositivi medico-diagnostici in vitro, COM(2012)541 def. del 26.9.2012.

(620)  http://87.234.226.93/easd_intranet/easdwebfiles/statements/EASD_ADA%20position%20statement.pdf

(621)  OJ L 331, 7.12.1998, p. 1.

(622)  Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on in vitro diagnostic medical devices, COM(2012) 541 final Brussels, 26.9.2012.

(623)  http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_projects/2003/action2/action2_2003_14_en.htm

(624)  http://www.eurocat.ulster.ac.uk/pubdata/Folic-Acid.html

(625)  http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/3e.pdf

(626)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:315:0018:0021:EN:PDF.

(627)  http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_projects/2003/action2/action2_2003_14_en.htm

(628)  http://www.eurocat.ulster.ac.uk/pubdata/Folic-Acid.html

(629)  http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/3e.pdf

(630)  http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2009:315:0018:0021:EN:PDF.

(631)  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/plenary/en/parliamentary-questions.html